The Context of Organizational Research - Essay Example

Running Head: THE CONTEXT OF ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH The Context of Organizational Research Name Course Tutor Date The Context of Organizational Research This entails relevant methodological developments in a wide range of research in business organization. These methods promote effective understanding of current and new methodologies applied in business organization. There are different types of organizational and business research they include applied research and basic research. Basic research enhances theorizing & general understanding of a research carried out, it includes models such as basic organizational & management processes, organizational or institutional systems and their interplay, employee & managerial behavior at work, responses to work behavior, outcomes & policies, consumer behavior, economic behavior, systems & processes and accounting & financial systems & processes (Cassell & Symon, 2004). On the other hand, applied research which informs the organization in its decision making and actions has models such as characterizing people & processes within a context, identifying a problem, constraint, perspective or opportunity, selecting a process, policy, intervention, innovation or action, evaluating a process, policy, intervention, innovation or action, capturing human responses to above three aspects, Monitoring/evaluating quality and other processes and segmenting & targeting markets. In organizational research methods, it is advocated that the ordered set of activities that focus on systematic collection of information should be spiral. This is the new accepted methods of analysis as a way of reaching conclusions and making recommendations (Podsakoff, 1986). The spiral research process includes steps that follow institutional procedures for obtaining ethical approval for the project. Spiral research process includes steps such as Defining Problem and/or Issue & Clarify Context, Read Past Research & other Secondary Data Sources, Select Paradigm & Specific Method(s), Construct Design and/or Procedures, Define Measures and/or Data Sources/Gathering Techniques, Devise Sampling Scheme(s) (this is a trial study or pilot study), Collect Observations/Data from Sample(s) (this is a trial study or pilot study), Analyzing Data & Interpretation, Draw Defensible Conclusions, Write-up/Present Results and finally refine problem and/or take action (Cooksey & McDonald, 1996). Before a research is carried out, one must establish the focus of the research by first of all knowing its main focal issue. The main issue here is then drawn from Situational Constraints, Knowledge-Based Needs and Decision-Making Needs (Chatman, 1989). It is then subdivided into qual and quant data. Where qual data includes Interpretive Orientation which finds out how employees view the culture within an organization. Equally, quant data includes, Exploratory Orientation which looks into reasons why morale is decreasing, Descriptive Orientation (looks at the types of employees in a business organization that provide services to customers) and lastly there is Causal Orientation which looks at the effectiveness of training programs (Korpela, Montealegre & Poulymenakou, 2003). Anny research carried out must be influenced by stakeholders. They will influence research issues and processes or its outcomes. By influencing research, stakeholders will influence the researcher himself, through funding the research, professional colleagues, consulting firm, government, clients and customers, management, gatekeepers, organizations, participants, employees and through buyers/consumers. Carrying a research entails ethical rights that protect the participant and the client in the research. It also has obligations that the researcher must adhere to when carrying out the research. Participant’s rights includes, the right to withdraw at anytime with no coercion, Avoidance/treatment of adverse impacts, Know what will be done with results, Not be tricked or deceived, to privacy, Informed consent and the right to cultural respect. Similarly, the client has the right to have Informed consent, Control over access, Withdraw at any time, know what will be done with results, and expect a report on the results, Respect for organizational resources, Identity kept secret/commercial–in-confidence honored. Apart from the rights, the clients too have obligations and they include, avoiding misuse of results, not to expect to know identities of participants and to avoid influencing research process (Pasmore, 2009). Finally, the obligations of the researcher includes, avoid deception wherever possible, safeguarding privacy, identity & data, minimize/correct adverse impacts, good faith dealing with data, seek informed consent, avoid misusing power, honor any promises, culturally appropriate behavior and must get ethical approval for the research. Paradigms & Methods This includes positivistic paradigm and interpretive paradigm. Under positivistic paradigm which is also known as normative paradigm, a hypothesis must be formulated the observed through theories to find its truth. Through deduction hypothesis is developed then tested by observation, inducted by theories before it is generalized into truth. For example when you have a hypothesis such as Human behavior is orderly & lawful the researcher should uncover cause & effect relationships and should preferably use natural science methods. The research should contain value objectivity and external reality. The observations should be measured & quantified (preference for the quantitative). It should be noted that a researcher’s perspective is central and control over context is essential, Theory & constructs are central and logical prior to observation. A research will only be judged when the construct is valid (has it measured the constructs thought), judged when it has Internal Validity (has study shown the relationships it was designed to show?), External validity (can the results be generalized to other people, times, and places?) and finally it would be judged based on the validity of statistical conclusion (are the analyses appropriate to support conclusions?) Theories involved in positivistic research includes can be picked from simple and complex theories. An example of a simple theory is when a researcher picks a hypothetical construct theory, he must make sure that he has the satisfaction of his supervisor and that he has the final feelings of control over events. All these would lead to the satisfaction of the company and therefore the morale of the employees would be increased. On the contrary, the hypothetical construct can follow a shorter channel where in any case the supervisor is satisfied, employee’s morale would be increased or in any case the researcher feels he has control over the events following hypothesized casual link, the employee’s morale would be increased (Johns, 2006). There are varied forms of complex theories where a researcher can follow all channels but would still have the same ending for example, using Karl Popper’s theory it must be made sure that the theory picked should be testable and must be falsifiable. The processes here include Transformational-Transactional Leadership or Substitutes for Leadership or Social Processes of Leadership followed by Organizational Commitment or Collective Efficacy/ Expectancies or Organizational Efficacy followed by Organizational Citizenship Behaviors and ending at performance outcomes (Muchiri, 2006). The Interpretive (Constructivist) Paradigm entails research based on observation after seeking to confirm or disconfirm which is transcribed in order to be described. The information is then inducted to get a general interpretation and further inducted to find an account of relative truth. The research entails key assumptions such as human behavior is a product of how people interpret their world (uncover interpretations), social science NOT natural science methods, values subjectivity & internal reality, observations occur in context, language is a key (but not only) source of data (preference for the qualitative), control over context should be avoided, participants’ perspectives are central and theory & constructs emerge from observations (Buchanan & Bryman, 2009). Constructivist) Paradigm is judged on the basis of transparency, authenticity, sufficiency, and transportability. Emergent theories in interpretive research looks at strategies of intuitive individuals (find rationale and make it up and dress it up), expression word choice (experience and judgment), low interiority (silence, strategies of intuitive individuals, expression word choice and intervening conditions), intrapersonal (low interiority, interpersonal and high interiority), interpersonal (low interiority, organizational, high interiority) and institution disclosure (gut feel, intuition and gut instinct) (Robson, 2011). Paradigms & Perspectives continues to Positivist/Normative which includes realism that explains that the world has an independent existence, world achieves meaning through human interpretation and causality understood by working backwards from outcomes to mechanisms in a specific context (Cooksey & McDonald, 1996). Others are experiential paradigm (action research) and critical social science. Interpretive/Constructivist on the other hand has feminist research and postmodernism. Research process has paradigm of complexity and finally a meta-criteria for judging research quality which includes Research Planning (Focus most closely on: ‘Contextualisation’ meta-criteria ‘Realisation’ meta-criteria, anticipate how ‘Explication’ meta-criteria could be addressed: Be clear about design & procedural choices and trade-offs made, Know strengths & limitations, Keep a journal, diary or record of the research journey and periodically reflect on it through the course of the research and during the ‘Explication’ (i.e., composition of the ‘presentation’) (Cooksey, 2008). On research evaluation the focus most closely is on ‘Explication’ meta-criteria, consider how ‘contextualisation’ and ‘realisation’ meta-criteria help build the case which looks into researcher sensitivity to the appropriate balance needed between meta-criteria, looks for evidence of researcher awareness of and responsiveness to emergent issues, looks for evidence of researcher insight into what they have done and learned and convincingness’ judgment rests on the integrative consideration of relevant meta-criteria and overall impression. Reference Buchanan, D. A. & Bryman, A. (2009). The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Research Methods. SAGE Publications Ltd Cassell, C. & Symon, G. (2004). Essential Guide: Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. SAGE Publishers Chatman, A. (1989). Improving interactional organizational research: A model of person- organization fit, The Academy of Management Review, 1989 - JSTOR Cooksey, R.W. (2008). Paradigm-Independent Meta-Criteria for Social & Behavioral Research: Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Postgraduate Research Conference, University of New England, Armidale Publishers Cooksey, R.W. & McDonald, G. (1996). Surviving and Thriving in Postgraduate Research, Prahran, Vic. Tilde University Press Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior, - Academy of Management Review.bschool.washington.edu Korpela, M. Montealegre, R. & Poulymenakou, A. (2003). Organizational Information Systems in the Context of Globalization. Working Conference on Information Systems Perspectives and Challenges in the Context of Globalization, June 15-17, 2003, Springer Publishers Muchiri, M. (2006). Transformational Leader Behaviors, Social Processes of Leadership and Substitutes for Leadership as Predictors of Employee Commitment, Efficacy, Citizenship Behaviors and Performance Outcomes. University of New England, New England Business Publishers Pasmore, W. A. (2009). Research in Organizational Change and Development. Vol. 17. Emerald Group Publishing Podsakoff, P. (1986). Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future. - Journal of management, jom.sagepub.com Robson, M. (2011). The Use and Disclosure of Intuition(s) by Leaders in Australian Organizations: A grounded theory. University of New England, School of Business, Economics & Public Policy Research Read More