Justifying the Choice of Quantitative Investigation Methodology - Term Paper Example

Table of Contents 2 Introduction 2 Qualitative approach 3 Case study method 5 Ethnography 5 Grounded Theory 6 Phenomenology 8 Critical discourse analysis 10 Action research 10 Quantitative approach 11 Controlled experiments 13 Survey 14 Conclusion 17 References:            20 Introduction Choosing the right research methodology largely depends on the results that the research is aimed at accomplishing as opposed to researchers preferred approach to the research (Aaron, 1997). There are two approaches that a researcher can use in conducting research namely qualitative and quantitative research methods. The choice of whether to apply qualitative or quantitative approach to one’s research will largely depend on the nature of the research problem, research design and the kind of data required for the research. However, the guiding principle for the choice of an appropriate approach to a research   is that the research method chosen has to support the desired outcomes for the research. As such, the research approach chosen for the current research (the effect of implementing the balanced scorecard on strategic financial performance: an exploratory study of Saudi financial institutions) must assist in the achievement of the research objectives. Therefore, it is imperative that the research outcomes are achieved and presented with a suitable level of severity (Veale, 2005). The research outcomes must also make a considerable contribution to the appreciation of the positive effect that implementation of balanced scorecard can have on strategic financial performance by business managers. A quantitative research approach has been found suitable for the current research based on the expected research results as well as the literature pertaining to the subject. Furthermore, the approach was found easy to apply owing to the nature of participants expected in the research. In other words, the approach was found to be participants friendly. This paper is aimed at justifying the choice of quantitative research methodology for the current research. In so doing, the paper examines the two research methodologies and explains why a quantitative approach has been found more appropriate than a qualitative approach. Qualitative approach General overview Traditionally, qualitative research was greatly used in social sciences. However, its use has been diversified to include other disciplines such as marketing in today’s world. In this case, the researcher often aims at acquiring in-depth knowledge of a phenomenon or human behavior including reasons for such behavior (Attewell, 2001). As such, Qualitative research answers the how and why of decision making in addition to where, when and what A distinguishing factor between quantitative and qualitative research is that information gathered in qualitative research is not subjected to formulaic analysis before making deductions. This makes it possible to use small but focused samples unlike in quantitative research where large samples are used. In addition, qualitative approach provides information on the specific case being researched on and any further general conclusions being only informed assertions and as such quantitative methods have to be used in getting empirical support for the research hypothesis.  (Attewell, 2001)  Qualitative analysis is however considered a good approach to research since it enables one obtain a more realistic feel of the world that can not be experienced in the numerical data and statistical analysis of quantitative research(Browne and Keeley, 1998 ). It also provides flexible ways of data collection, analysis and interpretation and hence gives a holistic view of the phenomenon under research. In addition, the method enables close interaction with the research subjects in their own language and terms. However, the method has been blamed for tendency to depart from the original aims of the research due to the dynamic nature of the context according to Cassell and Symon (1994). It is also possible for one to arrive at different conclusions resulting from the same information depending on the researchers personal; characteristics. ‑­ Using the method, the researcher is not able to investigate the causality between differing research phenomena. This is in addition to the method tending to result in difficulties in explaining differences in quality and quantity of the information obtained from differing respondents hence arriving at differing and non-consistent deductions (Floyd, 2005). It is as a result of this weaknesses and hence its inability to provide consistent and reliable outcomes owing to the researchers ability to employ differing probing techniques  as well as the participants’ ability to choose what information to reveal that the method was found inappropriate for the current research. Furthermore, there was the need for the research to provide deductions that can be supported by quantifiable information that can be used to compare different institutions as well as different periods. There are six qualitative research methodologies that one can apply in a research. These are explained as follows; Case study method This method is mainly used in examination of a phenomenon at an individual or singular level which may not necessarily call for generalization to a wider population. This is because case studies are mainly aimed at achieving a detailed understanding of the given phenomena in the first place although generalization to the wider population is usually the ideal outcome for a given research. The researcher needs to develop a level of understanding of related concepts and events that are relevant to the case in question (Isaac, 1997). The data gathered in a case study is generally used in describing, understanding, predicting or controlling the circumstances surrounding the case in question (Kraemer, 2001).  