The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Complementary Use of Qualitative and Quantitative Cultural Assessment Methods
Abstract
The organizational cultures of two small manufacturers were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative assessment methods. This article describes not only how qualitative and quantitative data contributed to the validity of the results through triangulation but also how the qualitative and quantitative research paradigms were used in a complementary fashion to produce a more complete understanding of the organizational cultures. Using methods from both research paradigms enabled a greater understanding of cultural artifacts and behaviors but more important of the underlying cultural values and assumptions. Based on this experience, it is recommended that qualitative and quantitative methods be used to produce more robust results than could be accomplished using a single approach for cultural assessment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.
Jick, T. D. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392366 · Cited by 7,103 · cited 2×
“Articles written by Jick (1979) and Stake (2000) exemplify the broad definition of triangulation.”
BackgroundToward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/01623737011003255 · Cited by 5,687
Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research
Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H., & Brazil, K. (2002) · Quality and Quantity · doi:10.1023/a:1014301607592 · Cited by 1,082 · cited 4×
“A similar dis tinction between triangulation and complementarity is made by Sale, Lohfeld, and Brazil (2002) .”
BackgroundInfluential
Cited by
Methodological fit in management field research
Edmondson, A. C., & Mcmanus, S. E. (2007) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2007.26586086 · Cited by 3,227
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY IN SOCIAL SCIENCES AND RELATED SUBJECTS
MOHAJAN, H. K. (2018) · Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People · doi:10.26458/jedep.v7i1.571 · Cited by 1,478
Qualitative research: deductive and inductive approaches to data analysis
Azungah, T. (2018) · Qualitative Research Journal · doi:10.1108/qrj-d-18-00035 · Cited by 1,262
Instruments for Exploring Organizational Culture: A Review of the Literature
Jung, T., Scott, T., Davies, H. T. O., Bower, P., Whalley, D., McNally, R., & Mannion, R. (2009) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02066.x · Cited by 320
Schmiedel, T., Müller, O., & vom Brocke, J. (2019) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428118773858 · Cited by 319
Metadata
- Authors
- Yauch, C. A., & Steudel, H. J.
- Venue
- Organizational Research Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2003-10
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 465-481
- ISSN
- 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7425
- OpenAlex
- W2115264044
- Cited by
- 281
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 9.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Complementary Use of Qualitative and Quantitative Cultural Assessment Methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1094428103257362
- The paper
- Yauch, C. A., & Steudel, H. J. (2003). Complementary Use of Qualitative and Quantitative Cultural Assessment Methods. Organizational Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428103257362
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
