Research Methods

Understanding Research
Philosophies & Approaches
Formulating Research
Designs/Methodologies

Objectives of Session
To explain the logic and also relevance of underlying philosophical perspectives in terms of informing
business research
To explore selected main research paradigms which are significant for business research
To outline the main features of positivism
To outline the main features of interpretivism

To distinguish between deductive & inductive research approaches

To explore typical research designs & the importance of achieving methodological coherence
throughout ones own research design
To explain the differences between quantitative & qualitative research designs & choosing a suitable
design for ones own research
To highlight the differences between exploratory, descriptive & explanatory research
To identify selected main research strategies/methodologies & choosing from amongst these to
achieve coherence throughout ones research design
To consider various issues that affect the feasibility and also quality of ones own research

What we have covered thus far

Most researchers plan their
research in the following way:
- There is a question that
needs to be addressed/ a
problem that needs to be
solved
- Then, they think about what
data they need + techniques
they use to collect such data
(e.g. use questionnaires?
or conduct interviews?)

FOCUS the centre of the research

ONION
3

What we have covered thus far

BUT in order to reach the
centre of the onion.. You have
to go through the outer
layers
Put simply, you have to
explain why you made the
choice you did this is the
proper approach.
In order to do this, you have to
understand & explain the key
concepts within each layer as
each layer informs the next
We will start by focusing on the 2 outermost layers

Research Philosophy
The term research philosophy refers to a system of
beliefs and assumptions about the development of
knowledge

Dimensions of Research Philosophy

ONTOLOGY the nature of reality.

EPISTEMOLOGY what is considered

Assumptions researchers have about the

way the world operates and commitment
held to particular views (e.g Employees
resistance to change).

acceptable knowledge

Objectivism social entities exist in

Subjective meanings & social phenomena

Only observable phenomena that can

provide credible data, facts.

reality external to and independent of

social actors

Subjectivism social phenomena are

EXAMPLES: MANAGEMENT
CUSTOMER SERVICE

created from the perceptions and

consequent actions of social actors. As
social interactions between actors are a
continual
process, social
Your assumptions
about phenomena
human knowledge and about the nature of the realities
are in
constant in
state
change/
youa encounter
your of
research
inevitably shape HOW YOU UNDERSTAND
revision.

your research questions, the methods that you use and how you interpret your
findings (Crotty, 1998).

Understanding your research philosophy

Ontology: is concerned with nature of reality.

This raise the questions of the assumptions researchers have

about the way the world operates and commitment held to
particular views.
The two aspects of ontology we describe here will both have
their devotees among business and management researchers.
In addition, both are likely to be accepted as producing valid
knowledge by many researchers

Ontology

The frst aspect of ontology

we discuss is objectivism.
This portrays the position
that social entities exist in

reality external to social

actors concerned with their
existence.
The second aspect, subjectivism holds
that social phenomena are created from

Ontology

Blaikie (1993) describes the root defnition of ontology as

the
science or study of being and develops this description for
the social sciences to encompass claims about what exists,
what it looks like, what units make it up and how these
units
interact with each other.
In short, ontology describes our view (whether claims or
assumptions) on the nature of reality, and specifcally, is this an

Ontolog

For the everyday example,

they use the example of a
workplace report asking one
to question whether it
describes what is really going
on, or only what the author
thinks is going on. They go on

to highlight the complexity

that is introduced when
considering phenomena such

Epistemology
It concerns what constitutes acceptable knowledge in a
field of study.
Closely coupled with ontology and its
consideration of what constitutes reality,
epistemology considers views about the most
appropriate ways of enquiring into the
nature of the world (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and
Jackson,
2008) and what is knowledge and what are the sources
and
limits of knowledge (Eriksson and Kovalainen, 2008).
Questions of epistemology begin to consider the
research

Epistemology

Blaikie (1993) describes epistemology as the

theory or science of the method or
grounds of knowledge expanding this into a
set of claims or assumptions about the ways in
which it is possible to gain knowledge of reality,
how what exists may be known, what can be
known, and what criteria must be satisfed in
order to be described as
knowledge. Chia (2002) describes epistemology
as how and what it is possible to know and the
need to reflect on methods and standards
through which reliable and verifiable knowledge
is produced.

