Researchers are exposed to multiple interpretive challenges in the journey from field data to theoretical understanding. A common response to these challenges is to turn to the guidance of templates such as the Gioia methodology—currently a preferred template for interpretive management research. Given its popularity, we examine how this methodology approaches the interpretive process of fieldwork. We find that the inductive route to theory that it offers does not address the challenges of interpretation. As an alternative, we propose a return to the epistemological tradition of hermeneutics. We argue that fieldwork informed by a hermeneutic orientation is able to generate credible and novel theory by confronting the challenges of interpretation head on. This process cannot be represented by the orderly steps of a template. We argue that a return to a hermeneutic orientation opens the way to more plausible and insightful theories based on interpretive rather than procedural rigor, and we offer a set of heuristics to guide both researchers and reviewers along this path.

One of the raging debates in organization study concerns the use of “templates” in qualitative research. This curated debate brings together many of the players in that debate, who make statements of position relative to the issues involved and trade accusations and counter-accusations about statements they have made that in their view have been misinterpreted or misconstrued. Overall, it is quite a lively debate that reveals positions, points of tension and grounds for disagreement. Denny Gioia wrote the triggering essay that prompted other players to weigh in with their personal and professional views.

Bartlett and Ghoshal's transnational 'solution' for managing the MNC remains popular among scholars A u t h o r a c c e p t e d m a n u s c r i p t

In this paper we refocus attention on managerial ideology. We analyze the dynamics of an ideological conflict among members of the transnational corporate elite in a large multinational corporation. Specifically, we trace the rise and fall of a counter-ideology. We identify the discursive, cognitive and social mechanisms driving ideological change and provide a model for ideological contestation inside the organization. Such multidisciplinary explanations have been missing in extant literature, which has either focused on more reductionist explanations of ideological change or on how ideological hegemony is maintained. We contribute a method to ‘excavate’ ideology – a deep sensemaking structure – from narratives. We conclude that managerial ideology is a useful, but often overlooked, concept for understanding how the ambiguity of managerial decision-making can lead to polarization and conflict.

No abstract