It should be noted that this method lacks a defined methodological program and procedures and is therefore not considered an appropriate research methodology for the current research. In addition, the current research calls for a more detailed methodology that will give more reliable results. Furthermore, the research will involve a large sample drawn form all the 49 financial institutions in Saudi to evaluate the effectiveness of application of all the elements of a balanced score card in their financial performance. As such, this is not a case study research case and hence the method was found inappropriate.   Ethnography An alternative research methodology explored for the current research is ethnography. The method is mainly based on observation and qualitative analysis of human cultural behaviors and is best suited for researches that require collection of empirical data on societies and cultures. However, one disadvantage of the method is that it calls for detailed involvement of the researcher so that he makes detailed observation of the community’s behavior as well as related circumstances before a conclusion can be made regarding the subject of research (Lemeshow, 1999). As such, the method was found inappropriate for the current research despite its having strong validity. This is because if used, the method would call for huge capital outlay considering that the research is to involve four of the senior managers in each of the 49 financial institutions in Saudi. It would be  highly labor intensive since it would call  for a long time embedment with each of the institutions in a bid to observe their operations and establish whether they have implemented the balanced scorecard practices in their operations as well as whether this has had any effect on their financial performance (Henry, 2001). Furthermore, my research does not call for the researcher to work directly with the institutions and is not aimed at observing changes in organizational behavior. It only calls for one to obtain and analyze data relating to the balanced score cards and comparing their financial performance over time in order to make a valid conclusion. Furthermore, the current research is not aimed at understanding or learning any cultural phenomenon within the study area and hence the unsuitability of application of this method in the current research. Grounded Theory As the name suggests, the research methodology is grounded in the data. The grounded theory method uses constant comparison method to examine empirical indicators from the gathered data hence enabling the researcher to develop new concepts (Mclntyre, 1999). The developed concepts are then compared with more empirical data with an aim of further refining definitions of the concepts as well as further developing understanding the concept’s properties. In other words, this qualitative research method makes use of systematic set of procedures in developing an inductively derived grounded theory regarding a phenomenon. It is an analytical research method mainly concerned with grounding the analysis in the gathered data before inductively arriving at conclusions from the data. Based on the above definition, the grounded theory methodology was found inappropriate for application in the current research. This is because the research is not aimed at generation of new theory but is aimed at testing the hypothesis outlined in the research proposal based on the data that will be systematically collected from the survey to be conducted in the 49 institutions. Goulding (1998) terms the grounded theory method as best suited for generating theory where very little knowledge exists or in provision of a fresh incline on existing knowledge.  However, many theoretical models are already in use in illuminating the hypothesis in question. In this case, the theoretical model to be used in testing the hypothesis already exists and has been stated in the research proposal. According to Strauss (1987), the grounded theory method entails various discrete procedures which include theoretical sampling as well as methodological guidelines which include making of constant comparisons and utilization of coding models in ensuring conceptual development and density. As such, this calls for the researcher to possess creative imagination based on significant professional and personal experience. The researcher also needs to posses technical knowledge and awareness of alternative models. However, the current research does not focus on development of alternative models but is based on investigation of outcomes of application of the balanced scorecard in financial performance of organizations. According to Strauss and Corbin (1990), Grounded theory is a set of relationships that provide a credible explanation of the phenomenon being studied – namely the theory which is grounded on data that is systematically gathered and analyzed. As such, the theory is developed in the course of the research process and is as a result of continuous interplay between analysis as well as data collection.  As such, grounded theory was found to be an inappropriate methodology for application in the current research since the research does not concern itself with development of any theory as data is collected or analyzed but is only concerned with hypothesis testing in the Saudi financial institution’s environment and hence gain better understanding of the effect of applying the balance scorecard on the financial performance of an organization. Phenomenology Phenomenology can best be attributed to the thinking of Husserl which Churchill 2006) refers to as the classical phenomenological approach which is an exploration of the essence of lived experiences. Owing to the development of post positivist approaches to research, the methodology was adopted by a number of disciplines as an appropriate way for exploration of research questions leading to a different way of knowledge being constructed.   