Epistemology

Hatch and Cunliffe (2006) summarise

epistemology
as knowing how you can know and
expand
this by
and how should
be represented or
asking how is knowledge generated,
reality
described.
what criteria

and
ontology,from
and how
discriminate
They
go on to good knowledge
the inter-dependent
bad
both
informs, and depends upon,
knowledge,
one
highlight
the
relationship

other.
between

ONTOLOGY the nature of

reality
Subjectivism
Objectivism

EPISTEMOLOGY what is
considered acceptable
knowledge

Research Philosophies:
Positivism
Interpretivism

Positivist vs. Interpretivist Philosophies

Positivism is a paradigm that originated in the natural sciences (e.g. physics, chemistry,
biological sciences, etc). It rests on the assumption that social reality is singular and
objective, and is not affected by the act of investigating it. The research involves a
deductive process with a view to providing explanatory theories to understand social
phenomena.
Positivists will prefer collecting data about an observable entity and search or
regularities and causal relationships in your data to create law-like generalizations
like those produced by scientists.
More specifically, theories provide the basis of explanation, permit the anticipation of
phenomena, predict their occurrence and therefore allow them to be controlled.
Explanation consists of establishing causal relationships between the variables by
establishing causal laws and linking them to a deductive or integrated theory.

Positivist vs. Interpretivist Philosophies

One may be critical of the positivist tradition and argue that the social world of business
and management is far too complex to lend itself to theorizing by definite laws in the
same way as the physical sciences. Those researchers critical of positivism argue that
rich insights into this complex world are lost if such complexity is reduced entirely to a
series of law-like generalizations. If you sympathize with such a view, your research
philosophy is likely to be nearer to that of the Interpretivist.
.
Crucial to the interpretivist philosophy is that the researcher has to adopt an
empathetic stance. The challenge here is to enter the social world of our research
subjects and understand the world from their point of view.
Some would argue that an interpretivist perspective is highly appropriate in the case of
business and management research, particularly in the fields such as organizational
behavior, marketing and human resource management. Not only are business situations
complex, they are also unique. They are a function of a particular set of circumstances
and individuals coming together at a specific time.

Positivist vs. Interpretivist Philosophies

Positivist vs. Interpretivist Philosophies

Positivist vs. Interpretivist Philosophies

From Research Philosophies to Approaches

Research Approaches
The next layer of the research Onion is about Research Approaches - the
choice of approach is largely informed or influenced by ones underlying
research philosophy.

Positivism

Interpretivi
sm

DEDUCTIVE

INDUCTIVE

- Research approach involving the

TESTING of a theoretical
proposition/ premise/prediction
by making use of a research
strategy specifcally designed for
the purpose of testing specifc
propositions made.
- Set of premises/predictions
conclusions
- So, conclusions true when all
premises are true

- Research approach involving the

development of a theory as a
result of the observation of
empirical data.
- Gap in the logic argument
between conclusion and premises
observed
- So, conclusions judged to be
supported by observations made

Research Approaches
Even though one may think that research is highly systematic, going from one
specific stage to the next i.e. a researcher starts from the outer layers of the onion,
going from any particular philosophy to a seemingly fitting research approach
BUT OFTENONE WILL FIND THAT RESEARCH IS A MESSY PROCESS THAT
CAN BE TRIGGERED BY ANY ELEMENT put simply, there are many ways to
start a piece of research For instance, researchers can also start their research
based on a theory that is developed from their reading of the academic literature & they
then design a research strategy to test the theory deductive approach Alternatively,
if a researcher starts by collecting data to explore a phenomenon and then theory is
generated or built (often in the form of a conceptual framework) inductive approach

Deductive Approach
Blaikie (2010) highlighted six sequential steps through which a deductive research
process would progress:
1. Put forward a tentative idea, premise or hypothesis (a testable proposition about the
relationship between two or more variables) or set of hypothesis to form a theory.
2. By using existing literature, or by specifying the conditions under which the theory are
expected to hold, deduce testable proposition(s).
3. Examine the premises and the logic of the argument that produced them, comparing
this argument with existing theories to see if it offers an advance in understanding.
4. Test the premises by collecting appropriate data to measure the concepts or
variables and analyzing it.
5. If the results of the analysis are not consistent with the premises (the tests fail!), the
theory is false and must either be rejected, or modified and the process restarted.
6. If the results of the analysis are consistent with the premises then the theory is
corroborated.

