Examines collage inquiry's impact on theorizing in management research, suggesting new evaluation criteria.
Prompted by ongoing debates about the need for more novel and pluralistic management research, this paper explores the different ways of researching, knowing and theorizing emerging from the arts‐based method of collage inquiry. We used a problematizing approach to examine how collage inquiry has been used in management research and neighbouring disciplines with the aim of unpacking its potential for relevant scholarship. We advance a typology of five approaches taken to collage inquiry: collage as projection , as triangulation , as sensemaking , as negotiation and as art . The typology links research motivation, ontological and epistemological assumptions, process of collage creation and interpretation, the role of the researcher in the process, data collection and analysis, emerging meanings and different ways of knowing, theorizing and assessing rigorously from collage inquiry. It clarifies when collage supports incremental extension and when—and how—it enables more imaginative, disruptive contributions. In doing so, we contribute to the broader management community, namely researchers, reviewers and editors, by showing that different uses of collage inquiry rest on different assumptions and therefore enable different forms of knowing and theorizing, as well as require different criteria for evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stavraki et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: