Choosing the Appropriate Sampling Method - Assignment Example

BUSINESS RESEARCH METHOD By Location Question Choosing the Appropriate Sampling Method for the Research Sampling is a critical aspect in any research because it enables the researcher to identify a representative of the target population. The target population usually consists of many entities/ items a factor that may make it difficult for the researcher to tackle each of them in a research. This is because of the many resources that will be needed to carry out a research that involves a large population. Moreover, such a large population would bring issues with accuracy limiting the validity of the mathematical calculations. These are some of the reasons that compel researchers to sample. In the case presented, it would prove impractical and impossible to carry a study that involves over 2000 fast food restaurants. Hence, there is a salient need for sampling. Researchers have identified two categories of sampling technique names, probability sampling and non-probability sampling. For the research on fast food restaurants mentioned, it becomes critical to identify the most appropriate method of sampling that will yield a reliable sample for the research. In a bid to identify the appropriate one, an overview of both sampling methods will be presented. Their implications will also be highlighted and eventually the most appropriate method will be identified (Acharya et al 2013, p. 332). Probability sampling is one of the common techniques used by many researchers when they require yielding a sample that can be used in their research. The basis of probability sampling is randomization. At such randomization, the researcher ensures that each item or entity in the target population has an equal chance of being part of the sample (Uprichard 2013, p. 9). Experts have highlighted that probability sampling eliminates the need for systematic and sampling biases. The main objective in probability sampling is ensuring that the sample serves as an effective representative of the targeted population (Acharya et al 2013, p. 332). Notably, such a representative sample is required by researchers for making generalizations about the targeted population. This is the reason why researchers need to be careful when sampling. There are different techniques of achieving the probability sampling, which have been widely used by different researchers (Uprichard 2013, p. 5). Types of Probability Sampling One of the common types of probability sampling is the simple random sampling, which may either be done mechanically or using computer software. The basis of simple random sampling is making an all-inclusive list of the entities in the population and then engaging in a randomized selection of the sample. Stratified random sampling is an additional type of probability sampling. In this type of probability sampling, all the entities / subjects have to be grouped into different categories depending on criteria such as gender, socioeconomic status and age. Each category is viewed as a single stratum (Schreuder, Gregoire, & Weyer, 2001, p. 283). The sample used for the research is usually selected from different subjects identified from all the strata. The most critical aspect in stratified random sampling is ensuring that the strata do not exhibit any form of overlapping. The third type is the systematic random sampling, which follows the arithmetic progression procedure. This means that, the difference exhibited by two consecutive entities is the same (Acharya et al 2013, p. 333). The other type is called cluster random sampling, which requires the formation of clusters in cases whereby the size of the population is too large. It follows the procedure of simple random sampling, but involves clusters because all the entities cannot be in one list. The clusters may be formed using different types of boundaries. For example, a country may be divided into different provinces, each province forms a cluster from where the final sample is selected. Notably, each cluster should have an equal chance of forming part of the sample (Schreuder, Gregoire, & Weyer, 2001, p. 285). Multi-stage random sampling is an additional type of probability sampling, which involves a combination of two of the above types discussed. Experts have described the advantages and the disadvantages of each of the above types of probabilities. However, the basis of all the types is randomization. Worth noting is the fact that, many researchers adopting a quantitative approach usually prefer the probability sampling. This is because, they rely on the fact that probability sampling does not present any form of bias if carried out well. Moreover, there are different types of probability sampling that offer a measure of convenience to the researchers as they can choose the most appropriate one. However, it is critical to knowledge that, forms of bias may occur if the chosen technique is not carried out properly. For many years, probability sampling has been a reliable sampling method for different researches. The challenge with probability sampling emerges when the subjects / entities are hidden or unavailable. This compels researchers to consider non probability sampling as the only remaining hope for creating a sample (Uprichard 2013, p. 4). Non Probability Sampling Although non probability sampling has been viewed by many researchers adopting the quantitative approach as only an alternative, it has a powerful basis of generating a sample. However, non-probability sampling is of critical importance to qualitative research. There is no randomization in non-probability sampling. It is especially adopted when a researcher finds it impossible to enlist all the entities in a population (Schreuder, Gregoire, & Weyer, 2001, p. 287). Therefore, non-probability sampling involves the selection of certain entities/ units from a target population. However, the selection is done by researchers and they rely on subjective judgment for choosing each of the units contrary to randomization in probability sampling. Five different approaches of carrying out non probability sampling exist. They include; Snowball sampling. Self-selection sampling. Purposive sampling. Convenience sampling. Quota sampling Researchers adopting the non-probability sampling usually have to choose one of this approaches which proves most appropriate (Schreuder, Gregoire, & Weyer, 2001, p. 288). Appropriate Sampling Method for the Research on Fast food Restaurant Since the researcher is well aware that there are over 2000 fast food restaurants in the west London area that can be easily identified, probability sampling is the best option. Since the research targets to make generalizations about fast food restaurants in this area, a randomized sample with little or no bias is required. Therefore, depending on the specific research topic, the researcher can choose from the different techniques of probability sampling that will be appropriate (Uprichard 2013, p. 6). Question 2 There has been an ongoing debate concerning the relevance of the interpretivist paradigm opposed to the positivist paradigm. The positivist paradigm has often been denoted as the scientific method adopted in different researches. Philosophers supporting this paradigm have developed different schools of thought such as naturalism, scientism, determinism and the behaviourism. According to these paradigms, observation and reason are viewed as main avenues of gaining knowledge concerning behaviour. According to this school of thought, reliable knowledge is only obtainable from sensory experience and experiments. Moreover, the positivist paradigm views reality as objective and completely independent of the