The article, “The Relational Foundation of Research: An Underappreciated Dimension of Interesting Research,” authored by Jane E. Dutton and Janet M. Dukerich, and published in The Academy of Management Journal in February 2006, presents a compelling argument for a re-evaluation of what constitutes “interesting” and impactful research. Grounded in their own rich experiences, particularly with a longitudinal research project on the Port Authority (PA) of New York and New Jersey’s intricate engagement with the issue of homelessness, Dutton and Dukerich propose that the relational foundation of a research project is a vital, yet frequently overlooked, dimension. Their central purpose in this essay is to explore how researchers can think more broadly about conducting research that not only yields significant outputs but also profoundly expands, stretches, and teaches both the researchers themselves and their audience.
The authors define the “relational foundation” as the entire network of interaction partners encountered throughout the research journey. This broad definition encompasses not only fellow research team members but also the individuals or organizations being studied, and even indirect contributors whose involvement influences research quality, such as journal reviewers, editors, and research audiences. The essay’s pivotal assertion is that the quality of the connections formed with these diverse partners is paramount to the development and sustained success of truly interesting research. To foster such research, Dutton and Dukerich contend that researchers must actively cultivate effective “relational practice,” which they define as the skilled ways of interrelating that build meaningful and robust connections between people. They highlight that, similar to other organizational settings, this essential relational work is often invisible or undervalued within academic domains.
The authors systematically unfold and illustrate their claim through a four-step framework:
- Three Personal Stories from their Port Authority Project: Dutton and Dukerich begin by sharing three vivid personal narratives from their Port Authority project, each illuminating distinct facets of how relational dynamics influenced their research.
- Story 1: Access. This recounts Jane Dutton’s personal connection to Deb Finn, an old college friend who took charge of the PA’s Task Force for Homelessness. Jane’s dilemma of potentially jeopardizing a friendship by requesting research access underscores the relational challenges of gaining access to a research site. It highlights the importance of a trustworthy and influential contact while also carrying the burden of living up to high expectations for a quality project. The authors later elaborate that gaining access is an ongoing process fraught with challenges such as identifying the right contacts, offering value, building “swift trust,” and navigating concerns about data ownership and potential publication blocks, as exemplified by the PA’s wariness and initial unease with the paper’s portrayal.
- Story 2: Research Participants. This narrative describes an emotionally charged interview with a seasoned civil engineer who shared a deeply personal and agonizing experience with a homeless mother and her baby at the Path Train terminal. This moment of shared vulnerability and emotional pain became a recurring point of insight for the researchers, illuminating the lived experience of PA employees beyond mere words. The authors emphasize that learning from participants, whether through interviews, experimental debriefings, or observational methods, relies heavily on building quality connections to overcome challenges like initial distrust, language barriers, and securing valuable time. They cite Connie Gersick’s struggle to understand the jargon of bankers as another example of the persistence required in relational learning from participants.
- Story 3: Collaborators. This story focuses on the interdependent relationship between Jane and Janet as co-researchers. Their shared commute and personal struggles as mothers of young children and junior faculty created a deep connection, allowing research conversations to interweave with their personal lives. A moment of insight during a hurried walk from the train station, after a day wrestling with theme coding, dramatically led to the core thesis of their paper. This story underscores the challenges inherent in research collaborations, such as differences in training (Janet’s experimentalist background clashing with Jane’s qualitative approach), shifting life circumstances, logistical difficulties, coordination efforts, and even authorship credit. Jane’s ability to convince Janet of the rigor in qualitative methods exemplifies overcoming these internal relational hurdles.
- Identification of Relational Challenges: Based on these stories, Dutton and Dukerich identify specific challenges inherent in the relational domains of many research projects: gaining and sustaining access and support, learning deeply from participants, and effectively collaborating with co-researchers. They stress that while these relationships are “fraught with challenges” that can undermine research quality, high-quality relationships within these domains can, conversely, provide a “vital relational foundation for knowing, learning, and growing” that contributes to interesting research.
- Unearthing Relational Practices for Building Quality Connections: The authors then delineate four key relational practices that were instrumental in building high-quality connections and navigating the challenges highlighted in their stories. These practices, while seemingly simple and universally powerful, are often not considered “task-critical” for research.
- Being Vulnerable: As newcomers to the subjects of homelessness and transportation facilities, Dutton and Dukerich were cognitively and emotionally vulnerable. They were dependent on Deb Finn’s endorsement and, as commuters, shared firsthand experiences of the homelessness issue, fostering a common ground with PA employees. Their willingness to share commuting experiences, admit to not having “all the answers,” and openly express their emotional responses to dilemmas expressed by interviewees heightened trust and mutuality, strengthening their relationships with both participants and each other.
- Being Genuinely Interested: Their genuine fascination and puzzlement with the PA’s dilemma regarding homelessness was deeply felt by task force members and participants. This genuine interest was conveyed through their “human presence,” careful listening that sought to hear more than just words, and their availability for contact beyond formal interviews (e.g., Jane attending PA police training sessions). This led to better learning, deeper appreciation, and increased mutual investment in the project.
- Seeking Feedback: Beyond a formal feedback component where initial findings were presented, their ties to the homelessness task force provided ready access to ongoing feedback. This created a mutual learning dynamic, infusing excitement and energy into the process, even when participants were not entirely pleased with certain portrayals in the paper, they acknowledged the relevance of the concepts used.
- Being Trustworthy: The sensitive and often controversial nature of the homelessness issue for PA informants necessitated building strong trust. The researchers established trust by clearly explaining their study’s purpose, ensuring informant anonymity and data confidentiality, and communicating genuine sympathy for the informants’ dilemmas. Their personal experience as commuters grappling with homelessness helped forge a bond, demonstrating empathy and mitigating potential misinterpretations.
- Theoretical Perspective on High-Quality Connections: Finally, the essay offers a theoretical understanding of “high-quality connections,” explaining why these relational practices are so crucial for fueling and sustaining engaging research. High-quality connections are defined as ties between individuals characterized by mutuality, positive regard, and vitality. These connections possess distinctive features:
- High emotional carrying capacity: They allow a greater flow of both positive and negative emotions.
- Tensility: They have the flexibility to “flex and bend,” enabling them to withstand stress and strain better than lower-quality connections.
- Strong connectivity: They foster openness to new ideas and influence among interaction partners. These three qualities are theorized to enhance a research project’s adaptability (by easing inevitable setbacks and facilitating coordination), foster growth and mutual learning (through openness and information sharing), and provide vitality and energy that sustain momentum through the project’s inevitable ups and downs.
In conclusion, Dutton and Dukerich challenge conventional wisdom that prioritizes strong research questions, clever theories, or rigorous methods. Instead, they position the relational foundation as a fundamental “keystone” that “feeds and enablers the overall quality of a research project”. They argue that while it cannot solely dictate an interesting trajectory, ignoring it is detrimental. The essay advocates for researchers to be more mindful and intentional in cultivating relational practices, asserting that such attention is both “practically useful and theoretically justified” for the entire scholarly research enterprise.
APA Reference: Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. (2006). The relational foundation of research: An underappreciated dimension of interesting research. The Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 21-26.