Deductive Approach
Key Characteristics:
-search to explain causal relationships between concepts and variables
-usually use highly structured methodology to facilitate replication & reliability
BUT does not permit alternative explanations of what is going on there is
rigidness in terms of choice of theory and definition of the hypothesis.
-concepts need to be operationalized in a way that enables facts to be
measured
-principle of reductionism problems reduced to the simplest possible
elements
-GENERALISATION
- relatively big samples

Inductive Approach
Key Characteristics:
-usually involves getting a feel of what is going on in order to
understand/appreciate better the nature of the problem
-one of the tasks involved is to make better sense of the data (for e.g.
interviews) collected through in-depth analysis.
-the result of analysis conducted would be the formulation of a theory, often in
the form of a conceptual framework.
-even though you MAY end up with a similar theory (produced by the deductive
approach) but the PROCESS/APPROACH of HOW you go about the
production of that theory is different inductive theory FOLLOWS data rather
than the other way around (deductive approach)

Inductive Approach
-This approach is argued to be more suitable for social sciences some social
scientists are critical of an approach that enabled cause-effect link to be made
between particular variables without an understanding of the way in which
humans interpret their social world. Developing this sort of understanding is the
strength of the inductive approach.
-most of the time, inductive research is particularly concerned with the context
in which such events were taking place
- Relatively small samples & use of a variety of research methods to collect
data to establish different views of phenomena

Deductive vs. Inductive Approach

CAUTION!
In reality, it is possible to combine or use both induction and deduction within
the same piece of research.
Besides philosophical considerations, the approach taken for a particular piece
of research can also partly depend on how much is known about the chosen
topic (deduction likely if there is a wealth of literature; induction likely if topic is
new and not much is known), timeframe, audience, personal and supervisor
expertise etc.

BRIEF Summary:As summarized by Saunders et al. (2012):

Research philosophy relates to the development of knowledge & the nature of that
knowledge each philosophy contains key assumptions about the way YOU view the
world.
Major ways of thinking about research philosophy include epistemology & ontology

Ontology concerned with the nature of social phenomena as entities

Objectivism holds that social entities exist in reality external to
social actors whereas the subjectivist view is that social
phenomena are created through the perceptions and consequent
actions of social actors (think of the management example earlier)

BRIEF Summary:Epistemology concerns what constitutes acceptable knowledge in a field of

study
Positivism philosophical stance of natural scientists work with
observable social reality and the end product can be law-like
generalizations similar to those in physical and natural sciences while
Interpretivism advocates the need for researchers to understand the
differences between humans in our role as social actors
Two main research approaches deduction & induction. With deduction, a theory or
hypothesis are developed and a research strategy designed to test the hypothesis.
With induction, data are collected and a theory developed as a result of the data
analysis.

Research Methodology, Strategy & Time Horizon

Moving to the inner layers
of the onion, we now
explore how chosen
Research Philosophy &
Approach subsequently
influence the selections of
-Methodological Choice
-Research Strategy &
-Time Horizon

= NOT covered by this module

Research Design
RESEARCH DESIGN research design is the general plan of how you will go about
answering your research question(s)
These three inner layers can be seen as key considerations in the process of designing
your research (i.e. research design focus)
Essentially: the way you turn your Research Questions into a research project
The most important issue here is COHERENCE how good the fit is between the
three elements/layers.
You need to have a clear research design with valid reasons for each of the design
decisions justification of each element should (i) be based on the nature of your
research question(s) and objectives, show consistency with your research philosophy
and demonstrate coherence across your research design.
.

Research Design
Positivism

QUANtitative
Research
Design

Interpretivi
sm

QUALitative
Research
Design
Inductive

Deductive

Qualitative research studies participants

meanings and the relationships between
them, using a variety of data collection
Quantitative research examines
techniques and analytical procedures, to
relationships between variables, which develop a conceptual framework. Data is
are measured numerically and analyzed collected in a non-standardized manner so
using a range of statistical techniques. that questions and procedures may alter and
Data is collected in a standardized
emerge during research process.
manner.
Success of researchers role includes building
The researcher is seen as independent rapport & demonstrating sensitivity to gain
from those being researched, who are
cognitive access to their data
usually called respondents.

