This "Instructor's Corner" describes a step forward on the journey to write, review, and publish high-quality qualitative research manuscripts. This article examines two existing perspectives on generating high-quality qualitative manuscripts and then compares and contrasts the different elements of each. First, an overview of Rocco's (2010) eight criteria for evaluating qualitative studies is presented. Rocco offers an easy-to-follow list of specific criteria that can be used by both authors and reviewers. Second, a more systemic analysis of "quality" is offered in the work of Easterby-Smith, Golden-Biddle, and Locke (2008). This article describes the messy, multilevel, pluralistic environment of qualitative research methods in order to point to specific areas for improving quality publications. Easterby-Smith and colleagues do not provide an easy-to-follow list; however, the issues and concerns raised in their article are relevant and important for the discipline of HRD and the journals of the Academy. This "Instructor's Corner" concludes by summarizing the key contributions of each evaluative method and suggests areas for continued examination.