Inductive Analysis

Definition

Inductive analysis aims to systematically generate theory grounded in specific instances of empirical observation. As such it sharply contrasts with hypothetico-deductive methodology in which a conceptual and theoretical structure is constructed prior to, and is tested through, observation. Inductive analysis has a long history in anglophone philosophy (e.g. Bacon, 1620/1960; Locke, 1690/1988; Mill, 1874) which pre-dates deductive approaches. However, it is the latter which has become the established mainstream methodology, especially in management research, under the aegis of Popper's (1968) falsificationism, which disputed the possibility of the inductive verification of theories [critical realism]. Although debate between rival exponents of induction and deduction in the social sciences is complex (Johnson and Duberley, 2000), a key contemporary justification for induction centres upon the view that, with deductive analyses, the testing of theoretical predictions entails the researcher's a priori conceptualization and operationalization of dimensions of actors’ behaviour in which the subjective basis of that behaviour is often necessarily lost, or at best distorted rather than captured (Guba and Lincoln, 1994). In order to access the subjective or cultural dimension, it is argued, explanations must be generated through verstehen [hermeneutics] which necessarily entails the inductive description and analysis of the subjective interpretations deployed by the actors who are being investigated (Giddens, 1976; Shotter, 1975) [phenomenology]. Hence induction is closely related to what Denzin (1971: 166) calls the logic of naturalistic inquiry where the researcher actively enters ‘the worlds of native people … to render those worlds understandable from the standpoint of a theory that is grounded in the behaviours, languages, definitions, attitudes, and feelings of those studied’ and tries to theoretically explain what shapes and influences their behaviour.

As noted above, inductive analysis usually entails developing descriptions of actors’ subjective cultural experiences, which await discovery (Glaser, 1992: 16), in order to explain their behaviour. However, a fuller analysis will also entail the development of explanations of any observed variation in those cultural elements (Lofland, 1970). Although there are different forms of inductive analysis, including different types of grounded theory (q.v.) (e.g. Glaser, 1992; Strauss and Corbin, 1990/1998) and analytic induction (Cressey, 1953; Denzin, 1978), below a composite overview of inductive analysis is presented which outlines and integrates key aspects of these different approaches. Although at risk of some over simplification, inductive analysis can be broken down into five key interrelated elements, some of which are synchronic.

First, at the outset of induction, many researchers would follow Blumer's (1954: 7) advice that they should use what he calls ‘sensitizing concepts’ which give ‘the user a general sense of reference and guidelines in approaching empirical instances … [and] … merely suggest directions in which to look’. This idea is of particular importance because it clarifies the relationship between prior conceptualization and subsequent data collection during induction. For Blumer, concepts must be used in a way that only gives a sense of direction in which to look. They must act merely as guides for uncovering empirical variation in the phenomenon of interest, rather than imposing conceptualized prescriptions of what to see and how to record, as is the case of what he calls ‘definitive’ concepts. Once the latter are developed, and operationalized into sets of indicators, they become fixed benchmarks which guide data collection in deductive research so as to enable testing whereas sensitizing concepts enable researchers to uncover variation in the phenomenon of interest because they are not fixed.

...