Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T22:56:44.443Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Discursive Void in a Cross-Language Study on Russia: Strategies for Negotiating Shared Meaning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2019

Virpi Outila ,
Rebecca Piekkari  and
Irina Mihailova
Virpi Outila*
Affiliation:
Aalto University, School of Business, Finland
Rebecca Piekkari
Affiliation:
Aalto University, School of Business, Finland
Irina Mihailova
Affiliation:
Aalto University, School of Business, Finland
*
Corresponding author: Virpi Outila (virpi.outila@aalto.fi)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Discursive voids in emerging markets present opportunities and challenges to debate meanings and taken-for granted assumptions. This article uncovers various strategies used by the researcher and the research participants to address the discursive void and to negotiate shared meaning about employee empowerment in Russia. In the absence of a concept for empowerment in the languages of the study, the researcher and the research participants engaged in joint sensemaking to bridge discursive voids. We contribute to the discussion of qualitative cross-language research in emerging markets by identifying the strategies used not only by the researcher, whose view has dominated previous research, but also those of the research participants. The researcher in our study addressed the discursive void by taking on the dual role of researcher-translator, engaging in contextual approach to translation, consulting external interpreters, and using iteration and flexibility in the course of the research process. Our research participants resorted to proverbs to address the discursive void, make sense of empowerment, and render it locally meaningful. Proverbs are a valuable methodological tool for sensemaking and theorising about context-specific phenomena in IB research.

摘要

存在于新兴市场中的话语空白为词语的含义和想当然的假设之间的讨论提供了机遇和挑战。本文揭示了研究人员和研究参与者在解决话语空白以及协商有关俄罗斯员工授权的共享含义过程中所使用的各种策略。在研究语言中缺少关于授权这一概念的情况下，研究者和研究参与者进行了联合意义构建来弥补话语空白。我们不仅发现了在过去研究中占主导地位的研究者所使用的策略，而且还发现了研究参与者们所使用的策略，从而为新兴市场的定性跨语言研究做出了贡献。本研究中的研究者通过承担研究者-翻译者的双重身份，从语境角度入手从事翻译、咨询外部的翻译人员，并在研究过程中使用重复和灵活的方式来填补话语空白。研究参与者们则依靠谚语来填补话语空白，理解授权的意义并赋予其本土化的含义。谚语作为在国际商务研究中关于特定情境下现象的意义构建及其理论化方面具有价值的方法论工具。

Аннотация

В странах с развивающейся экономикой, дискурсивные пробелы одновременно открывают новые возможности и ставят трудные задачи для обсуждения смыслов и общепринятых предположений. В этой статье рассматриваются различные стратегии, которые исследователи и участники исследований используют для устранения дискурсивного пробела и формирования общего понимания о расширении прав и возможностей сотрудников в России. В отсутствие концепции расширения прав и возможностей на языках исследования, исследователь и участники исследования занимались совместным осмыслением для преодоления дискурсивных пробелов. Мы вносим свой вклад в область качественных межъязыковых исследований в странах с развивающейся экономикой, определяя стратегии, которые используют не только исследователь, чье мнение доминировало в предыдущих работах, но и участники исследования. Обратившись к дискурсивному пробелу, исследователь в нашей работе брал на себя двойную роль исследователя-переводчика и применял контекстный подход к переводу, с помощью других переводчиков, а также итерации и гибкости в процессе исследования. Наши участники исследования прибегали к пословицам, чтобы устранить дискурсивный пробел, осмыслить концепцию расширения прав и возможностей, а также придать ей контекстуальное значение. Пословицы являются ценным методологическим инструментом для осмысления и теоретизирования специфических контекстуальных явлений в исследованиях по международному бизнесу.

Resumen

Los vació discursivos en mercados emergentes presentan oportunidades y retos para de debatir significados y supuestos dados por sentados. Este artículo deja descubierto varias estrategias usadas por la investigadora y los participantes de la investigación para abordar el vacío discursivo y negociación del significado compartido sobre el empoderamiento de los empleados en Rusia. En la ausencia de un concepto para empoderamiento en los idiomas del estudio, la investigadora y los participantes de la investigación participaron conjuntamente en dotar de sentido para superar los vacíos discursivos. Contribuimos a la discusión de la investigación cualitativa entre distintos idiomas en mercados emergentes al identificar las estrategias usadas no solo por la investigadora, cuya visión ha dominado la investigación anterior, sino también de los participantes de la investigación. La investigadora de nuestro estudio aborda el vacío discursivo asumiendo el doble papel de investigador-traductor, participando en un abordaje contextual para la traducción, consultando interpretes externos, y usando iteración y flexibilidad en el curso del proceso de investigación. Nuestros participantes de investigación recurrieron a proverbios para abordar los vacíos discursivos, dar sentido de empoderamiento y hacer que sea localmente relevante. Los proverbios son una herramienta metodológica valiosa para dar sentido y teorizar sobre los fenómenos específicos en la investigación de negocios internacionales.

