The Success of Management and Business Research Projects - Essay Example

?Section A The success of management and business research projects is depended on the choice of the appropriate approach, meaning the framework on which each research project is based taking into consideration its needs and the resources available. Every research project is likely to be based on one of the following two research approaches: qualitative or quantitative. The qualitative approach is used for reflecting ‘the views, the perceptions and the beliefs of a group of people’ (Kumar 2010, p.104). In order to serve the above need, qualitative studies are likely to be ‘deductive, flexible and emergent’ (Kumar 2010, p.104), in opposition with the quantitative studies which are, commonly, ‘carefully structured and sequential’ (Kumar 2010, p.104). At the next level, the precise structure and the methods used for data collection and analysis are expected to be less clear in qualitative studies compared to quantitative ones (Kumar 2010). As a result, a misunderstanding may often results in regard to the characteristics of a qualitative study; in certain qualitative studies, their design is identical with the data collection method, as, for example, in the case of the participant observation’ (Kumar 2010, p.104). Further differences can be identified regarding the philosophical underpinning of the two approaches. More specifically, the qualitative studies are usually characterized as ‘naturalistic’, being depended on social evidence, while the quantitative studies are ‘positivistic’ (Rapport 2004, p.2), being depended on specific facts which can be analysed using tools that can ‘produce generalisable observations’ (Rapport 2004, p.2). On the other hand, qualitative studies are likely to emphasize on the relationship between the causes and the effects of particular events while the qualitative studies are based on the analysis of human behaviour, as reflected in the responses of participants to a series of events. In accordance with Lee (1999) one of the key characteristics of the qualitative approach is that it is ‘context – free’ (Lee 1999, p.8), meaning that it is not based on empirical results but it rather refers to findings that reflect the local conditions, as related to a series of events. From this point of view, researchers using the qualitative approach give emphasis on the responses of participants to specific events (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2009); in opposition, in quantitative studies researchers tend to focus on the development of empirical results, which need to be fully justified, as of the methods used for generating them, and verified; in qualitative approach, the researcher does not have such concerns since the qualitative study can refer to the views of a limited number of participants (Hansen 2007); these views do not have to be tested as of their validity as in the case of quantitative studies. Moreover, Elliott (2005) noted that qualitative and quantitative approaches can be characterized as ‘divergent genres’ (Elliott 2005, p.184), based on different methods of data presentation; in quantitative studies, efforts need to be made for persuading the readers on the validity of results (Elliott 2005, p.184). In qualitative studies there is no such pressure; the reader has to be informed on the responses of the participants without further explanations on the characteristics of the data and the process involved (Elliott 2005). Section B In the context of the qualitative approach a series of different data collection methods can be used, in accordance with the research aims, the availability of sources and the target population. In the study of Bryman and Bell (2007) emphasis is given on the high range of data collection methods that respond to the requirements of the qualitative approach. Reference is made to five of the most known methods of data collection as used in qualitative studies: a) the participant observation in which the research has to observe the response of a group of persons to particular events; usually, the social group chosen for a qualitative study meets has specific cultural characteristics, which are considered as most appropriate for the relevant study, b) interviews; commonly, the specific method is combined with the participant observation method for data collection aiming to increase the validity of its findings, c) focus groups, d) conversation analysis; it can be also combined with another data collection method when the level of population is considered as low and the need for verifying the responses of participants is emergent; for example, when the subject under examination is quite complex, e) the ‘collection and qualitative analysis of texts and documents’ (Bryman and Bell 2007, p.404). Under certain terms, additional data collection methods can be used, when the needs of a study are increased. The specific issue is highlighted in the study of Klenke (2008) where reference is made to the data collection methods most commonly used in qualitative research. It is explained that in the context of the qualitative research, the researcher can choose among the common methods of data collection, such as interviews or participant observation or prefer a less known method, such as ‘the direct observation or the archival records’ (Klenke 2008, p.66). It is made clear that interviews are considered as the most credible method of data collection for qualitative studies. On the other hand, due to the high range of needs of qualitative studies, a