Recognizing the Nature of Research Design

The PURPOSE of your research may be

Explorator Descriptiv
y
e

Explanato
ry

or some combination of these

So, you have to think about your research what research questions & objectives do you
wish to address? The way you ask your questions will result in you undertaking
exploratory, descriptive or explanatory research leading to an answer that is either
descriptive, descriptive & explanatory, or explanatory.

Recognizing the Nature of Research Design

Explorator Descriptiv
y
e

Exploratory study
usually asks open
questions to discover
what is happening and
to gain preliminary
insights about a topic of
interest useful if little
is known about the
subject area or if you
are unsure of precise
nature of problem.
Tends to be open and
unstructured

Explanato
ry

Objective is to gain an
accurate profle of
events, persons or
situations.
Necessary to have a
clear picture of the
phenomenon on which
you wish to collect
data on
Usually a step
before explanatory
focus

Focuses on
establishing causal
relationships between
variables studying a
situation or problem in
order to explain the
relationships between
variables

Research Strategies
Strategy plan of action to achieve a goal
Therefore, research strategy a plan of how a researcher will go about answering
his/her research question
Often termed as the methodological link between research philosophy and subsequent
choice of research methods to collect data.
Even though some research strategies may seem to ft in more naturally
with certain research philosophies please note that there are often overlaps
In addition, choice of research strategy is also influenced by many other
factors such as the extent of existing knowledge, amount of time & resources
available, access to participants, access to other sources of data, etc.
As long as a reasonable degree of coherence is achieved OK!

Research Strategies
Quantitative
Research Design

1. Experiment
2. Survey

Quan/Qual

1. Archival research
2. Case Study

Qualitative
Research Design

1.
2.
3.
4.

Ethnography
Action Research
Grounded Theory
Narrative Enquiry

Research Strategy

Quantitative Research Strategies

Experiment

Experiment is often seen as the gold standard owes much to the

natural sciences although it features strongly in psychological and social
science research.
Purpose is to study the probability of a change in an independent variable
causing a change in another, dependent variable
An experiment uses predictions, known as hypotheses, rather than
research questions
Null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis
Testing of null hypothesis (p=0.05)
Is there a link between two variables? What is the size of the change?
What is the relative importance of two or more independent variables?
Between-subjects within-subjects (repeated measures) design
Feasibility of using this strategy will depend on the nature of

Quantitative Research Strategies

Survey

Usually associated with a deductive research approach popular and

commonly-used strategy in business and management research
Surveys using questionnaire are popular as they allow the collection of
standardized data from a sizeable population in a highly economical (i.e.
cost effective) way, allowing easy comparison
Usually involves collection of quantitative data that can be analyzed using
descriptive and inferential statistics
Suggest possible reasons for particular relationships between variables
and to produce models of these relationships.
With proper sampling, it is possible to generate fndings that are
representative of the whole population at a lower cost
Many pitfalls!

Quan/Qual Research Strategies

Archival Research

Makes use of administrative records and documents as principal source of

data.
Data is seen as product of day-to-day activities these are assumed to
be part of the reality being studied.
This strategy allows research questions which focus on the past and
changes over time to be answered, be they exploratory, descriptive or
explanatory. Even so, your ability to answer such questions will inevitably
be constrained by the nature of the administrative records and documents
available. Even if records exist, they may not contain the precise info
needed to answer your RQs.
Those pursuing this strategy must frst establish what data is available

Quan/Qual Research Strategies

Case Study

Explores a research topic or phenomenon within its context, or within a

number of real-life contexts
Boundaries between phenomenon being studied and context within which
it is being studied not always clear complete opposite of the
experimental strategy where contextual variables are highly controlled as
they are seen as potential threats to the validity of the results
It also differs from the survey strategy where, although the research is
undertaken in context, the ability to explore and understand this context is
limited by the number of variables for which data can be collected
This strategy is relevant if you wish to gain a rich understanding of the
context of the research and the processes being enacted.
Often mixed methods interviews, observations, questionnaires,
documentary analysis.
Triangulation the use of different data collection techniques within one
study to ensure data is telling you what you think it is telling you.