researcher and the subject (McKenna, Richardson, & Manroop 2011, p. 152). Therefore, such reality is only defined and affected by natural laws and mechanisms. In a more detailed view, the positivist approach believes that the world is both “external and objective” and the person making the observations does not have any portion in defining reality (Shah & Al-Bargi 2013, p. 256). On the other hand, the interpretivist paradigm has different views concerning both knowledge and reality. The interpretivist paradigm is viewed as constructivist and a humanistic approach to research. It opposes the views of the positivist approach, highlighting that observers have a critical contribution in offering subjective meanings depending on their interpretation and understanding of different topics (McKenna, Richardson, & Manroop 2011, p. 154). According to these paradigms, it is impossible for a researcher to be distant from the studied object, research methodology as well as the research topic. In this sense, interpretivist paradigm assumes that objective knowledge does not exist because it cannot be completely of human interpretations. According to this paradigm therefore, knowledge and meanings only emanate from human interpretations (Shah & Al-Bargi 2013, p. 259). Moreover, the paradigm does not support the cause and effect relationships which support the objective reality. On the contrary, the interpretivist paradigm focuses on transferability, dependability, confirmability and credibility as the key terms in research (McKenna, Richardson, & Manroop 2011, p. 149). In my view point, carrying out a research on the managerial effectiveness in Tesco requires the interpretivist approach. Notably, as highlighted above, the interpretivist approach places emphasis on the researchers understanding of the criteria under study. In any case, making conclusions on the managerial effectiveness in any organization will depend on how much the researcher can understand and interpret appropriately concerning the objects under study. It would prove completely impossible for the researcher to distance himself or herself from the Tesco Organization. It would prove impossible for the positivist view to be adopted in such a research. Notably, in order to understand the efficiency of the management at Tesco, there is a need for the researcher to interact rigorously with the employees and managers at Tesco. Finding and knowledge can only be obtained as the research process progresses. Therefore, the researcher needs to be involved in the research process from the initial steps, this means that the researcher will need to formulate and interpret the research topic identify the most appropriate methodology and also the appropriate technique for data analysis (Shah & Al-Bargi 2013, p. 255). Notably, in the interpretivist paradigm focuses on naturalistic research methods such as observation, interviews and analysis of texts. In the case of Tesco, carrying out interviews would prove to be the most effective research methodology. This is because it would ensure that the researcher and the respondents have an interactive session that can ensure their active participation in the development of reliable knowledge and reality. Throughout the interviews, when the researcher listens to the opinions of the respondents, he or she indulges in an active interpretation process of the shared information. One notable thing about the interpretivist approach is that the interpretations made in any study are usually relevant and based on the specific moment of the research. Moreover, they are limited to the context and situations defining that moment (Shah & Al-Bargi 2013, p. 260). For example, in the case of Tesco, analysing managerial effectiveness at a given time will reveal certain information and knowledge that may be different from an additional interpretation at a different time. Worth noting is the fact that understanding managerial effectiveness requires a qualitative study which is supported by the interpretivist approach. Such a qualitative approach would require a proper understanding of the views exhibited by different respondents in the research. For this to happen, a critical aspect of the interpretivist paradigm which concerns pragmatism and moral concerns during interview sessions would apply. These aspect places emphasis on the role of moral concerns as the researcher develops a relationship with the respondents in a bid to gain as much information as possible. The efficiency of the relationship between the researcher and the respondents determines how much knowledge the research is likely to yield. Notably, in the case of Tesco, this aspect of the interpretivist approach would be critical. In order to understand the efficiency of management systems in any organization, a researcher needs to interact thoroughly with the respondents and interview them on different aspects that define management (Shah & Al-Bargi 2013, p. 262). Afterwards, the research must interpret the findings. Therefore, when studying organizations and their management structures, the researcher must indulge in active interpretations of the findings to yield knowledge and meaning. This serves to highlight the relevance of the interpretivist paradigm in the case of Tesco. The fact that the interpretivist approach places emphasis on the fact that knowledge and reality are negotiable across cultures makes it the most appropriate approach when studying Tesco. This is because, the Tesco organization is a unique culture on its own and managerial styles that are effective to the Tesco organizational structure may be different in other organizations (Shah & Al-Bargi 2013, p. 254). Moreover, managements involve relationships with people and respondents may only describe such relationships compelling the researcher to carry out interpretations. Evidently, all these factors justify the use of the interpretivist approach in studying Tesco’s managerial systems and their efficiency. The researcher focusing on this case study will need to interact continuously with the respondents and the organizations throughout the research process in a bid to yield reliable information. Moreover, interviews prove to be the most appropriate research methods and are supported by the interpretivist approach. Since knowledge is negotiable across cultures and people, according to this research paradigm, it proves relevant to the Tesco case study because each respondent would have individual views. Bibliography Acharya, A, Prakash, A, Saxena, P, & Nigam, A 2013, Sampling: Why and How of it?, Indian Journal Of Medical Specialities, 4, 2, pp. 330-333, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 1 July 2014. McKenna, S, Richardson, J, & Manroop, L 2011, Alternative paradigms and the study and practice of performance management and evaluation, Human Resource Management Review, 21, New Developments in Performance Management, pp. 148-157, ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost, viewed 1 July 2014. Schreuder, H, Gregoire, T, & Weyer, J 2001, For What Applications Can Probability and Non-Probability Sampling Be Used?, Environmental Monitoring & Assessment, 66, 3, pp. 281-291, Energy & Power Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 1 July 2014. Shah, S, & Al-Bargi, A 2013, Research Paradigms: Researchers Worldviews, Theoretical Frameworks and Study Designs, Arab World English Journal, 4, 4, pp. 252-264, Education Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 1 July 2014. Uprichard, E 2013, Sampling: bridging probability and non-probability designs, International Journal Of Social Research Methodology, 16, 1, pp. 1-11, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 1 July 2014. Read More