IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v25y1997i5p489-509.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies

Author

Listed:
  • Mingers, John
  • Brocklesby, John

Abstract

In recent years the predilection for Systems/OR practice to be underpinned by a single methodology has been called into question, and reports on multimethodology projects are now filtering through into the literature. This paper takes a closer look at multimethodology. It outlines a number of different possibilities for combining methodologies, and considers why such a development might be desirable for more effective practice, in particular by focusing upon how it can deal more effectively with the richness of the real world and better assist through the various intervention stages. The paper outlines some of the philosophical, cultural and cognitive feasibility issues that multimethodology raises. It then describes a framework that can attend to the relative strengths of different methodologies and provide a basis for constructing multimethodology designs. Finally it presents a systematic way of decomposing methodologies to identify detachable elements, and the paper concludes by outlining aspects of an agenda for further research that emerges out of the discussion.

Suggested Citation

  • Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:25:y:1997:i:5:p:489-509
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(97)00018-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ormerod, R. J., 1996. "Combining management consultancy and research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Adri Smaling, 1994. "The pragmatic dimension," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 233-249, August.
    3. Norman Blaikie, 1991. "A critique of the use of triangulation in social research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 115-136, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John Mingers, 2001. "Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 240-259, September.
    2. Iszan Hana Kaharudin & Mohammad Syuhaimi Ab-Rahman & Roslan Abd-Shukor & Azamin Zaharim & Mohd Jailani Mohd Nor & Ahmad Kamal Ariffin Mohd Ihsan & Shahrom Md Zain & Afiq Hipni & Kamisah Osman & Ruszym, 2022. "How Does Supervision Technique Affect Research? Towards Sustainable Performance: Publications and Students from Pure and Social Sciences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, May.
    3. G A Hindle & L A Franco, 2009. "Combining problem structuring methods to conduct applied research: a mixed methods approach to studying fitness-to-drive in the UK," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1637-1648, December.
    4. Gjoko Stamenkov, 2023. "Recommendations for improving research quality: relationships among constructs, verbs in hypotheses, theoretical perspectives, and triangulation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 2923-2946, June.
    5. Paul Downward & Andrew Mearman, 2005. "Methodological Triangulation at the Bank of England:An Investigation," Working Papers 0505, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    6. Marco Taliento, 2022. "The Triple Mission of the Modern University: Component Interplay and Performance Analysis from Italy," World, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-24, July.
    7. Paul Downward & Andrew Mearman, 2008. "Decision-making at the Bank of England: a critical appraisal," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 385-409, July.
    8. Ton, Giel & Vellema, Sietze & DeRuyterDeWildt, Marieke, 2011. "Credible evidence on complex change processes: key challenges in impact evaluation on agricultural value chains," MPRA Paper 32027, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Jan F. Tesch & Anne-Sophie Brillinger & Dominik Bilgeri, 2017. "Internet Of Things Business Model Innovation And The Stage-Gate Process: An Exploratory Analysis," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(05), pages 1-19, June.
    10. Ivo De Loo & Alan Lowe, 2011. "Mixed methods research: don't – “just do it”," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(1), pages 22-38, April.
    11. Ormerod, R. J., 1997. "The design of organisational intervention: Choosing the approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 415-435, August.
    12. R J Ormerod, 2008. "The transformation competence perspective," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(11), pages 1435-1448, November.
    13. Goles, Tim & Hirschheim, Rudy, 2000. "The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead...long live the paradigm: the legacy of Burrell and Morgan," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 249-268, June.
    14. Shaw, Duncan & Smith, Chris M. & Scully, Judy, 2019. "From Brexit to Article 50: Applying Critical Realism to the design and analysis of a longitudinal causal mapping study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(2), pages 723-735.
    15. de Chernatony, Leslie & Cottam (née Drury), Susan, 2009. "Interacting contributions of different departments to brand success," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 297-304, March.
    16. Sven Modell, 2011. "Book review," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 183-186.
    17. Arnold Reisman & Muhittin Oral, 2005. "Soft Systems Methodology: A Context Within a 50-Year Retrospective of OR/MS," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 164-178, April.
    18. Michel Verstraeten, 2006. "L'intervenant face aux objectifs de mission: entre tensions vécues et régulations tentées," Working Papers CEB 06-013.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    19. Peter Swanborn, 1996. "A common base for quality control criteria in quantitative and qualitative research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 19-35, February.
    20. Eeva‐Mari Ihantola & Lili‐Anne Kihn, 2011. "Threats to validity and reliability in mixed methods accounting research," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(1), pages 39-58, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:25:y:1997:i:5:p:489-509. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.