Professional Research Methods - Essay Example

PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH METHODS 2006 INTRODUCTION The recent years have been marked with increasing interest in the role of philosophical paradigms and assumptions in carrying out research. Over the last two decades different authors have voiced some serious concerns about effectiveness of using the prevailing paradigm of positivism and the methods associated with it in the search for greater depth and meaning in the understanding of complex social phenomena. The underlying assumption of positivism - existence of an objective world that can be measured and quantified using the traditional scientific methods - has been questioned by numerous critics arguing that the positivist approach "strip contexts from meanings in the process of developing quantified measures of phenomena" (Guba and Lincoln, 1994: 106). Other concerns about the applicability of quantitative methodologies to in-dept examination of complex social phenomena include taking the collected data out of the real-world setting, poor representativeness and generalisation of data, exclusion of discovery from the realm of scientific inquiry, etc. The institutional structure of business and management research has also reacted to the criticism of the positivist paradigm. Increasing numbers of qualitative studies published domestically and internationally have challenged the traditional view of qualitative research paradigm as the inferior to the more rigorous and reliable quantitative methodology. The aim of this paper is to identify the major research designs and techniques associated with each methodology and to provide explanation on the views about the nature of knowledge (epistemology) and the nature of reality (ontology) underlying these perspectives. OVERVIEW OF QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH There are various classifications of methods used in the area of professional research, but the most common classification splits the methods into two large groups, namely quantitative and qualitative research methods. Quantitative methodology employs methods historically applied in the natural (physical) sciences. The primary task of quantitative research is to ensure validity and reliability of results (Dingwall et al, 1998). Examples of quantitative methods widely used in the social sciences and business and management research are survey methods, formal methods (e.g. econometrics), laboratory experiments and several numerical methods (e.g. mathematical modelling) (Myers, 1997). Quantitative research implies standardized questionnaires and methods of data analysis, specific position of the researcher whom is considered external to the research, replicability of the results regardless of the context, etc (Wainer and Braun, 1998). While reliability and validity are the most often cited strengths of the quantitative methodology, poor applicability of this methodology to exploration of a phenomenon, which is difficult or impossible to quantify, is considered a serious weakness. The main drawback that limits applicability of quantitative methods is the so-called 'decontextualization': models constructed on the basis of data obtained through quantitative methods do not take into account certain variables that act in the real world context (Patton, 1987). Qualitative methodology utilizes a naturalistic approach seeking to understand phenomena in a specific context, such as "real world setting [where] the researcher does not attempt to manipulate the phenomenon of interest" (Patton, 2002: 39). The broad definition of qualitative research is "any kind of research that produces findings not arrived at by means of statistical procedures or other means of quantification" (Strauss and Corbin, 1990: 17). Qualitative research reveals findings observed in the real world context where the phenomena being studied unfold naturally (Patton, 2002). The motivation underlying qualitative research is the researchers desire to understand the social and cultural phenomena within the real-world setting. Qualitative methods are designed to provide the researchers with data explaining participants' perception and understanding of various phenomena, experiences and motivations, etc. (Hoepfl, 1997). Qualitative methodologies generate rich and highly detailed data without taking it out of the context where it has been gathered. Qualitative researchers adopt a different view on adequacy and applicability of the concepts of validity and reliability than quantitative researchers do (Kirk and Miller, 1986; Kuhn, 1970). Defined in qualitative terms these concepts do not apply to the quantitative paradigm and visa versa. Thus, the replicability criterion is not applicable to qualitative research, while the criteria of credibility, transferability and precision are treated as very important in assessment of qualitative research findings (Hoepfl, 1997). Some researchers argue that the concept of validity as it is defined within the quantitative paradigm is also not applicable to qualitative research (Creswell and Miller, 2000). Instead, they tend to develop their own concepts of validity or adopt other assessment criteria that depend upon each particular case. The examples of such criteria are quality, trustworthiness, rigor and some others (Dingwall et al, 1998; Golafshani, 2003). The distinctions between quantitative and qualitative research methodologies are determined by the underlying philosophical assumptions they are based upon. The choice of epistemology, which guides the research, is admittedly the most important of such assumptions (Hirschheim, 1992). EPISTEMOLOGY AND ONTOLOGY The researcher's beliefs about the reality and knowledge play an important role in the research process. Epistemology or theory of knowledge refers to the nature and scope of knowledge: this branch of philosophy questions the sources of knowledge, the