The Ethics of Researching Friends: On Convenience Sampling in Qualitative Management and Organization Studies

Published date01 October 2014
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12064
Date01 October 2014
Methodology Corner
The Ethics of Researching Friends: On
Convenience Sampling in Qualitative
Management and Organization Studies
Joanna Brewis
School of Management, University of Leicester, Ken Edwards Building, University Road,
Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
Email: j.brewis@le.ac.uk
Scholarship on the ethical complexities resulting from friendships which develop with
respondents during qualitative data collection is well established. There has also been
consideration of the ethics of researching existing friends across various disciplines. But,
although management and organization scholars use convenience samples of the latter
kind in qualitative research, there is virtually no discussion in our field of the ethical
implications. In seeking to rectify this, I draw on my experiences of a project where I
gathered data from six friends on their experiences of and attitudes towards sexual
relationships, motherhood and life–work ‘balance’. I discuss the reportage of what
sometimes felt like confidences, the use of ex ante data, the objectification of participants
and difficulties relating to respondent validation in order to highlight some of the ethical
challenges in qualitative management and organizational research with friends.
Introduction
This paper is a retrospective reflection on a project
where, between August 2008 and March 2009, I
gathered qualitative longitudinal data by email
from six longstanding friends about the intersec-
tions between sexual relationships, motherhood
and life–work ‘balance’ (Brewis, 2011). Conveni-
ence sampling amongst friends – which raises
rather different issues compared with the develop-
ment of friendships during data collection – has
been discussed by researchers from anthropology,
sociology, health and social welfare studies, social
work, education, social geography, nursing,
women’s studies and cultural studies (e.g. Barton,
2011; Birch and Miller, 2012; Brayboy and Deyhle,
2000; Browne, 2003; Ellis, 2007; Humphrey, 2007;
Irwin, 2006; McConnell-Henry et al., 2009–2010;
Neal and Gordon, 2001; Taylor, 2011; Tillmann,
2008, 2009, 2010a, 2010b; Tillmann-Healy, 2003).
But this is not the case in management and organi-
zation studies (MOS). Haynes’s (2006, 2010)
reflections on her collection of oral histories from
female accountants, including friends and former
colleagues, are one exception. Another is Karra
and Phillips’s (2008) discussion of Karra’s ethnog-
raphy of a company established by her father,
where she had previously worked.
This paper adds to this very small body of
literature by considering the ethical issues raised
I owe a huge vote of thanks to Bella, Catherine, Georgie,
Judith, Madeleine and Wendy, for being my friends first
of all, and secondly for making this and other papers and
chapters possible. I also really appreciated comments
from the audiences for earlier iterations – at the 5th
Annual Ethnography Symposium, Queen Mary Univer-
sity of London (September 2010), a ULSM staff seminar
in March 2011, the In Conversation seminar at the
London College of Fashion (December 2010) and the
Being Critical in a Mainstream Business School event at
Durham Business School (September 2011). Finally,
Elizabeth Murphy gave me some very constructive com-
mentary on the piece during its development, as did the
three anonymous British Journal of Management review-
ers and Catherine Cassell.
bs_bs_banner
British Journal of Management, Vol. 25, 849–862 (2014)
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.12064
© 2014 British Academy of Management. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4
2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA, 02148, USA.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT