Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:31:00.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Climbing the Higher Mountain: The Challenges of Multilevel, Multisource, and Longitudinal Research Designs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Carol T. Kulik*
Affiliation:
University of South Australia, Australia

Abstract

Management researchers are being encouraged to collect multilevel, multisource, and longitudinal (MML) data. In this essay, I identify the barriers that researchers might encounter in gaining university ethics committee approval for MML designs and the challenges researchers face when conducting MML research in organizations. I offer suggestions to overcome these challenges. I further discuss some long-term consequences of MML designs for researchers' relationships with organizations and the progress of the management field as a whole.

Type
Forum Articles
Copyright
Copyright © International Association for Chinese Management Research 2011

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.)

References

Arthur, J. B., & Boyles, T. 2007. Validating the human resource system structure: A levels-based strategic HRM approach. Human Resource Management Review, 17(1): 7792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashkanasy, N. M. 2010. Publishing today is more difficult than ever. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(1): 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azar, B. 2002. Ethics at the cost of research? Psychological Society Observer, 33(2): 38.Google Scholar
Bartram, T. 2005. Small firms, big ideas: The adoption of human resource management in Australian small firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 43(1): 137154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L. 2010. The construction and contributions of ‘implications for practice’: What's in them and what might they offer? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(1): 100117.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Button, S. B. 2001. Organizational efforts to affirm sexual diversity: A cross-level examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1): 1728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. 2005. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6): 874900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cycyota, C. S., Harrison, D. A., & Stahl, A. S. 2002. Enhancing response rates at the executive level: Are employee- or consumer-level techniques effective? Journal of Management, 28(2): 163189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dougherty, D. W., & Kramer, M. W. 2005. Organizational power and the institutional review board. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 33(3): 277284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felps, W., Mitchell, T. R., Hekman, D. R., Lee, T. W., Holtom, B.C., & Harman, W. S. 2009. Turnover contagion: How coworkers' job embeddedness and job search behaviors influence quitting. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3): 545561.Google Scholar
Gonzalez, J. A., & DeNisi, A. S. 2008. Cross-level effects of demography and diversity climate on organizational attachment and firm effectiveness. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(1): 2140.Google Scholar
Hamilton, A. 2005. The development and operation of TRBs: Medical regulations and social science. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 33(3): 189203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herdman, A., & McMillan-Capehart, A. 2010. Establishing a diversity program is not enough: Exploring the determinants of diversity climate. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(1): 3953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
House, R., Rousseau, D. M., & Thomas-Hunt, M. 1995. The meso paradigm: A framework for the integration of micro and macro organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 17: 71114.Google Scholar
Hox, J. J. 2010. Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulin, C. 2001. Applied psychology and science: Differences between research and practice. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50(2): 201251.Google Scholar
Jehn, K. A., Rispens, S., & Thatcher, S. M. B. 2010. The effects of conflict asymmetry on work group and individual outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3): 596616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozlowski, S. W. J. 2009. Editorial. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1): 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kulik, C. T. 2005. Editorial: On editing in an international context. Journal of Management, 31(2): 162166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, X., & Batt, R. 2010. How supervisors influence performance: A multilevel study of coaching and group management in technology-mediated services. Personnel Psychology, 63(2): 265298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malouff, J. M., & Schutte, N. S. 2005. Academic psychologists' perspectives on the human research ethics review process. Australian Psychologist, 40(1): 5762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsui, K., Lie, R. K., & Kita, Y. 2007. Two methods of obtaining informed consent in a genetic epidemiological study: Effects on understanding. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2(3): 3948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKay, P. F., Avery, D. R., & Morris, M. A. 2008. Mean racial-ethnic differences in employee sales performance: The moderating role of diversity climate. Personnel Psychology, 61(2): 349374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishii, L. H., & Mayer, D. M. 2009. Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse groups? The moderating role of leader-member exchange in the diversity to turnover relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6): 14121426.Google Scholar
OB-List. 2010. Lucky draws and ethics reviews. [Last accessed 11 April 2011.] Available from URL: http://aomlists.pacc.edu/archives/ob.html Google Scholar
Ostroff, C., & Harrison, D. A. 1999. Meta-analysis, level of analysis, and best estimates of population correlations: Cautions for interpreting meta-analytic results in organizational behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(2): 260270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ployhart, R. E., & Vandenberg, R.J. 2010. Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36(1): 94120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pugh, S. D., Dietz, J., Brief, A. P., & Wiley, J. W. 2008. Looking inside and out: The impact of employee and community demographic composition on organizational diversity climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6): 14221428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogelberg, S. G., Luong, A., Sederburg, M. E., & Cristol, D. S. 2000. Employee attitude surveys: Examining the attitudes of noncompliant employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(2): 284293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rousseau, D. M., & House, R.J. 1994. Meso organizational behavior: Avoiding three fundamental biases. In Cooper, C. L. & Rousseau, D. M. (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (Vol. 1): 1330. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Rupp, D. 2011. Ethical issues faced by editors and reviewers. Management and Organization Review, 7(3): 481493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryncs, S. L., & McNatt, D. B. 2001. Bringing the organization into organizational research: An examination of academic research inside organizations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(1): 319.Google Scholar
Ryncs, S. L., Bartunek, J. M., & Daft, R. L. 2001. Across the great divide: Knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2): 340355.Google Scholar
Rynes, S. L., Colbert, A. E., & Brown, K. G. 2002. HR professionals’ beliefs about effective human resource practices: Correspondence between research and practice. Human Resource Management, 41(2): 149174.Google Scholar
Sanders, R. M. 2003. Medical research ethics committees and social work research: A hurdle too far? Social Work Education, 22(1): 113114.Google Scholar
Schwartz, N. 1999. Self-Reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54(2): 93105.Google Scholar
Scott, C. R. 2005. Anonymity in applied communication research: Tensions between IRBs, researchers, and human subjects. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 33(3): 242257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sieber, J. E. 2000. Planning research: Basic ethical decision-making. In Sales, B. D. & Folkman, S. (Eds.), Ethics in research with human participants: 1326. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Sieber, J. E. 2004. Empirical research on research ethics. Ethics & Behavior, 14(4): 397412.Google Scholar
Wasti, S. A., & Robert, C. 2004. Out of touch? An evaluation of the correspondence between academic and practitioner concerns in IHRM. Advances in International Management, 15: 207239.Google Scholar