Single Case

vs. Multiple Cases

Holistic Case vs. Embedded Case
For multiple cases - Literal replication OR Theoretical replication

Qualitative Research Strategies

Ethnography

Qualitative strategy to study groups anthropology primitive societies

Ethnographers are interested to study people in groups, who interact with
one another and share the same space, whether this is at street level,
within a work group, in an organization or within a society for instance,
the researcher may live amongst those whom they studied, to observe and
talk to them in order to produce detailed cultural accounts of their share
beliefs, behaviors, interactions, language, rituals and the events that
shaped their lives.

Action Research

The purpose of this strategy is to promote organizational learning to

produce practical outcomes through identifying issues, planning action,
taking action and evaluating action
Research in action rather than research about action addresses
worthwhile practical purposes and resolving real organizational issues
Many iterations explicit focus on action related to multiple stages, to
explore and evaluate solutions to organizational issues and to promote
changes

Qualitative Research Strategies

Grounded Theory

A methodological approach where a theory that is grounded in or

developed inductively from a set of data.
Grounded Theory was developed for social researchers as a process to
analyze, interpret and explain the meanings that social actors construct to
make sense of their everyday experiences in specifc situations.
Used to develop theoretical explanations of social interactions and
processes in a wide range of contexts including business and
management.
Coding & Categories.

Narrative Inquiry

A narrative is a story a personal account which interprets an event or

sequence of events.
Complete story the ways in which events in a story are linked, the
actions that follow and their implications are more likely to be revealed by
encouraging participants to narrate his or her experiences.
Providing opportunity to connect events & actions over time in a
meaningful whole
Therefore, a narrative is as an account of an experience that is told in a
sequenced way, indicating a flow of events that, taken together, are

The Quality of Chosen Research Design

How do we enhance the quality of our research fndings?
Will the evidence and my conclusions stand up to scrutiny?

Main Strategy:- Try to reduce the possibility of

getting the answer wrong!
To assess Quality of research
Positivist Researchers

Canons of scientific inquiry

Reliability
Construct Validity
Internal and External Validity

Interpretivist Researchers

Credibility
Transferability
Dependability
Confirmability

IMPORTANT: You have to develop in-depth

understanding of all the concepts above in order to

The Quality of Chosen Research Design

RELIABILITY
Refers to whether your data collection technique and analytic procedures
would produce consistent findings if they were repeated on another occasion
or replicated by a different researcher.
In attempting to ensure a high degree of reliability it is perhaps easier to
explore the threats to reliability.
The best way to address these threats is to be methodologically consistent
and rigorous in the way u design & also carry out your research otherwise,
your research findings and conclusions will not be reliable.
Note: Regardless what steps you take, you will need to report these
in a clear and transparent manner to allow others to judge for
themselves & to replicate your study if they so wish.

The Quality of Chosen Research Design

General Threats to Reliability:

Even though it is a key characteristic of research quality, reliability alone is not

sufficient ensure good quality research

The Quality of Chosen Research Design

VALIDITY
Refers to the extent to which data collection method or methods accurately measure
what they were intended to measure
OR the extent to which research findings are really about what they claim to be about
BRIEF Description (Note: we will explore in more detail later in the semester for
e.g. when we outline proper questionnaire design procedures)
1. Construct Validity is concerned with the extent to which your research measures
actually measure what you intend them to assess. Usually associated with positivist and
quantitative research. Within this category we have face validity, content validity &
criterion-related validity.
2. Internal Validity is established when your research demonstrates a causal
relationship between to variables. For example, in a questionnaire-based survey, internal
validity would be established where a set of questions can be shown statistically to be
associated with an analytical factor or outcome.

The Quality of Chosen Research Design

Your research findings would be seen as spurious (i.e. false fake
inaccurate) when an apparent relationship is really due to some other reason,
such as a flaw in your research design.
Threats to
Internal
Validity:

The Quality of Chosen Research Design

3. External Validity is concerned with the question: can a studys research findings be
generalized to other relevant settings or groups? This is a major concerns of academic
researchers it is usually necessary to replicate the study in that other context, or
contexts, to be able to establish such statistically generalizability.

IN SUMMARY: All researchers take issues of research quality seriously if

they wish others to accept their research as good and credible.
BUT the canons of scientific inquiry seems to apply to positivist and quantitative
studies how then would a qualitative researcher demonstrate that their research
is of high quality and credible?

Some have adapted the aforementioned concepts formulated new names for
versions of these criteria that recognize the nature of qualitative research:
Dependability Reliability
Credibility Internal Validity
Transferability External Validity