Range and Diversity of Qualitative Research Methods - Essay Example

RANGE AND DIVERSITY OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS Introduction The academic field is very wide, having different disciplines that people in the field often undertake. One of the approaches used in the academic circles is the use of qualitative research methods. In most cases, this approach is used in the process of data collection for research in various subjects. This approach, in research activities is accredited with the ability to obtain first hand information from respondents, something that is appropriate for effective decision making by people who use this information. Qualitative research can be described as an a method employed for inquiry in various academic disciplines; initially, this approach was commonly used in social sciences, market research and several other contexts (Johnson & Christensen 2008, 32). It is important to realize that qualitative research is important in gathering an effective in-depth comprehension of various factors about human behavior and the issues that govern those behavioral issues (Anderson 2000, 17). The qualitative research methodology has been cited as very effective in investigating the how and why of an effective decision making process and not just about when, what and where (Thomas 2003, 98). In this case, samples that are small and focused are preferred compared to those that are large. In conventional perspectives, qualitative research methods have been known to produce information relating to particular cases (Denzin 2005, 33). Quantitative research methods are thus used in seeking some empirical support for the research hypotheses that are created (Denzin 2000, 54). This paper examines quantitative research methods, focusing on how it is often used in business and management research as well as the criticisms raised against its effectiveness. Range and Diversity of Qualitative research methods The increase in popularity for qualitative research methods in most of psychological disciplines can be traced back to dissatisfactions that happened within experimental and cognitive psychology that was prevalent in the 60s and 70s. During this time, a broad range of qualitative humanistic approaches were designed in order to respond to the wide countercultural critiques in traditional foundations of authority (Ramsey & Ramsey 2010, 31). This prompted a new wave of different qualitative methods that came alongside an importation of post structural and postmodernist perspectives that featured in the 80s and 90s. In the 21st century, the situation has appeared to be that of heterogeneity, featuring qualitative research as the best and effective conceptualization as a fuzzy situation. The field comprises of groups of methods that are common and overlapping. It is important to realize that for effective results, qualitative research methods can be grouped differently depending on the method deemed effective in achieving the set targets. In all these issues a lot of satisfaction has been achieved in the use of qualitative research methods. In the process of maintaining effective qualitative research, the need for over homogenizing this field is often not necessary. This happens whenever qualitative research is seen to have certain defining characteristics like giving focus on meanings and interpretations (Ottewill, 2001, 74). Additionally, the criticisms raised against qualitative research methods from the mainstream psychology is inclined at converging on certain problems that are perceived present like subjectivity intrusion, which sometime seems to be bias as well as a tendency for induction. The consensus arising from the qualitative community as well as critiques outside the community can establishes an impression that this research method is widely unified that the actual case. This misconception seems to have diverse damaging implications to people and organizations that lean on for their research activities. For instance, articles made from research exercises can sometimes be judged based on the evaluation criteria created as being generic compared to qualitative methods. In the real sense, these misconceptions are very inappropriate qualitative methods (Brace 2008, 27). Additionally, qualitative research methods can be done away with on grounds of familiarity alongside one or more methods. It is important to realize that productive research methods that are potentially creative can be lost with an inability to appreciate various qualitative research methods that are available for use. In order to create and maintain an effectively complex image relating to qualitative research method, it is imperative that a structured impression of the data collection methods and an analysis be made available. Thereafter, one has to highlight the diverse qualitative research methods that need to be used. In this case, the data collected and the process of analysis can be said to have significant levels of reliability and relevance (Lee 2010, 21). Generally, it is important to appreciate the fact that qualitative research in its pluralism, tends to have implications for effective communication within traditions, something that calls for establishment of inter-traditional links as well as those that have effective quantitative methods. Application of qualitative research methods to business and management research The current business world is very dynamic with changing customer tastes and preferences as well as methods of production and sale of goods. In all these different aspects of dynamism, technology seems to be at the centre stage, determining the level of utility that people derive from the goods and services they buy. Businesses that aim at establishing and consolidating on their competitive advantages often tends to rely on approaches that can enable them determine some of the emerging trends in business. In achieving competitive advantages, market research has often been the most effective approach by which businesses understand their strengths in the market as well as some approaches that can be devised in ensuring that they improve their brand and market position. Additionally, qualitative research methods are often very effective in the process of data collection over effective ways of management (Partington 2002, 17). Business managers often want to get feedback from their employees about the effectiveness of management approaches and strategies and how they are impacting on the business. One of the advantages with qualitative research methods is that they offer real time information about different social and economic issues relevant to the subject of research. A careful examination of some published research works reveal how qualitative research methods can be designed in various ways within particular individual studies as well as how the idiosyncratic methods can be adopted by businesses and management cases (Qualman 2009, 64). In analyzing the effectiveness of qualitative research methods in business and management, it is important to make a clear distinction between data analysis and data collection methods. Additionally, some of the qualitative methods used in data analysis seem to presuppose certain forms of data collection in such a way that it becomes hard to separate them even when the link appears to be typical instead of being essential. Some of the most common qualitative methods used in business and management research are discussed below. Depth Interviewing Depth interviewing is the most common type of qualitative research applied in business markets as well as management contexts. In this type of research, an interviewer often takes enough time on one-on-one interviews trying to establish facts about clients and their personal opinions regarding prevailing issues in business and management (McQuarrie 2012, 57). Majority of management and business depth interviews takes place in person, such that the added benefits include the researcher visiting the respondents’ place of work in a bid to effectively understand the prevailing culture at the business. In addition, the research also has the opportunity to go deeper into the workers perspectives and views about management styles used in business organizations. However, when it comes to multi-dimensional studies, on-line depth interviews and depth interviews on telephone are often the most appropriate and cost effective (Reddy & Appannaiah 2010, 63). In such a case, feedback to researchers is often done using presentations that draw together findings that cut across various depth interviews. In circumstances involving aspects like segmentation studies, checking out for certain difference among the respondents of the research can be as significant s the perspectives that they share about the different issues in question. An alternative to the option of depth interviews is focus groups forums and discussions. These groups are often very effective in terms of data collection especially for the respondent (Denzin 2005, 88); however, they are sometimes very expensive and difficult to carry out especially for business managers and business executives. In most cases, having a face-to-face kind of interaction is very effective as far as getting first hand information is needed (Johnson & Duberley 2000, 34). In management, this kind of approach is often hard to achieve because it may mean that the business organization stops its functions for a while, which can be detrimental for the daily operations of the business. Following the above and other kinds of challenges with this approach, an effective alternative nowadays for business and management executives is online techniques for the process. In this approach, managers can schedule meetings with their workers in the business and carry out the interview on telephone (Gummesson 2000, 19). This approach is effective considering the fact that most business have embraced reliable technology that facilitates such communications effectively without having to interrupt work and management duties for the employee and manager respectively. Most businesses rely on their online platforms in order to engage their clients in focus group discussions, an option that saves on costs for the business and their clients. This method is very fast and serves as a competitive advantage and strategy for businesses and management approaches that rely on it for their effective operations (Boehmer & Broussard 2002, 45). In this case, businesses managers are always on the look out to identify the most cost effective and reliable approaches in which they can facilitate interviews and discussions about effective management and business strategies that can give them competitive advantages and market position (Creswell 2003, 51). Group discussions Focus groups, another important qualitative research method can be described as very essential, especially when it comes to consumer research (Birn 2004, 41). This research method works best in market research for businesses as opposed to its use in management contexts. In business, the method allows for customers to be called together to participate in discussions that are facilitated by the research, who moderates the discussion (Scarborough & Zimmerer 2000, 67). These groups are effective in exploring certain topics in great depths and encouraging creating thinking and concepts from the customers in the discussion. Despite the effectiveness of this approach, they are sometimes rare in most business markets, save for instances where the customers seem to be small businesses (Hitchcock & Willard 2009, 29). It is important to realize that when it comes to technology markets, instances where final users are customers or comprise of the team evaluating technology, these group discussions can serve as effective methods for understanding the specific factors that customers are in need of especially during the creative phases of the research. It is important to understand that collaborative methods used in data collection comprise of individuals combining their efforts in ways that challenge distinctions between participants and researchers. For instance, in memory exercises, individuals often decide on the facets of experience they need to study and effectively collaborate in the discussion with the objective of reaching at a theorized understanding (Shani 2008, 36). In this case, it is imperative to acknowledge that collaborative methods, as used in qualitative research are very democratic when to their respective ethos and expertise conceptualization. Common criticisms against qualitative research in Business and Management In as much as qualitative research methods have received great praise from sections of researchers in business and management contexts; they have often received equal criticisms for failure over certain issues (Tart 2001, 52). However, business owners and managers that use these approaches in understanding the markets and work environment need to be aware of these drawbacks in the process of using them. Subjectivity Subjectivity has