Balancing Blueprinted Methods and Methodological Flexibility in Cross-Cultural, Multi-Lingual and Multi-Country Contexts: A Processual Methodology

In the history of research methodology, a persistent tension has existed between blueprinting methods and methodological flexibility, often resulting in the dominance of one over the other. This tension is amplified in four distinct circumstances: In research projects in which funding is based on research proposals, in larger-scale research projects involving extensive qualitative data, in comparative, cross-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-country research; and fourthly, in collaborative research projects where multiple researchers co-operate.

This article shows our reflections on addressing and pragmatically reconciling this tension within the context of a research that encompasses all four circumstances—the CO-CREATE project.

In this Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR), 199 adolescents in 5 countries were tasked with formulating policy proposals to prevent adolescent obesity. To assess the PAR process, we created and collected over 1500 pages of field notes, subjecting them to collaborative and comparative qualitative analysis.

To organise and structure the data collection, management and analysis, we adopted a methodological approach conceptualised as a dynamic process, aligning with a pragmatist and perspectivist orientation. Anticipating potential challenges at the project's inception, we prepared for foreshadowed problems, while also confronting unforeseen obstacles along the way. Reflecting on this methodological journey, we offer a nuanced exploration of the implications of methodology as a dynamic process within the context of collaborative multi-country qualitative projects employing pragmatist and perspectivist perspectives. To balance blueprinted methods and methodological flexibility we propose a processual methodology with two strategies: Blueprinted Methodological Reflexivity and Collaborative Moments of Iterative Validation.