Contradictions in qualitative management research: Consensus and dissensus perspectives on impression, identity and management work

Per Richard Hansen, Jens Dorland

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review


– Contradictory accounts in empirical material are often perceived as deliberate “lies” or “misleading deceptions” performed in acts of impression management, or they are simply neglected. When observed in the material collected empirically, methods have been developed in order to identify and remove them from the analytical work. The purpose of this paper is to re-visit and re-introduce a dissensus-based management research strategy in order to analytically be able to work with what appear to be contradictions and misinformation in qualitative research accounts, and give them a more profound role in the understanding of management ideas, work and practices.
TidsskriftBaltic Journal of Management
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)44-64
Antal sider21
StatusUdgivet - 7 jan. 2016
Udgivet eksterntJa


  • Contradictions
  • Impression management
  • Qualitative research
  • Management research
  • Dissensus-orientated theories
  • Multiple identities

Citer dette