From bricolage to thickness: making the most of the messiness of research narratives

Abstract

Purpose

The research process is commonly viewed as a succession of linear, structured and planned practices that exclude informal and unplanned practices, engaging with the unexpected or the uncertain. The authors’ aim is to explore this aspect of researching in connection with the narratives of researchers as they oscillate between past and present, theory and empiricism.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors first draw on the concept of “bricolage” to validate informal research practices as researchers seek to lend “thickness” to their research. To deal with the apparent “messiness” of research narratives, they apply the concepts of kairotic time and action nets. Kairotic times are key moments in research narratives when actions, under tension, interconnect to form action nets, which, in turn, generate meaning or knowledge.

Findings

The authors analyse two research episodes. The first recounts how personal experiences and contingencies influence a researcher's choice of research objects and his associated theoretical reflections. The second highlights how some concrete difficulties in choosing a field and gaining access trigger a set of actions that force a researcher to review his initial choices and to reposition himself methodologically. Discussing the concept of kairotic time, the authors show the importance of context and timing and demonstrate how stories build around a gravitational point. From there, they discuss how the concept of action nets, breaking linearity, helps to envision research practice not as a sequence, but as networks of actions that produce scientific outcomes.

Originality/value

This paper provides an operational method of using kairotic time and action nets to account for, and acknowledge, the messiness in research narratives.

Citation

Lambotte, F. and Meunier, D. (2013), "From bricolage to thickness: making the most of the messiness of research narratives", Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 85-100. https://doi.org/10.1108/17465641311327531