combination of data collection methods can take place in the context of qualitative research. This process, which is also known as triangulation offers the following advantage: ‘different type of data can be gathered in regard to the subject under examination’ (Klenke 2008, p.66). In accordance with Denzin and Lincoln (2011) it is possible for data collection methods used in the qualitative research to be mixed with data collection methods employed in the quantitative studies. This practice is common in cases that the demands of a research projects are high; then, quantitative and qualitative approaches can be combined for responding to the needs of the study (Denzin and Lincoln 2011). In the above case, the timing of data used in the specific research project has to be different: quantitative data need to be gathered primarily while qualitative data follow. The above process is known as ‘mixed method of data collection’ (Denzin and Lincoln 2011, p.279). After gathering the data, using one or more of the methods mentioned above, the researcher has to proceed with the analysis of data in order to develop a series of assumptions on the issues examined in the study involved. The number of data analysis methods available in qualitative studies is high. This issue is highlighted in the study of Williams and Vogt (2011). In accordance with the above researchers, the data analysis techniques available to researchers working on qualitative research projects have been estimated to 55 (Williams and Vogt 2011, p.358). Such data analysis techniques are, indicatively, the following ones: a) the constant comparison analysis; data are transformed to codes which are then used for the development of critical themes, b) word count; it is based on the counting on the total number of words, meaning the responses of participants to the issues under discussion, c) the domain analysis; it focuses on the relationship between a series of symbols and particular domains, d) the componential analysis; in the context of this data analysis method, tables are used for comparing the content of a series of domains; this method can be time consuming requiring the prior categorization of domains in accordance with their content, e) conversation analysis; the behaviour of participants is analysed in order to show the approaches that these participants tend to use when interacting within a particular social framework, f) secondary data analysis; it refers to the analysis of the material included in studies that have been published in regard to the issue under examination; it is a quite popular method of data analysis in the context of a qualitative study, g) latent content analysis; it focuses on the true meaning of the text involved; it refers to the analysis of the words in order to retrieve their actual meaning, apart from their obvious (grammatical) meaning, f) semiotics; it refers to the simultaneous use of conversation and text as signs for developing critical themes; this technique is based on the view that ‘no meaning can be attached to a single term’ (Williams and Vogt 2011, p.359). In accordance with Wimmer and Dominick (2010) qualitative approach offers to researchers a significant advantage compared to the quantitative approach; in the qualitative studies, the researcher can begin the analysis of the data early, i.e. while gathering the data involved in the research project. Such practice is not available to the researchers working on quantitative studies since in those studies it is necessary for the completion of the data to be finished before starting analysing the data using an appropriately customized method of data analysis. Moreover, Daymon and Holloway (2010) note that data analysis is an important part of qualitative studies; commonly, this part is not adequately developed since researchers working in qualitative studies are likely ‘to emphasize on the literature review section of the study’ (Daymon and Holloway 2010, p.302). Data analysis in qualitative studies has to be carefully developed for ensuring the validity of the themes produced, even if the test of the validity of the findings is not a criterion for evaluating the effectiveness of a qualitative study. References Bryman, A., Bell, E. 2007. Business research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Daymon, C., Holloway, I. 2010. Qualitative Research Methods in Public Relations and Marketing Communications. Oxon: Taylor & Francis. Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y. 2011. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: SAGE. Elliott, B. 2005. Using narrative in social research: qualitative and quantitative approaches. London: SAGE. Hansen, E. 2007. Successful Qualitative Health Research: A Practical Introduction. Crows & Nest: Allen & Unwin. Klenke, K. 2008. Qualitative research in the study of leadership. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing. Kumar, R. 2010. Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners. London: SAGE Publications Lee, T. 1999. Using qualitative methods in organizational research. London: SAGE. Rapport, F. 2004. New qualitative methodologies in health and social care research. London: Routledge. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A. 2009. Research Methods for Business Students. Essex: Pearson Education. Williams, M., Vogt, P. 2011. The SAGE Handbook of Innovation in Social Research Methods. London: SAGE Publications. Wimmer, R., Dominick, J. 2010. Mass Media Research: An Introduction. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Read More