Infrastructure in Developing Countries: Turkish Libraries - Assignment Example

Infrastructure in Developing Countries: the Case of Turkish Libraries Information January 24, 2007 Infrastructure in Developing Countries: the Case of Turkish Libraries Question 1 Compare and contrast the research methodologies used to study the development of infrastructure in developing countries. Summarize the techniques used, the assumptions and limitations faced and the potential for error and how it is minimized, and finally, the lessons learned through these methods. INTRODUCTION The availability of efficient and reliable infrastructure is one of the most essential requirements for sustainable development and economic growth of any country. In some countries, such as the United States, Great Britain, Japan and others the potential contribution of infrastructure to sustainable growth has been realized almost to the full extent. However, in developing countries improvement of existing infrastructure still remains the most integral element of the public policy. Although the direct relationship between availability of developed infrastructure and healthier economy is still debated, there is little doubt that such relationship exists and has been confirmed, both explicitly and implicitly, in a plethora of studies. Research in the field of infrastructure development in developing countries features a number of distinctive techniques, assumptions, limitations, different potential for error and error minimization techniques. Such variety is, obviously, due to extreme broadness of the term ‘infrastructure’. The American Heritage Dictionary, defines this word as “the basic facilities, services, and installations needed for the functioning of a community or society, such as transportation and communications systems, water and power lines, and public institutions including schools, post offices, and prisons.”1 Furthermore, rapid technological and political evolution has resulted in some other important concepts (e.g. homeland security) being defined under this term. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast research methodologies used to study the development of infrastructure in developing countries. Since the term infrastructure is too broad, only one type of infrastructure services, namely librarianship, has been chosen as the focus of this research. The choice is determined by the reasonable consideration that narrowing the research subject will facilitate the process of comparison and reduce the potential for error. The scarcity of serious research in the field of infrastructure improvement in developing countries provides another justification for the choice. The author and supervisor agreed to take librarianship as the focal point in achieving the research purpose. MAIN BODY Description of Methodologies Hemami (2005) and Kaya (1994) both study the job satisfaction among the public and university librarians in Turkey, but the methodologies adopted by each of them are fairly different. Hemami’s (2005) research employs surveying as the primary data collection technique. Data have been collected from the selected librarian employees in both public and university libraries. Specifically designed questionnaires have been distributed among the selected participants who agreed participate in the research. One of the principal objectives of Hemami’s research effort is to identify the specific programs that help improve job satisfaction among the Turkish librarians. The study findings reveal that periodically held job satisfaction seminars are one of the primary factors that help respondents remain up to date on information, skills, and techniques that improve their job awareness and positively affect job satisfaction. In another study of job satisfaction among public librarians in Turkey, Kaya (1994) carries out a comparative evaluation of existing scholarly studies in order to identify the most influential job satisfaction factors. Although the study involves no primary research, the amount of scholarly literature processed by Kaya is impressive. Thorough analysis of the materials allowed the author to compose the following hierarchical list of factors that affect job satisfaction among Turkish librarians: (1) Wage (Ergenc, 1982; Sencer, 1982; Kose, 1985; Onaran, 1979; Yncir, 1990) (2) Management policy (Ergenc, 1982; Sencer, 1983; Yncir, 1990) (3) Security (Ergenc, 1982; Sencer, 1982; Onaran, 1979; Yncir, 1990) (4) Working conditions (Ergenc, 1982; Sencer, 1982; Onaran, 1979) (5) Social relations (Kose, 1985; Onaran, 1979) (6) Possibilities of promotion (Ergenc, 1982; Yncir, 1990) (7) Gaining respect (Sencer, 1982; Onaran, 1979; Yncir, 1990) (8) The size of the organization and self-development (Kose, 1985) (9) Achievement and the use of talents (Sencer, 1982) Management-Research Question Hierarchy Hemami (2005) derives important guidelines and approaches in her research from other relevant research, such as placing importance on research design as suggested by Robson (2002) and placing emphasis on Lofland’s seven key features of a systematic research strategy presented in Miles and Huberman (2002). Management Dilemma Both Hemami and Kaya in their respective studies state that librarians in developing countries, such as Turkey, face substantial management dilemmas directly related to job satisfaction factors. Management Question In both studies, the central management question raised by the author is the same, namely: ‘How can job satisfaction among employees of these organizations be improved?’ Research Questions In Hemami (2005), the research questions are: (1) ‘Do we need to implement a specialized program to improve job satisfaction among employees of these organizations?’ and (2) ‘Do we need to upgrade technologies in the libraries?’ Kaya (1994) addresses a single research question: ‘What factors cause issues associated with job satisfaction among librarians to arise in developing countries?’ Investigative Questions Hemami (2005) and Kaya (1994) both examine specific factors affecting job satisfaction among librarians in Turkey. Two of the broader research questions raised by the authors can be formulated as follows: (1) ‘Are factors such as education, cultural differences, political circumstances, social, technological, economic and human resources, organizational structure, and information sources affect job satisfaction among librarians in Turkey?’ and (2) ‘What other factors affect job satisfaction among librarians in Turkey?’ In order to find the answer to the research question Hemami (2005) asks the respondents simple question in her study, namely: ‘What is your job title?’ and ‘How long have been at this job?’ However, the survey also involves more complex multiple choice questions, such as ‘Imagine yourself as a manager and in charge of hire and fire of employees, If you had to hire someone for an open position would you (A) hire a friend, (B) hire a family member, (C) hire someone with the most knowledge, (D) hire someone recommended through a friend.’ Hemami uses SPSS tools to draw a comparison between the respondents’ answering patterns related to these questions. The results are used to conduct the rest of her research. A sample of the data collection questionnaire designed by Hemami (2005) for the purposes of her study is provided in Appendix B. Kaya (1994) carries out no primary research: he relies exclusively on the secondary sources. Consequently, the study involves analysis and comparison of existing studies examining the issue of factors affecting job satisfaction among librarians in Turkey. Kaya’s objective is to focus on finding out how the whole range of job-related issues, such as wages, management policies, working conditions, social relations, and compensation, can affect the system of relationships between the managing personnel and employees. For example, in his analysis of one such study conducted by Bilgin (1986) Kaya (1994) evaluates the impact of motivation and hygiene factors on job satisfaction and demonstrates that they do not vary depend upon gender. Management Decision Hemami (2005) determines the management decision based on the results of her study, but the ultimate goal is to use the survey data as a research instrument in itself. Kaya (1994) has the ultimate goal in his theory driven research to utilize the gathered data as the actual instrument. Sampling Plan In her study, Hemami (2005) states: “Note. For future studies the researcher can employ sequential approach, which is gathering data from the participants being surveyed in one initial qualitative collection phase. In the second phase, use the statements in order to put together another survey that is grounded in the opinions of the participants. The last phase would be validating the instrument with a large sample which represents a population.” (p. 5). This statement reflects the flexibility of approach adopted by the author in her study. Hemami (2005) selects her sample skew population from employees and managers in Turkey’s university libraries as well as several public libraries of varying size. Kaya (1994) does not implement any sampling plan because no primary research is carried out. Conceptual Framework According to Maxwell (1996), conceptual framework is a tool that permits visualizing assumptions, beliefs, theories, and expectations. The conceptual framework employed by Hemami (2005) serves precisely this purpose. A sample of the conceptual framework applied by Hemami (2005) is provided in Appendix A. In this sample, Hemami (2005) puts the various variables in separate rectangular boxes with the first box encasing ‘Management Dilemma’ and ‘Management Questions.’ The arrow pointing to a circle diagram below the box clearly demonstrates these two issues are to be addressed in the introductory section of the study. The second rectangular box encases ‘Research and Investigation Questions’ which are addressed in the ‘Design Analysis’ section of the study. The third rectangular box encases ‘Measurement Questions’ addressed in the ‘Theories’ section of the study. The fourth rectangular box encases ‘Measurement Decisions’ which are addressed in the ‘Implementation’ part of the research study. This conceptual framework conveys clearly the assumptions, beliefs, theories, and expectations underlying Hemami’s study. Measurement Strategy The measurement strategy of Hemami (2005) highlights the importance of survey results. These results greatly facilitate the overall understanding of how job satisfaction can be improved and Hemami also uses them to design an effective program for librarian employees. The measurement strategy adopted by Kaya (1994) is based on secondary data gathered from existing works. The researcher’s analytical and evaluating skills are the cornerstones of his strategy. Data Display and Analysis Strategy An important element of both studies is organization of data which includes categorization and synthesis. In displaying such data, text and numeric presentation is also accompanied by graphics such as matrices, tables, and figures. Content-based data analysis is the method preferred by both Hemami (2005) and Kaya (1994). In order to confirm validity of their findings both researchers maintain that the results obtained after thorough analysis and/or interpretation of data are generalizable and representative of the situation not only in Turkey but also in other developing countries of the Middle East. Evaluation of Methodology Hemami (2005) adopts the analytical approach in studying the relationship between the variables identified during data collection. The choice of qualitative approach and surveying as the primary data collection technique perfectly fits the objectives Hemami want to achieve. By contrast, Kaya (1994) focuses exclusively upon the literature review and analysis of existing studies in the field. Therefore, Kaya’s study has less practical value than Hemami’s effort which is based on the primary data, but can perhaps be effectively used as a broad theoretical instrument. Thus, Kaya’s findings may be very helpful in constructing a theoretical framework for further primary research in the field of job satisfaction among the Turkish librarian employees. CONCLUSION The two studies evaluated, contrasted, and compared within the framework of this review focus upon one type of infrastructure services in developing countries, namely librarianship. The choice of librarianship as the focal point of analysis is determined by extreme broadness of the term infrastructure on the one hand and by scarcity of reliable scholarly material covering other aspects of infrastructure in developing countries on the other. Besides, narrowing the focus of research is likely to positively affect generalizability and representativeness of the key findings. Each of the studies under review represents a solid piece of work written by the top-level professionals in the field of practical and theoretical research. In terms of the research methodology, the authors provide a good example of how qualitative methodology and theoretical analysis of existing literature may be effectively used to improve our understanding of the various issues