Keywords

discursive voidemerging marketsproverbsqualitative cross-language researchtranslation话语空白新兴市场谚语跨语言的定性研究翻译дискурсивный пробелразвивающиеся рынкипословицыкачественные межъязыковые исследованияпереводvacío discursivomercados emergentesproverbiosinvestigación cualitativa en diferentes idiomastraducción
Type
Special Issue Articles
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 15 , Special Issue 2: Doing Qualitative Research in Emerging Markets , June 2019 , pp. 403 - 427
Copyright
Copyright © The International Association for Chinese Management Research 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Accepted by: Guest Editor Tian Wei

References

REFERENCES

Alasuutari, P. 1996. Theorizing in qualitative research: A cultural studies perspective. Qualitative Inquiry, 2(4): 371–384.Google Scholar
Alvesson, M. 2009. At-home ethnography: Struggling with closeness and closure. In Ybema, S., Yanow, D., Wells, H., & Kamsteeg, F. (Eds.), Organizational ethnography: Studying the complexities of everyday life: 156–174. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. 2000. Taking the linguistic turn in organizational research: Challenges, responses, consequences. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36(2): 136–158.10.1177/0021886300362002Google Scholar
Barkema, H. G., Chen, X.-P., George, G., Luo, Y., & Tsui, A. S. 2015. West meets East: New concepts and theories. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2): 460–479.Google Scholar
Bartunek, J. M., & Spreitzer, G. M. 2006. The interdisciplinary career of a popular construct used in management: Empowerment in the late 20th century. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(3): 225–273.Google Scholar
Beeler, B., Cohen, L., de Vecchi, D., Kassis-Henderson, J., & Lecomte, P. 2017. Special issues on language in global management and business. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 17(1): 3–6.Google Scholar
Blenkinsopp, J., & Shademan Pajouh, M. 2010. Lost in translation? Culture, language and the role of the translator in international business. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 6(1): 38–52.10.1108/17422041011017612Google Scholar
Brannen, M. Y., & Mughan, T. 2017. Language in international business. Developing a field. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Brannen, M. Y., Piekkari, R., & Tietze, S. 2014. The multifaceted role of language in international business: Unpacking the forms, functions and features of a critical challenge to MNC theory and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(5): 495–507.Google Scholar
Chidlow, A., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Welch, C. 2014. Translation in cross-language international business research: Beyond equivalence. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(5): 562–582.Google Scholar
Chlebda, W. 1997. God and religion in the proverbs of the Soviet nation. Paper presented at International symposium Europhras, in Bratislava 1997.Google Scholar
Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. 2002. Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7): 553–560.Google Scholar
Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. 2014. Systematic combining: A decade later. Journal of Business Research, 67(6): 1277–1284.Google Scholar
Fey, C. F. 2008. Overcoming a leader's greatest challenge: Involving employees in Russia. Organizational Dynamics, 37(3): 254–65.Google Scholar
Fey, C. F., & Shekshnia, S. 2011. The key commandments for doing business in Russia. Organizational Dynamics, 40(1): 57–66.Google Scholar
Fiedler, S. 2014. Proverbs and foreign language teaching. In Hristztova-Gotthardt, H. & Varga, M. A. (Eds.), Introduction to paremiology: A comprehensive guide to proverb studies. Warsaw/Berlin: DeGruyter Open Ltd.Google Scholar
Gabriel, Y. 2002. On paragrammatic uses of organizational theory – A provocation. Organization Studies, 23(1): 133–151.Google Scholar
Gawlewicz, A. 2016. Language and translation strategies in researching migrant experience of difference from the position of migrant researcher. Qualitative Research, 16(1): 27–42.Google Scholar
Grant, D. 2004. Sage handbook of organizational discourse. London: Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
Grzybek, P. 2014. Semiotic and semantic aspects of the proverb. In Hristztov Gotthardt, H. & Varga, M. A. (Eds.), Introduction to paremiology: A comprehensive guide to proverb studies: 7–27. Berlin: DeGruyter Open Ltd.Google Scholar
Haynes, K. 2012. Reflexivity in qualitative research. In Gillian, S. & Cassel, C. (Eds.), Qualitative organizational research: Core methods and current challenges: 72–89. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Holden, N. 2008. Reflections of a cross cultural scholar: Context and language in management. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 8(2): 239–51.Google Scholar
Holden, N., & Michailova, S. 2014. A more expansive perspective on translation in IB research: Insights from the Russian handbook of knowledge management. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(7): 906–918.Google Scholar
Holden, N., Cooper, C., & Carr, J. 1998. Dealing with the new Russia: Management cultures in collision. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Holden, N. J., Kuznetsova, O., & Fink, G. 2008. Russia's long struggle with Western terms of management and the concepts behind them. In Tietze, S. (Ed.), International management and language: 198–213. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hong, J. L., Snell, R. S., & Mak, C. 2016. Knowledge assimilation at foreign subsidiaries of Japanese MNCs through political sensegiving and sensemaking. Organization Studies, 37(9): 1297–1321.Google Scholar
Hristztova-Gotthardt, H., & Varga, M. A. 2014. Introduction to paremiology: A comprehensive guide to proverb studies. Berlin: DeGruyter Open Ltd.Google Scholar
Kostova, T., & Roth, K. 2002. Adoption of organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1): 215–233.Google Scholar
Koveshnikov, A., Vaara, E., & Ehrnrooth, M. 2016. Stereotype-based managerial identity work in multinational corporations. Organization Studies, 37(9): 1353–1379.Google Scholar
Kuznetsov, A., & Kuznetsova, O. 2014. Building professional discourse in emerging markets: Language, context and the challenge of sensemaking. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(5): 583–599.Google Scholar
Macdonald, S., & Hellgren, B. 2004. The interview in international business research: Problems we would rather not talk about. In Marschan-Piekkari, R. & Welch, C. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business: 264–281. Cheltenham, UK & Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, C. A. 2016. Filtered meaning: Appreciating linguistic skill, social positions and subjectivity of interpreters in cross-language research. Qualitative Research, 16(2): 167–182.10.1177/1468794115569564Google Scholar
Marschan, R., Welch, D., & Welch, L. 1997. Language: The forgotten factor in multinational management. European Management Journal, 15(5): 591–598.Google Scholar
Marschan-Piekkari, R., & Reis, C. 2004. Language and languages in cross-cultural interviewing. In Marschan-Piekkari, R. & Welch, C. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business: 224–263. Cheltenham, UK & Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Meyer, K. E. 2015. Context in management research in emerging economies. Management and Organization Review, 11(3): 369–377.Google Scholar
Michailova, S. 2002. When common sense becomes uncommon: Participation and empowerment in Russian companies with western participation. Journal of World Business, 37(3): 180–187.Google Scholar
Michailova, S. 2004. Contextualising fieldwork: Reflections on conducting research in Eastern Europe. In Marschan-Piekkari, R. & Welch, C. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business: 356–383. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Michailova, S. 2011. Contextualizing in international business research: Why do we need more of it and how can we be better at it? Scandinavian Journal of Management, 27(1): 129–139.Google Scholar
Michailova, S., & Clark, E. 2004. Doing research in transforming contexts: Themes and challenges. In Clark, E. & Michailova, S. (Eds.), Fieldwork in transforming societies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mieder, W. 2008. Proverbs speak louder than words: Folk wisdom in art, culture, folklore, history, literature, and mass media. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Nonaka, I. 1991. The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 69: 96–104.Google Scholar
Norrick, N. R. 1985. How proverbs mean? Semantic studies in English proverbs. Berlin: Mouton cop.Google Scholar
Norrick, N. R. 2014. Subject area, terminology, proverb definitions, proverb features. In Hristztov Gotthardt, H. & Varga, M. A. (Eds.), Introduction to paremiology: A comprehensive guide to proverb studies: 7–27. Berlin: DeGruyter Open Ltd.Google Scholar
Pascale, R. T. 1978. Zen and the art of management. A different approach to management for the ‘cards on the table’ executive, which works. Harvard Business Review, March–April: 153–162.Google Scholar
Permyakov, G. 1989. On the question of a Russian paremiological minimum. Proverbium, 6: 91–102.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. 1992. Managing with power. Politics and influence in organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Piekkari, R., & Tietze, S. 2011. A world of languages: Implications for international management research and practice. Journal of World Business, 46(3): 267–269.Google Scholar
Piekkari, R., & Tietze, S. 2014. Micropolitical behavior in the multinational enterprise: A language perspective. In Verbeke, A., Van Tulder, R., & Lundan, S. (Eds.), Multinational enterprises, markets and institutional diversity: 259–277. Published online: 27 Oct 2014: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S1745-886220140000009010Google Scholar
Piekkari, R., & Tietze, S. 2016. Doing research on power and politics in MNCs: A methodological perspective. In Becker-Ritterspach, F., Blazejewski, S., Dörrenbächer, C. & Geppert, M. (Eds.), Micropolitics in the multinational corporation: 208–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Piekkari, R., & Zander, L. 2005. Language and communication in international management. International Studies of Management & Organization, 35(1): 3–9.Google Scholar
Piekkari, R., Welch, D. E., & Welch, L. S. 2014. Language in international business: The multilingual reality of global business expansion. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Polsa, P. 2007. Comparability in cross-cultural qualitative marketing research: Equivalence in personal interviews. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 8: 1–18.Google Scholar
Psoinos, A., & Smithson, S. 2002. Employee empowerment in manufacturing: A study of organizations in the UK. New Technology, Work and Employment, 17(2): 132–148.10.1111/1468-005X.00099Google Scholar
Pym, A. 2014. Exploring translation theories. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reznikov, A. 2009. Old wine in new bottles. Modern Russian anti-proverbs. Burlington: Queen City Printers Inc.Google Scholar
Sahlin-Andersson, K., & Engwall, L. 2002. The expansion of management knowledge: Carriers, flows and sources. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Schaffer, B. S., & Riordan, C. M. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizational research: A best-practices approach. Organizational Research Methods, 6(2): 169–215.Google Scholar
Sronce, R., & Li, L. 2011. Catching flies with honey: Using Chinese and American proverbs to teach cultural dimensions. International Journal of Management Education, 9(2): 1–10.Google Scholar
Steyaert, C., & Janssens, M. 2012. Multilingual scholarship and the paradox of translation and language in management and organization studies. Organization, 20(1): 131–142.Google Scholar
Temple, B. 1997. Watch your tongue: Issues in translation and cross-cultural research. Sociology, 31(3): 607–618.Google Scholar
Temple, B., & Edwards, R. 2002. Interpreters/translators and cross-language research: Reflexivity and border crossings. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2): 1–12.Google Scholar
Temple, B., & Young, A. 2004. Qualitative research and translation dilemmas. Qualitative Research, 4(2): 161–178.Google Scholar
Tenzer, H., Terjesen, S., & Harzing, A.-W. 2017. Language in International Business: A review and agenda for future research. Management International Review, 57(6): 815–854.Google Scholar
Tietze, S. 2018. Multilingual research, monolingual publications: Management scholarship in English only. European Journal of International Management, 12(1/2): 28–45.Google Scholar
Tietze, S., Tansley, C., & Helienek, E. 2017. The translator as agent in management knowledge transfer. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 17(1): 151–169.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. S. 2004. Contributing to global management knowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21(4): 491–513.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. S. 2006. Contextualization in Chinese management research. Management and Organization Review, 2(1): 1–13.Google Scholar
Usunier, J.-C. 2011. Language as a resource to assess cross-cultural equivalence in quantitative management research. Journal of World Business, 46(3): 314–319.Google Scholar
Venuti, L. 1995. The translator's invisibility: A history of translation. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Voldnes, G., Grønhaug, K., & Sogn-Grundvåg, G. 2014. Conducting qualitative research in Russia: Challenges and advice. Journal of East-West Business, 20(3): 141–161.Google Scholar
Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Sokolowska, J. 1998. What folklore tells us about risk and risk taking: Cross-cultural comparisons of American, German and Chinese proverbs. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75(2): 170–186.Google Scholar
Welch, C., & Piekkari, R. 2006. Crossing language boundaries: Qualitative interviewing in international business. Management International Review, 46(4): 417–437.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, A. 1998. Empowerment: Theory and practice. Personnel Review, 27(1): 40–56.Google Scholar
Williamson, D. L., Choi, J., Charchuk, M., Rempel, G. R., Pitre, N., Breitkreuz, R., & Kushner, K. E. 2011. Interpreter-facilitated cross-language interviews: A research note. Qualitative Research, 11(4): 381–394.Google Scholar
Witte, A. E., & Daly, P. 2014. Proverbial wisdom – A ‘serious’ international business game. Journal of International Education in Business, 7(1): 2–13.Google Scholar
Xian, H. 2008. Lost in translation? Language, culture and the roles of translator in cross-cultural management research. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 3(3): 231–245.Google Scholar