assumptions upon which knowledge is based, and what we 'can know' and 'do know' (Allison, 2000: 13). Ontology, in its turn, is concerned with the nature of reality: it attempts to reveal the 'filters' that affect our perception of the reality. The concepts of epistemology and ontology are closely interrelated, and sometimes it is difficult to differentiate between them (Allison, 2000: 13). There are numerous stances, themes and arguments in the field of both epistemology and ontology. Much of the epistemological debate focuses on the nature of knowledge and the nature of its relation to the notions of belief, justification, and truth, but the means and process of producing knowledge also rest within the realm of epistemology. Ontology facilitates addressing these issues by offering to take into consideration the ontological vision or the nature of reality as the researcher sees it. Since individual views of the reality differ greatly, each researcher is likely to adopt different knowledge; understanding the researcher's view of the world - the 'knowledge base' from which he works - is the only way to make the research useful (Allison and Pomeroy, 2000). The origins of modern epistemological debate can be traced back to the past philosophers. The famous Cartesian mind/body duality introduced by famous philosopher and mathematician Rene Descartes divorced body from mind and thinking from sensing. Descartes is considered to be the founder of the rationalist approach with its basic claim that thinking about the world is the only source of true knowledge: reason and logic implied in thinking are objective and flawless, while the sensory experiences of the reality are subjective and flawed (Eraut, 1994). By contrast, John Locke and David Hume claim that true knowledge comes through sense experience. This claim is the core idea of empiricism (Phillips, 1993). The experiential epistemology based upon experience as the source of true knowledge is the third major alternative to rationalism and empiricism (Allison and Pomeroy, 2000). However, none of these foundations of knowledge has gained the status of dominant in modern research. Contemporary scientists still adopt varying ontological and epistemological positions in selecting the research techniques and develop argumentation in their inquires. Guba and Lincoln (1994) suggest four basic epistemological stances: positivism, post-positivism, critical theory, and constructivism. Other authors identify only three perspectives, based on the underlying research epistemology: positivist, interpretive and critical. The positivist perspective rests upon the founding principles of realism - a broad philosophical term denoting several theoretical movements that all reject the impractical and visionary approaches in science. Although the form of this denial varies, realism emphasizes that objects in the world that surrounds us do not depend of our perception; nor they depend upon what people think about them (Guba and Lincoln, 1994). Consequently, the prevailing opinion is that positivist research is "concerned with the empirical testability of theories in order to discover the general principles or laws which govern the natural and social world" (Darke et al, 1998: 276). The positivist perspective implies that the researcher is neutral and objective, while the inquiry itself is value-free. Post-positivism is a contemporary modification of the traditional positivist philosophy developed by Auguste Comte. Adherents of this paradigm claim that human being is not capable of perfect and comprehensive understanding of reality admitting that only serious analysis and accurate collection of information can bring the researcher close to such understanding. Post-positivism exerts substantial influence particularly on qualitative research (Shaw, 1999: 45-47). The interpretivist paradigm is rooted in the traditional philosophy of idealism which is the opposite of the realism. Proponents of the interpretivist perspective argue that there is no mind-independent reality; the world and objects that surround us are dependent on human perception and exist only in the form of concepts, social constructs and ideas. The antirealist perspective discards the realist belief that there is a single social reality or truth directly accessible to the researcher and absolutely independent of the research process (Guba and Lincoln, 1994). Consequently, the interpretivist position rejects the notion of value-free research, while replicability and generalisability are not on the list of interpretivist assessment criteria. While the positivist and interpretivist paradigms remain dominant in modern studies, the third paradigm, critical theory/postmodernism, increasingly challenges them. This paradigm is a combination of the critical theory and postmodern philosophy: the material world is full of structured contradictions hidden by various ideologies; the researcher can objectively perceive the world only upon the condition that the implicit ideological biases are removed (Gephart, 1999). Adherents of this approach assume that social reality is historically constituted, produced and reproduced by people. Although people can consciously act to change their social and economic circumstances, critical researchers recognize that their ability to do so is limited by various forms of social, cultural and political domination expressed in ideologies. Consequently, the primary task of critical research is to provide adequate social critique thus revealing the restrictive and alienating conditions of the dominant ideologies. The oppositions, contradictions, and conflicts occurring in the society are in the focus of critical research (Myers, 1997; Gephart, 1999) And finally, constructivism focuses on the meaning that individuals and groups make of the world around them. Constructivism is the ontological vision that rejects "the conventional inquiry on three basic grounds: its posture on reality; its stance on the knower-known relationship, and its stance on the possibility of generalisation (Lincoln, 1990: 68). The paradigm advocates multiple, socially constructed realities which, "when known more fully, tend to produce diverging inquiry" (Lincoln and Guba, 1986: 75). It is inappropriate to study these realities in pieces (e.g., as variables): holistic and context-basted approach is the only alternative. Advocates of constructivism reject the conventional views of the relationship between the researcher and the phenomenon being studied: "Knower and known not only could not remain distanced and separated in the process of evaluation, but probably should not" (Lincoln, 1990: 68). Rejecting existence of any enduring context-free truth statements or situations, the constructivist paradigm puts in question the possibility of generalisation (Lincoln, 1990). The positivist and post-positivist epistemologies are typically associated with quantitative research, while the critical research, interpretivist paradigm, and constructivism are linked to qualitative methods (Guba and Lincoln, 1994). However, there is an opinion that the philosophical distinctions between these research epistemologies are not as stiff as one might think: many researchers disagree as to whether the varying epistemologies must be opposed or it is possible to accommodate them within one study (Myers, 1997). Furthermore, despite the strong associations between the epistemologies and the research methods, positivist approach does not imply exclusive use of quantitative methods as well as interpretivist perspective is not always associated with qualitative methods only. Thus, a case study, a popular qualitative study design, may be positivist, interpretive, critical, or constructionist (Yin, 1994). Action research, another popular qualitative method, is characterized by the same epistemological flexibility. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS The number of various qualitative research designs is even greater that the number of philosophical perspectives underlying the qualitative perspective. The most commonly used qualitative study designs are ethnography, case study, action research, phenomenology, and grounded theory. 1. Ethnography Ethnography is a renowned form of qualitative research initially used in studies of social and cultural anthropology. The basic goal of ethnographic research is to provide the reader with the story of life of the group being studied and also to identify the cultural beliefs and meanings members of that group attach to their behaviours and lifestyle (Patton, 2002). The ethnographic approach requires from the researcher to spend much time in the field immersing him in the setting of the phenomenon being studied. The first rigorous ethnographic studies in business and management were published in the mid-1980s (Cross, 1994). Typically the data gathering and analysis methods used within the ethnographic design include participant observation, unstructured interview, studying documents and photographs (Creswell, 1997). 2. Case Study Yin (1994) defines case study as "an empirical enquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident' and it relies on multiple sources of evidence" (p.13). This method is perhaps the most popular type of qualitative inquiry in business and management research. Case study has two distinguishing characteristics: the focus on in-depth understanding of a phenomenon and its context; the boundaries between the phenomenon and the context are not clearly evident (Yin, 1994). Two types of case study must be distinguished from each other, namely: the instrumental case study and the intrinsic case study. The instrumental study is defined as an attempt "to provide insight into an issue or refine the theory, while the case [itself] is of secondary interest; it plays a supportive role, facilitating our understanding of something else" (Stake 1994: 237). The intrinsic case study is, on the contrary, defined as: "...not undertaken primarily because the case represents other cases or because it illustrates a particular theory or problem, but because in all its particularity and ordinariness, [the] case itself is of interest The purpose is not to come to understand some abstract concept or generic phenomena...The researcher temporarily subordinates other curiosities so that the case may reveal its story" (p.237). In other words, the instrumental case studies are used as teaching devices, while the intrinsic cases aim to develop or test theory or hypothesis. A case study may involve the use of combined data collection techniques such as interviews, observation, questionnaires, and document and text analysis. Besides, the multimethod approach in data collection and analysis is acceptable for a case study: qualitative and quantitative methods may be used together, though the nature of case study research is qualitative. 3. Action Research The most widely accepted definition of action research is proposed by Rapoport (1970): "Action research aims to contribute both to the practical concerns of people in an immediate problematic situation and to the goals of social science by joint collaboration within a mutually acceptable ethical framework" (Rapoport, 1970: 499). Rapoport's definition highlights the most important collaborative aspect of action research and simultaneously identifies the major problem associated with action research, namely the possibility of emerging ethical dilemmas. Action research involves individuals and groups exploring their own existence, socio-cultural or economic settings and experiences, and reflecting on their own needs, values, realities, etc (Patton, 2002). During action research the researcher works in close partnership with participants of his study throughout the whole research process. Although action research has been widely recognized as a valid and reliable research method in the field of social sciences, in business and management-related studies, however, this study design has been largely ignored. Only in the mid-1990s several studies were published highlighting value of action research for theory building in the fields of organization behaviour and management information systems. Thus, Westbrook (1995) defends applicability of action research design to exploration of business and management-related issues, and claims that "a properly conducted action research project can be as rigorous as other [traditionally used] methods" (Westbrook, 1995:17). Recently, action research design seems to receive more appropriate attention from the researchers working in the field of business and management. 