Triangulation in Case Studies: incidence, appropriations and misunderstandings in Management researches

• Autor(a) principal: Bruning, Camila
• Data de Publicação: 2018
• Outros Autores: Godri, Luciana, Takahashi, Adriana Roseli Wünsch
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Administração (São Paulo. Online)
• Texto Completo: https://raep.emnuvens.com.br/raep/article/view/889
• topic: Qualitative Methodology in Administration researches; Case Studies; Triangulation; Metodologia de pesquisa qualitativa em Administração; Estudos de caso; Triangulação

This paper presents a bibliometric analysis that identifies the incidence of the use of triangulation, as well as its appropriations as a methodological strategy.  The paper analyses Case Studies published in Brazilian scientific journals from the Management academia. Triangulation is understood as an important strategy to increase the in-depth understanding of the phenomena studied, as well as to assign greater reliability and reliability to Case Studies. The paper discusses five types of triangulation: Triangulation of: (i) sources of evidence; (ii) methods, (iii) researchers, (iv) theories, and (v) the triangulation technique as proposed by Triviños (1987). The research analyzed a sample of 1384 Case Studies published between the years 2008 and 2012 in periodicals classified as A1 to B1 by the Coordination of Improvement of Higher Level Personnel - CAPES (according to Qualis qualification event 2013). The results point out that only 12% of the studies analyzed reported the use of triangulation. In the few cases in which it was used, the studies reported triangulation of sources of evidence (100%), triangulation of methods (86.72%), with rare case studies reporting having used theoretical triangulation, or any type of systematized triangulation techniques, as the one proposed by Triviños (1987).  In addition to the incidence and appropriation of triangulation, several misunderstandings have been identified regarding triangulation. This article explores these misunderstandings and presents suggestions to ensure the correct use and reporting of the technique. The relevance of the article is based on the need to reflect about the quality of the methodological procedures and the research reports that have been carried out in the area of Administration in Brazil.