been marked as one of the greatest hallmarks in qualitative research, additionally; it also stands out as one of its greatest flaws (Ketchen 2004, 84). The nature of subjectivity with information from qualitative methods can be picked from methods like case studies and interviews which are commonly used approaches. The subjectivity in these methods often means that they are prone to misinterpretations and biasness from observers. For instance, when a business is conducting an interview to find out about market reception of its goods and services, the presumed clients can be bias and talk in praise of the goods when in the real sense they do not use them at all (Thierauf 2001, 43; Allen 2011, 25). Business researches that are meeting respondents in random samples may not rely on their views and perspectives because of this kind of subjectivity (Smith 2008, 65). Additionally, some employees may use this opportunity to push for their issues by pretending to support the strategies used by particular managers. Those that want to sabotage the business may not often give their honest views; instead, they act in introspection. When it comes to data analysis, subjectivity is also a key issue of concern because the researchers can sometimes conduct the analysis in a way that suits their interests and not those presented from the market by respondents (Kimmel 2005, 89). Subjectivity does not stand out as a challenge when it comes to quantitative research since the information used may have been long before the business and management issues emerged for research. Lack of generalizations Because of the challenge of subjectivity, the relatively small sizes of samples and detail levels, qualitative research methods often lack generalizations of the findings to the entire populations. In general, it is expected that findings from research samples are representative of the views of the entire population (Sen 2008, 66); however, the samples in qualitative research sometimes happen to be too small to warrant this process. Alternatively, in quantitative research, it is often possible to generalize data since it can make conversions to different mathematical expressions and percentages, which can often be extrapolated effectively. The answers received from focus discussions are sometimes very much detained, something that makes them hard to be generalized as representative of the larger group (Ananthan & Appannaiah 2010, 78). In this case, it may be quite inaccurate to claim that findings from these data collection methods represent the entire populace. Conclusion In conclusion, it is important to note that despite the drawbacks of qualitative methods, they have continued to stand as the most effective when it comes to collecting first hand information for business and management cases. First hand information often reflects the current trends in business activities, which is effective in decision making processes for business managers and owners (Weinstein 2004, 102). In this case, businesses should find ways of ensuring relevance and reliability in the use of these methods in order to establish their competitive advantages and market position. Bibliography Allen, P. 2011. The SAGE handbook of complexity and management. SAGE, Los Angeles. Ananthan, B., & Appannaiah, H. 2010. Business management (Rev. ed.). Himalaya Pub. House, Mumbai India. Anderson, N. 2000. Practical process research & development. Academic Press, San Diego. Birn, R. 2004. The effective use of market research how to drive and focus better business decisions (4th ed.). Kogan Page, London. Boehmer, E., & Broussard, J. 2002. Using SAS in financial research. SAS Pub, Cary, N.C. Brace, I. 2008. Questionnaire design how to plan, structure and write survey material for effective market research (2nd ed.). Kogan Page, London. Denzin, N. 2000. Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Calif. Denzin, N. 2005. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. Creswell, J. 2003. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Calif. Gummesson, E. 2000. Qualitative methods in management research (2nd ed.). Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif. Hitchcock, D., & Willard, M. 2009. The business guide to sustainability: Practical strategies and tools for organizations (2nd ed.). Earth Scan, London, England. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. 2008. Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Los Angeles. Johnson, P., & Duberley, J. 2000. Understanding management research an introduction to epistemology. SAGE Publications, London. Ketchen, D. 2004. Research methodology in strategy and management. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Kimmel, A, J. 2005. Marketing communication new approaches, technologies and styles. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Lee, G. 2010. Business process management of Japanese and Korean companies. World Scientific, New Jersey. McQuarrie, E. 2012. The market research toolbox: A concise guide for beginners (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Calif. Ottewill, R. 2001. Effective learning & teaching in business & management. Kogan Page, London. Partington, D. 2002. Essential skills for management research. SAGE, London. Qualman, E. 2009. Socialnomics: How social media transforms the way we live and do business. Wiley, Hoboken, N.J. Ramsey, D., & Ramsey, J. 2010. The everything guide to starting and running a retail store all you need to get started and succeed in your own retail adventure. Adams Media, Avon, Mass. Reddy, P., & Appannaiah, H. 2010. Business management (Rev. ed.). Himalaya Pub. House, Mumbai India. Sen, M. 2008. Business management. Oxford Book, Jaipur, India. Scarborough, N., & Zimmerer, T. 2000. Effective small business management: An entrepreneurial approach (6th ed.). Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J. Shani, A. 2008. Handbook of collaborative management research. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, Calif. Smith, M. 2008. Management research (3rd ed.). SAGE, Los Angeles. Tart, R. 2001. Doing management research a comprehensive guide. SAGE, London. Thierauf, R. 2001. Effective business intelligence systems. Quorum Books, Westport, CT. Thomas, R. 2003. Blending qualitative & quantitative research methods in theses and dissertations. Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, Calif. Weinstein, A. 2004. Handbook of Market Segmentation Strategic Targeting for Business and Technology Firms. (3rd ed.). Routledge, New York. Read More