4. Phenomenology Phenomenology as a method of inquiry attempts to understand the phenomenon of a lived experience, which may be related to either to emotions, or to relationships, or to being part of a group or organization. The core assumption underlying the phenomenological approach is that there is an essence to shared experience. This assumption is rooted in the social sciences and requires a researcher to immerse into the life world of participants and draw a parallel between the researcher's own experiences and experiences of the target groups/individuals (Patton, 2002). Hein and Austin (2001) argue that there is no one way to carry out a phenomenological research because "the specific method used depends on the purposes of the researcher, his or her specific skills and the nature of the research question and data collected" (p.2). Appropriate methods of data collection and analysis include in-depth interviewing, philosophy, poetry, or art, while the direction of the study is determined by the experience (Creswell, 1997). In many ways, the potential of phenomenology in business and management studies still have to be demonstrated. However, in some recent publications phenomenology is already described as a highly valuable methodology particularly applicable to exploring human experiences in management-related research (Ehrich, 2005). 5. Grounded Theory Grounded theory is a research method that focuses on the task of developing and verifying a theory which is grounded in systematically collected and analysed data. This qualitative study design is widely defined as "an inductive, theory discovery methodology that allows the researcher to develop a theoretical account of the general features of a topic while simultaneously grounding the account in empirical observations or data" (Martin and Turner, 1986:143). As Myers (1997) argues "the major difference between grounded theory and other methods is its specific approach to theory development - grounded theory suggests that there should be a continuous interplay between data collection and analysis" (p.241). Appropriate methods of data collection and analysis for this qualitative study design are participant observation, interviewing, focus groups, and diaries. Grounded theory method is gradually becoming common in business and management research: this approach is particularly valuable in developing context-based, process-oriented descriptions and explanations of the phenomenon (Myers, 1997). 6. Other Qualitative Methods Other qualitative research methods can also be found in the literature. They are based on varying philosophical assumptions and theories and often their use is limited to one single discipline; many of them are variations of the ethnographic and phenomenological methods. Heuristics, hermeneutics, ethno methodology, ecological psychology, and social interactionism are the most often used within this group of methods (Patton, 2002). Numerous methods of data collection are effectively used within the qualitative framework. The most common of them are interviewing, participant observation, fieldwork, analysis of written data and focus groups, but there are also such qualitative data collection techniques as historical research, mapping cultural settings and events, biographies, audio and visual techniques, and even genograms (Denzing and Lincoln, 1994). Each of these data gathering techniques has certain advantages and specific drawbacks, but the most important factor to consider is whether the chosen method is congruent with the purposes of a study. QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS Quantitative methods have dominated the area of professional research, including organizational and management research, for decades, and even the recent surge of attention toward the qualitative perspective hardly threatens their dominant position. The debate over legitimacy of qualitative research is still on with qualitative methods being characterized as having "had a rough time gaining acceptance in the mainstream social and behavioural science research" (Boyatzis, 1998: vi). Continuous attempts of qualitative researchers to justify their stance by criticizing the quantitative research paradigm and the philosophy of positivism underlying it have not led to any considerable results. These reciprocal criticisms and endless debates are often as 'the wars of paradigms' (Miles and Huberman, 1994). A good attempt to explain the dominance of quantitative methods in business and management research was undertaken by Hill and McGowan (1999). They provide three reasons for such situation: 1. Firstly, many management researchers have drawn upon traditional sciences such as economics, psychology or sociology that have had a long history of utilising quantitative methods for understanding particular phenomena; 2. Secondly, these researchers have worked with student researchers and encouraged them to use similar approaches thus perpetuating this type of research from one generation to another; 3. Thirdly, the expectations of government funding agencies are more in line with quantitative research approaches than qualitative (Hill and McGowan, 1999:5). Another explanation of the dominant status of quantitative methods is the alleged "lack the rigor and objectivity of the quantitative approach" (Patton and Appelbaum, 2003: 60). 