A note on using hermeneutics for literature review: for MBA students

A note on using hermeneutics for literature review: for MBA students (information from perplexity.ai)

My question 1: "In the context of conducting literature review and writing up the MBA dissertation chapter of "literature review', notably on the relevant concept definitions, analytical theories and theoretical perspectives, highlight 5 main literature review practices from the lens of hermeneutics. It would be useful to provide a few illustrative examples on the literature review topic of "change leadership"."

The reply: "Hermeneutics treats the literature review as an interpretive, iterative dialog between you and the texts, rather than a one‑off “summary of what others said”. From this lens, five core practices become central: reflexive pre‑understanding, iterative hermeneutic circling, meaning‑oriented classification, critical dialoguing with texts, and integrative argument building.

​

1. Make pre-understandings explicit

Hermeneutics starts from the recognition that you always approach “change leadership” with prior assumptions, experiences, and theoretical leanings. These pre‑understandings shape what you notice in the literature (e.g., transformational leadership, Kotter, sensemaking) and what you overlook.

​

For an MBA literature review on change leadership, you could:

• State your initial stance: e.g., “This review begins from an interest in how managers mobilise people during digital transformation, drawing on prior exposure to Kotter’s 8‑step model and transformational leadership theories.”

• Acknowledge your context: e.g., working in Asian organisations may sensitize you to hierarchy, face‑saving, and incremental rather than radical change.

These short reflexive statements in the opening of the chapter explain why certain definitions (e.g., “change leadership as mobilising commitment for discontinuous change”) are foregrounded over more incremental change management views.

​

2. Use the hermeneutic circle iteratively

Hermeneutic review frames reading as moving back and forth between parts (individual articles, concepts) and whole (your evolving understanding of change leadership). Searching, reading, and writing are cyclical rather than linear: each new text can re‑shape your overall picture, and the evolving picture changes what you look for next.

​

Applied to change leadership:

• Start with seminal works (e.g., transformational leadership, Kotter, sensemaking‑based views of leading change) and sketch a provisional map (e.g., trait‑based, process‑based, relational perspectives).

• As you read a qualitative, context‑rich study on leaders navigating resistance in healthcare or education, revisit your earlier map and refine categories (e.g., add “emotional and ethical practices in change leadership”).
  ​

In the chapter, show this circling by signalling how later studies prompted re‑interpretation: e.g., “Initial reading suggested change leaders as visionary strategists; subsequent hermeneutic engagement with phenomenological studies repositioned them as relational sense‑makers working within constraints.”

​

3. Classify and map for meaning, not just mechanics

Hermeneutic approaches stress classifying literature in ways that clarify meanings and conceptual nuances, not only method or date. Instead of simple headings like “definitions”, “theories”, “models”, the categories themselves should emerge from interpretive engagement with texts.

​

For change leadership, you might organise the literature around:

• How change leadership is defined:

  • As a role (e.g., senior leader championing transformation).

  • As a process (ongoing sensemaking, communication, and adaptation).

  • As a practice (daily micro‑interactions and relational work during change).
    ​

• Theoretical perspectives used:

  • Functionalist/contingency (fit between style and context).

  • Sensemaking/social construction (meaning‑making among stakeholders).

  • Critical/ethical (power, emotion, and justice in leading change).
    ​

In the dissertation, your sub‑headings signal this hermeneutic classification, for example: “Change leadership as episodic intervention”, “Change leadership as ongoing sensemaking”, “Change leadership as ethical and relational practice”.

​

4. Read texts as dialog partners, not data points

Hermeneutic reviewing treats each article as a voice in a conversation, to be questioned and responded to, rather than a fixed fact to be extracted. The review thus becomes a written dialogue: you reconstruct how authors frame change leadership, and then critically “talk back” to them.

​

For example, on the concept of change leadership:

• When an article equates effective change leadership with charismatic vision and top‑down communication, you could ask: what assumptions about followers and power underpin this?
  ​

• When phenomenological studies show leaders’ lived struggles, ambivalence, and emotional labour during change, you can contrast this with more heroic, prescriptive models and discuss what each view illuminates and obscures.
  ​

In writing, this appears as dialogical phrasing, such as:

• “While X conceptualises change leadership as primarily visionary and top‑down, Y’s hermeneutic analysis of leaders’ lived experience foregrounds ambiguity, ethical tension, and mutual influence, challenging simplistic heroic portrayals.”
  ​

5. Build an integrative, interpretive argument

The endpoint of a hermeneutic literature review is not a neutral “summary”, but a coherent interpretive argument about the phenomenon—in your case, what change leadership is, how it is theorised, and what this means for your study. You integrate definitions, theories, and perspectives into a theoretically grounded position that is explicitly yours, yet accountable to the texts.

​

For your MBA dissertation on change leadership, this might involve:

• Arguing that change leadership should be understood as “relational sense‑making under conditions of uncertainty”, synthesising transformational, sensemaking, and relational leadership theories.
  ​

• Showing how this interpretation justifies your chosen analytical theories (e.g., sensemaking theory plus a leadership style framework) and your research questions about how managers in a particular sector narrate and enact change.

In the chapter, the final sections explicitly articulate this integrative stance, for example:

• “Drawing on hermeneutic engagement with the literature, this study conceptualises change leadership as a situated, relational practice through which leaders and followers co‑create meanings of change, rather than a set of discrete steps applied to passive recipients.”
  ​

---

These five practices—reflexivity, hermeneutic circling, meaning‑centred classification, dialogical critique, and integrative argumentation—allow the literature review chapter to become an interpretive foundation for your empirical work on change leadership, rather than a descriptive backdrop."

My question 2: "Please suggest 3 YouTube videos that introduce hermeneutics for learning purpose by MBA students."

The reply: "Three YouTube videos introduce hermeneutics accessibly for MBA students tackling research methods in dissertations like literature reviews. These selections prioritize clear explanations of the hermeneutic circle, its role in qualitative analysis, and relevance to interpretive social science, aligning with your interest in structured educational videos for research philosophies.

​

Hermeneutics Simply Explained

This 9-minute video (2024) breaks down hermeneutics, the hermeneutic circle, and key thinkers like Gadamer in plain language, ideal for quick dissertation prep. It covers philosophical foundations, iterative interpretation (pre-understanding to text), and challenges like context bias, with visuals for research application. (link 1)

​

Philosophy of Qualitative Research: Hermeneutics

A 7-minute University of Amsterdam lecture (2016) explains hermeneutics in qualitative research contexts, stressing why it's essential beyond buzzwords. Main ideas include the hermeneutic circle's two elements—personal knowledge embedding and contextual text understanding—and its fit for analyzing interviews or organizational texts like change leadership studies. 

(link 2)

​

Intro to Hermeneutics, Part 1

This 30-minute seminary lecture (2022) offers a structured historical and methodological intro to hermeneutics, adaptable to MBA by focusing on interpretation principles. It outlines presuppositions, grammatical-historical analysis, and bridging ancient/modern contexts, useful for theorizing leadership literature iteratively.

​" (link 3)

A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.