Be critical and analytical in your responses, and provide evidence from the paper to support your answer. Remember, the goal is to identify these aspects and understand and critique how they contribute to the research.

Paper One: In the paper “Reflections on the Labyrinth: Investigating Black and Minority Ethnic [BME] Leaders’ Career Experiences”, the researchers focus on the individual experiences of BME employees navigating career journeys to senior management roles.

  1. Research question/aim: The researchers aim to understand and compare the career experiences of BME and white senior managers in a UK government department. This research question is relevant and fills a gap in the existing literature, which often overlooks the individual experiences of BME employees by focusing on how managers perceive BME employees.
  2. Theories or theoretical/conceptual assumptions: The study extensively uses Eagly and Carli’s metaphor of the labyrinth and attribution theory to analyse how participants made sense of significant career incidents. It also introduces the concept of ‘homophily’ to explain the social network ties at work.
  3. Underpinning research philosophy: The researchers adopt an interpretivist philosophy, focusing on BME senior managers' individual experiences and interpretations. This subjective approach is appropriate given the study’s focus on personal experiences and perceptions.
  4. Level of research focus: The study maintains a micro-level focus, concentrating on individual career experiences and perceptions of BME and white senior managers within a specific governmental department. This focus is well-suited to the research aim and allows for an in-depth exploration of individual career journeys.
  5. Data collection method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 BME and 20 white senior managers from a UK government department. The biographical analysis provided contextual quantitative data regarding top team membership across Whitehall.
  6. Types of data collected: Qualitative data derived from semi-structured interviews. The data included detailed responses from the participants about their experiences, perceptions, and interpretations of significant career incidents. Quantitative data was obtained from the biographical analysis of top team membership across Whitehall, providing numerical data about the demographic composition of these team memberships.
  7. Justification of methods: The choice of semi-structured interviews is justified by the need for an in-depth exploration of individual experiences. The biographical analysis provides a broader context, giving a more balanced view.
  8. Researcher reflexivity: While the researchers recognise biases in previous studies and aim to fill this gap, they do not explicitly discuss their biases, assumptions, or influences on the research process. This lack of explicit reflexivity is a limitation in the research design as it leaves potential biases unexplored. However, the researchers are aware of avoiding culturally or ideologically biased interpretations during the analysis phase, indicating some reflexivity.

Paper Two: In the paper “The ‘Feminine Advantage’: A Discursive Analysis of the Invisibility of Older Women Workers”, the researcher investigates the discursive construction and subsequent invisibility of older female worker identities within a public employment inquiry.

  1. Research question or aim: The paper investigates the social construction of ‘older workers’ identity, highlighting the intersection of gender and age and its consequences in a public inquiry on the challenges encountered by older unemployed individuals. It critically examines the discursive processes leading to the ‘invisibility’ of the female ‘older worker’ identity.
  2. Theories or theoretical/conceptual assumptions: The ‘discourses of difference’ theory is employed to scrutinise the creation and propagation of age and gender identities, presenting a novel viewpoint on how these identities are socially constructed, perpetuated, and contested.
  3. Underpinning research philosophy: Adopting a critical philosophy, the research emphasises power dynamics, societal transformation, and the replication and resistance of inequality through social identity construction. It supports a constructionist social identity perspective, asserting its social accomplishment and context-dependent relevance.
  4. Level of research focus: The study comprises both the macro and micro levels, exploring societal structures like age and gender discrimination in the labour market while delving into individual older workers’ identities and discourse-driven construction and manipulation.
  5. Method of data collection: Data was obtained from various public sources associated with a parliamentary inquiry into the issues faced by older workers, including newspaper advertisements, media releases, submissions, public hearings transcripts, parliamentary proceedings, and the inquiry’s final report.
  6. Types of data collected: Textual data from various public sources related to the inquiry facilitated a thorough discourse analysis on older worker identity.
  7. Justification of methods: The researcher justified their methodological choices by aligning with a constructionist view of social identity, indicating discourse analysis as the most appropriate method for studying identity construction processes. The focus on inquiry texts was justified by the insights they offer into group interpretations and shared narratives.
  8. Researcher reflexivity: Though not explicitly stated, the researcher exhibited reflexivity through their consciousness of their methodological approach and the likely influence of dominant groups and social institutions on public inquiries’ interpretations and outcomes. They recognised that such inquiries could often endorse and validate the interests of dominant groups, potentially impacting their data analysis and interpretation.

Paper Three: In the paper “Ethical Management in the Hotel Sector: Creating an Authentic Work Experience for Workers with Intellectual Disabilities [WWID]”, the researchers explore the employment experiences of workers with intellectual disabilities in the Australian hotel sector. They analyse the role of ethical human resource practices in creating an inclusive work environment and how they contribute to a more authentic work experience for these individuals.

  1. Research question or aim: The study seeks to understand how ethical HR practices in the Australian hotel sector impact the work experiences of WWIDs, concentrating on social inclusion and well-being.
  2. Theories or theoretical/conceptual assumptions: The study utilises Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) theory and Heidegger’s model of existential authenticity as the theoretical framework. This intertwining allows the exploration of ethical workplace creation and its influence on social inclusion and well-being.
  3. Underpinning research philosophy: The study adopts an interpretivist philosophy, emphasising the understanding of social phenomena from the perspective of WWIDs in their specific context.
  4. Level of research focus: The study focuses on the micro level, examining individual experiences of WWIDs in their workplace.
  5. Method of data collection: Data was collected through individual interviews and focus groups, allowing for in-depth exploration of personal experiences and collective perspectives.
  6. Types of data collected: Qualitative data was collected from interviews and focus groups, capturing participants’ beliefs, perceptions, and experiences.
  7. Justification of methods: The chosen methods cater to the study’s interpretivist philosophy, enabling a nuanced understanding of WWIDs’ experiences.
  8. Researcher reflexivity: Although not explicitly mentioned, the researchers showed sensitivity to the needs of WWIDs, providing information beforehand and allowing for a support person during interviews. This approach may have mitigated potential bias and ensured a more authentic data collection process.

Paper Four: In the paper “Digi-Housekeeping: The Invisible Work of Flexibility”, the researchers investigate ‘digi-housekeeping’, often-overlooked tasks related to maintaining digital tools for flexible work. They delve into these tasks beyond the household that have become critical to commercial enterprises. The study explores how these tasks add to workers’ burdens within neoliberal work arrangements—a framework characterised by flexible, non-traditional employment, often with increased individual responsibilities.

  1. Research question or aim: The study aims to critically examine the unacknowledged and undervalued tasks of ‘digi-housekeeping’ within flexible working environments. It scrutinises how these tasks influence feelings of work intensification and how they are positioned within neoliberal work arrangements. The research challenges the cultural boundaries between ‘real’ and ‘not real’ work.
  2. Theories or theoretical/conceptual assumptions: The paper utilises Boundary Theory as a foundational concept but extends its scope to include ‘digi-housekeeping’. The extension of the theory to have this new concept is innovative, as it challenges societal and cultural norms that render these tasks ‘mundane’ and ‘invisible’.
  3. Underpinning research philosophy: The research adopts an interpretivist philosophy, focusing on individuals' everyday practices and experiences, emphasising the pervasive tasks that have become critical to commercial enterprises.
  4. Level of research focus: The study primarily focuses on the micro-level, analysing individual experiences. Simultaneously, it draws connections to macro-level issues, such as the cultural devaluation of certain types of work.
  5. Method of data collection: Video diaries and follow-up interviews may have provided a rich data source, allowing researchers to capture the everyday activities contributing to ‘digi-housekeeping’.
  6. Types of data collected: The research collected qualitative data, including video diaries and interview transcripts.
  7. Justification of methods: Video diaries allowed to capture unanticipated insights, validating their use in the study. The use of video diaries is further justified as it enabled the researchers to capture everyday activities that contribute to ‘digit-housekeeping’.
  8. Researcher reflexivity: The researchers showed reflexivity by recognising and acknowledging their unique perspective in identifying ‘digi-housekeeping’. They critically evaluated societal norms around ‘real’ work and their impact on the visibility and valuation of ‘digi-housekeeping’ tasks.
Conduct a research project to understand the challenges UK early-career theatre directors face.
  1. Introduction: This research uses a qualitative approach to explore the challenges emerging theatre directors from under-represented backgrounds may face in the UK theatre industry (Marshall et al., 2021). The proposed research question is: “How do early-career theatre directors from under-represented backgrounds experience challenges in the UK theatre industry?”
  2. Literature Review: Current research in the UK theatre industry primarily appears to explore directors' experiences from advantaged backgrounds (Banks & Hesmondhalgh, 2009). This study could fill a significant gap in understanding directors' experiences from under-represented backgrounds.
  3. Methodological Approach: A critical research approach can help uncover the underlying power structures, societal norms, and cultural contexts that may contribute to the challenges early-career theatre directors face from under-represented backgrounds. This approach could provide a nuanced understanding of how these factors intersect and shape the directors’ experiences, thus providing a more holistic view.
  4. Data Collection Method: In-depth interviews can further explore the participants’ experiences (Brinkmann & Kvale, 2014). The interviewees can express thoughts and feelings in their own words and provide personal narratives to enrich the data. This method can reveal deep insights into the complexities of their challenges, which would likely not be achieved through quantitative methods.
  5. Design Elements & Materials: The research materials will include an interview guide with open-ended questions and a digital recorder for recording the interviews. Ethical considerations, such as informed consent and confidentiality, must be safeguarded.
  6. Sampling & Participants: Purposive sampling can focus the study on individuals with first-hand experience of the issue being explored. This means the findings will be directly relevant to the research question. Focusing on under-represented backgrounds also emphasises voices often marginalised or overlooked, promoting diversity and inclusivity in the research.
  7. Data Analysis: Thematic analysis can identify patterns or themes in qualitative data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). These themes can reveal the directors' common or recurring experienced challenges, differences, and nuances. This method aligns well with the critical approach, as it may highlight societal and institutional factors that impact the directors’ experiences.

References

  • Banks, M., & Hesmondhalgh, D. (2009). Looking for work in creative industries policy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 15(4), 415—430. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286630902923323
  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77—101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  • Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2014). InterViews (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  • Marshall, C., Rossman, G.B., Blanco, G.L. (2021). Designing qualitative research (7th ed.). SAGE.
MSc Human Resource Management
Deepen your understanding of Human Resource Management and its role in the organisational psychology of modern workplaces.
University of London
Share this post