1. Experiments Experiment is a typical quantitative research method that aims to provide a better understanding of the relationship between a causal hypothesis and a specific phenomenon which represents either theoretical or practical interest for the researcher. True experimental study design or random experimental design is the preferred method in quantitative research, especially in evaluation studies for it is the best option to ensure as great amount of control as possible and thus allow close examination of causal relationship (Kaplan, 2004). Three major features characterize the experimental design: Manipulation: The researcher manipulates at least some of the participants involved in the study; Control: The experimenter introduces one or more controls over the experimental situation; Randomisation: The researcher assigns participants to different groups randomly (Clark-Carter, 2004) Although experimental studies have been traditionally viewed as superior to other non-experimental designs, this view is repeatedly challenged these days. Thus, Heckman and Smith (1995) identify some serious drawbacks of the experimental method, namely: Randomisation is likely to alter the pool of participants or change their behaviour which results in the so-called 'randomization bias'; Availability of close substitutes for the experimental setting may lead to the so-called 'substitution bias'; Limited potential of the experimental data in answering some questions which may be of certain interest to the researcher. Thus, no parameters that depend on the joint distribution of outcomes in the control and treatment groups can be estimated: "Only if the evaluation problem is defined exclusively in terms of means can it be said that experiments provide a precise answer" (Heckman and Smith, 1995: 22). Experimental studies only help evaluate and assess, but provide no explanation why some or other results have been revealed. However, these shortcomings are largely associated with the quantitative paradigm in general, and it will be misleading to state that other methods, such as quasi-experiments or descriptive designs do not share some of them. 2. Quasi-experimental Design Quasi-experimental studies bear much resemblance to the true experimental design with only one difference: in a quasi-experiment the researcher assign participants to different groups non-randomly. This research method has been developed as an alternative tool for examining causal relationship in situations which, for some reason, are poorly conducive to experimental control. The most common characteristics of quasi-experiments are the following: Use of matching instead of randomisation; Use of interrupted or uninterrupted time series analysis (a type of longitudinal research); Quasi-experiments is more effective that the true experiment in analysing such contextual concepts as quality of life, morale, etc (Cook and Campbell, 1979). Although a quasi-experimental design is commonly used in many disciplines and fields, including business and management research, many scholars are concerned about multiple interpretation problems associated with quasi-experiments. Thus, the validity of quasi-experimental design for assessing the impact of employment and training programs was questioned. Besides, there is an opinion that economists using quasi-experimental methods "have had little success in isolating program effects i.e., removing the "selection bias" (Heckman and Smith, 1995). Bias due to non-randomised sampling is the most commonly cited drawback of the quasi-experimental method as compared with the true experiment. 3. Descriptive design Descriptive designs are used to collect data about some particular characteristic or phenomenon within the field of study. A descriptive study may be carried out to identify problems with current practices, develop a theory, make judgments or identify alternative actions, etc. The descriptive research design does not imply any manipulation of variables and does not attempt to establish/explore any causal relationship (Clark-Carter, 1994). Surveys and correlational studies, which determine the relationship between two or more variables, are the most commonly met examples of descriptive design. CONCLUSION The war of paradigms continues with much criticism being levelled at both qualitative and quantitative perspective, but the answer to the question whether there are any better ways of knowing the world and, consequently, better research methods and paradigms than those available these days has not been found yet. Qualitative and quantitative perspectives each has its own unique strengths and limitations, and comparison which one is better per se is not appropriate. Abundant literature on advantages and disadvantages of various methods "does not prove which technique is better; it simply provides evidence relating to the potential strengths and limitations of each approach." (Howard, 1985: 20). Therefore, the biggest challenge for the researcher is not simply to choose the best research method available, but to decide which research method or technique is the most suitable in regard to the purposes of research. Quantitative research methods widely used in many various disciplines such as biology, physics, sociology, economics, etc, is a better alternative in examination of quantitative properties and various relationships between the phenomena. This methodology provides the connection between empirical observation and mathematical expression of quantitative relationships. Qualitative methods are better suited for examination of complex social phenomena within the natural settings, and provide the researcher with holistic image of the phenomenon being studied. The epistemologies