associated with job satisfaction among the library employees. The difference in methodologies and techniques preferred by Hemami and Kaya is apparently due to varying research objectives. Hemami (2005) carries out a survey to identify the factors affecting job satisfaction among the Turkish librarian employees. This knowledge will help map the ways of improving job satisfaction among the target population. In a broader sense, Hemami’s study provides a nice example of how surveying should be used in qualitative analysis of infrastructure problems in developing countries. Also, the author implements an excellent conceptual framework thus providing a valuable insight into how to organize and explore various sorts of relationships between variety of research, management, and measurement issues and variables. Kaya (1994) adopts a different methodology, but even absence of the primary research does not undermine validity of the study: the methodology chosen by Kaya is congruent with the objectives of his study. While Hemami (2005) needs the primary research in order to fulfill one of the research objectives, namely to identify specific programs that positively affect job satisfaction among the Turkish librarian employees, Kaya (1994) only wants to provide a list of factors that affect the same phenomenon. Secondary analysis of data collected by other authors seems to be an appropriate method of achieving this goal. Both Hemami (2005) and Kaya (1994) provide a strong synthesis of their major findings. The findings revealed by each author are fully congruent with the stated objectives and research questions: Hemami discovers that specialized programs may positively affect job satisfaction level among the target population; Kaya identifies and lists a range of factors, such as wages, management policies, working conditions and other that have been confirmed by other scholars to affect the level of job satisfaction among the same target population. Therefore, it will be reasonable to assume that both authors have correctly chosen the methodologies for their studies. The biases and limitations that can be identified for each of the two studies are mostly associated with the limitations of the methodological frameworks used by the authors. Thus, the major limitation of Kaya’s study the fact that they are derived from his literature review of existing studies: none of them is supported by the primary data collected by Kaya. Hemami does collect primary data, but her methodology also has serious limitations too: qualitative data obtained via surveying may be subjective and descriptive while the questions asked during interviewing may frame responses of the participants. However, the authors’ qualifications suggest they are fully aware of the biases and limitations that are impossible to overcome within the chosen methodologies. Therefore, the major criterion in evaluating their methodologies is that the choice of methods and techniques fits the objectives of research. Evidently, this criterion is met: Hemami (2005) and Kaya (1994) offer an illustrative example of how absolutely different methodologies can be effectively used to explore a similar problem. LESSONS LEARNED Hemami (2005) and Kaya (1994) also provide insightful lessons about this particular infrastructure development issues. Perhaps the key lesson is how to carry out a research on the infrastructure problems in developing countries: the role of balanced and well-designed research is huge. Hemami (2005) highlights the importance of correct questioning at the stage of data collection. Only with the help of clear, accurate questions a research is able to derive reliable and valuable data to be used to achieve the research objectives. Ambiguous questions skew the reliability and validity of this kind of study’s results. Hemami (2005) makes it clear for me as an aspiring researcher that the most challenging elements of the research process are: drawing up the research plan, determining the time-frame sufficient to realize it, and managing the data analysis with professional, tested methods to validate or disprove the research hypotheses/assumptions. Validation and evaluation of data collected by Hemami (2005) study is obviously the most difficult aspect of the research: this is where the author’s background and professional qualifications as a researcher are critically important for the research outcomes. Kaya (1994), in his turn, demonstrates the importance of abundant theoretical knowledge about the issue being studied. Besides, Kaya (1994) provides an insight into the nature of some common problems faced by developing countries trying to improve their infrastructure. Some of these problems are insufficient funding, absence of legible and clear employment standards, poor planning, inadequate wages, and negative work environment. References Appendix A: Conceptual Framework  Appendix B: Data Collection Instrument sample of Hemami (2005) research Part 1: Name: Date: Country you were born: Country you work in: Organization name: Field you work in: Position: Part 2: How long have you been at this job? How long have you been in the workforce? Number of years at school: Highest education achieved? Last date at school: Part 3: Target questions sample 1. Circle the phrase(s) that express your emotion most: a. Job satisfaction will improve my performance. b. Issues such as sexual harassments exist in the work place and there is no one to go to. c. We have no technological advances to help find the right journal or material. d. My boss always hires and promotes the people he is related to or friends with regardless of their job fit. e. The condition of the building is not satisfactory. f. The journals and material in this library are very obsolete. g. I have too many tasks to do in one day. 4. Imagine yourself as a manager and in charge of hire and fire of employees. If you had to hire some one for an open rack would you: a. hire your friend b. hire your family member c. hire some one with most knowledge d. hire some one recommended to me through a friend who is not very knowledgeable e. hire a freshman from school Part 4: 1. Does your workplace provide enough training and support? Why do you think so? 2. What do you think may be the biggest two barriers affecting job satisfaction in your workplace? 3. Can you describe a personal experience related to issues of job satisfaction in the workplace? What were the challenges? How did you overcome them? Was it worth it? 4. What is your general opinion about job satisfaction? 5. What does being satisfied with your job mean? Read More