underlying both these approaches are not mutually exclusive: if approached correctly they may effectively complement each other. Consequently, the methodologies themselves should not be perceived as conflicting. Integrating these paradigms into an integrated highly effective scheme is perhaps the next methodological challenge facing qualitative and quantitative researchers. References Allison, P. (2000). Research from the ground up post expedition adjustment. Cumbria, UK: Brathay Hall Allison P. and Pomeroy E. (2000). How shall we "know" Epistemological concerns in research in experiential education, The Journal of Experiential Education, 23(2), 91-98 Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information. London: Sage Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis, Heinemann, London Clark-Carter, D. (2004) Quantitative Psychological Research Textbook: A Student's Handbook (2nd Ed) Psychology Press, Hove Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally College Pub. Co Creswell, J. W. (1997). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Creswell, J. W. and Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry, Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-131 Cross, G.A. (1994). Ethnographic Research in Business and Technical Writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, Vol. 8(1), 118-134 Darke, P., Shanks, G. and Broadbent, M. (1998). "Successfully completing case study research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism," Information Systems Journal, Vol. 8(4), 273-289. Descartes, R. (1970) The Philosophical Works of Descartes New York: Cambridge University Press Dingwall R, Murphy E, Watson P, Greatbatch D, Parker S. (1998). "Catching goldfish: quality in qualitative research", Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 3, 167-72 Ehrich, L. (2005). Revisiting phenomenology: its potential for management research. In: Proceedings: Challenges or organisations in global markets, British Academy of Management Conference, Said Business School, Oxford University, 1-13 [available online at http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00002893/01/2893.pdf] Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: The Falmer Press. Gephart, R. (1999). Paradigms and Research Methods, Research Methods Forum, Vol. 4 Gribbons, B. and J. Herman (1997). True and quasi-experimental designs, Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 5(14) Golafshani, N. (2003). "Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research", The Qualitative Report, Vol. 8 (4), 597-607 Guba, E.G. and Y. S. Lincoln (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 105-117 Hancock, B. (2002). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. Trent Focus Group Heckman, J.J and J.A. Smith (1995) Assessing the case for social experiments, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 9(2), 85-110. Hein, S.F. and Austin, W.J. (2001). Empirical and hermeneutic approaches to phenomenological research in psychology: a Comparison, Psychological Methods, 6, 3-17. Hill, J. and McGowan, P. (1999). Small business and enterprise development: Questions about research methodology, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 5(1), 5-18 Hirschheim, R. (1992). Information Systems Epistemology: An Historical Perspective. In: Galliers, R. (Ed.) Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1992, 28-60. Hoepfl, M. C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers", Journal of Technology Education, 9(1), 47-63 Howard, G. (1985). Basic Research Methods in the Social Sciences, Scott, Foresman and Company Kaplan, D. (2004). The SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methodology for the Social Sciences, London, Sage Kirk J, and M. Miller (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. London: Sage Lincoln, Y. (1990). The Making of a constructivist: a remembrance of transformations past. In E. Guba (Ed.), The Paradigm Dialog. Newbury Park: Sage Lincoln, Y., and E. Guba (1986). But is it rigorous Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. In D. D. Williams (Ed.), Naturalistic Evaluation. New Directions in Program Evaluation, No. 30, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Martin, P.Y., and B.A. Turner (1986). Grounded Theory and Organizational Research, The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, (22:2), 1986, 141-157 Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis, London: Sage Morey, N.C. and Luthans, F. "An Emic Perspective and Ethnoscience Methods for Organizational Research," Academy of Management Review (9:1), January 1984, pp. 27-36. Myers, M. D. (1997). Qualitative Research in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly (21:2), 241-242 Orlikowski, W.J., and J. J. Baroudi (1991). Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions, Information Systems Research (2) 1991, pp. 1-28. Patton, M. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. London: Sage Publications Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc Patton, E. and Appelbaum (2003). The case for case studies in management research, Management Research News, 26, 60-62 Phillips, D. C. (1993). Subjectivity and objectivity: An objective inquiry. In M. Hammersley (Ed.), Educational research: Current issues (pp. 57-72). London: Open University Rapoport, R.N. (1970). Three Dilemmas in Action Research, Human Relations, (23:4), 499-513 Stake, R.E. (1994). Case Studies. In: Denzin, N. K and, Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc Wainer, H., and Braun, H. I. (1998). Test validity. Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates Westbrook, R. (1995). Action research: a new paradigm for research in production and operations management, International Journal of Operations & Production Management Vol. 15(12), 6-20 Yin R.K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods, 2nd ed. Sage Read More