However, the application of the method in research took a long time to be established owing to the fact that a phenomenological praxis, a systematic and sustained methodology had not been put in place according to Scwandt (1997). The situation however changed in the 1970s when a praxis was established by phenomenological psychologists and hence it’s increased utilization. Phenomenology is mainly based on the researcher describing as accurately as possible the phenomenon while avoiding any pre-given framework and ensuring that facts are preserved. According to Greene (1997), a researcher using phenomenology as a method is mainly concerned with the lived experiences of the people taking part in the current research issue. However, there lacks use of prescribed techniques  in phenomenology owing to the fact that it is impossible to impose a technique in a phenomenon as that would limit the integrity of the phenomenon in question although there needs to be some guidelines for neophyte researchers. Phenomenology therefore gives a deeper understanding of the given phenomena based on the data obtained from the participant’s experiences. As such, the method can be suitable in interrogating the senior management of the financial institutions on their experiences as a result of implementation of a balanced score card. However, the method was found to be inappropriate due to the subjectivity of data which results in difficulties in establishment of reliability and validity of information and approaches. Furthermore, the methodology fails to give generalisable data and it is difficult to detect and avoid personal bias by the researcher. The methodology has also been noted for difficulties in ensuring pure bracketing which results in interference of data interpretation.  Another reason why the method was deemed inappropriate for the current research is its use of extremely small samples hence making it difficult to obtain reliable results. Phenomenological research usually has the object of drawing from other people’s experiences. Researchers in phenomenological researchers live figuratively through their participants’ so as to better understand the meaning of their experiences (Maxwell, 2005). The research methodology unfortunately has some inherent challenges since lived experience descriptions can never be identical to lived experience itself. In addition, even though lived experiences may be captured right at the moment, it has already been transformed.  As such, the method was found inappropriate for the current research as it calls for collection of adequate data that can be used in testing the hypothesis outlined in the research proposal. Critical discourse analysis Jacobs (1995), sees this methodology as one concerned with examination of the language and interaction bases upon which the given society is founded. The methodology critically examines language, discourse and communication within the context of the society. As such, the methodology uncovers feelings, thoughts and beliefs of the members of the society as stated by Pinsonneault (2003). The method is therefore useful in revealing discourses accounting certain ideas, procedures and actions. The methodology is used in a number of fields such as discourse studies and linguistics and its main emphasis is theorizing as well as researching of social change and processes. The method is deeply political in its analysis of societal values and practices with an aim of revealing how elites act in reproduction of prominent discourses. Areas that could greatly benefit from critical discourse analysis would include such subjects as warfare reform as well as racism. As such, critical discourse analysis seems to be best suited for studies regarding relations of power and identity formation via social interactions.  Although some aspects of the current research could be studied using this methodology, it was found inappropriate  since the current research does not concern itself with the power relations  and on constructing reality but rather on investigating the effects of implementation of the balanced scorecard on the financial performance of an institution. The current research would call for a more quantitative approach as opposed to a qualitative one due to its nature. Action research This is a method that requires interaction between the researcher and his/her subjects as well as the data collected. The methodology is qualitative in nature and its outcome based as it focuses on improvement of the methods used in a certain discipline or organization. The method therefore requires insight, reflection and personal involvement with the subject of research. Action research is best conducted by people directly involved with the situation or problem being studied (Peters, 2008). After recognition of the research problem, action research entails four steps which include are the action research methodology: plan, act, observe, reflect. Changes are made to the plan and the entire process repeated until the researcher gets satisfied with the whole research process. The observation methods to be used in this case are all at the discretion of the researcher. As such, this method was found to be inadequate for the current research as the research is not aimed at bringing change in participants but rather in measuring the outcomes of implementation of the balance scorecard by institutions. In other words, the current research is concerned with measurement of the objective truth existing in the world. Quantitative approach General overview This approach involves numerical representation and manipulation of observations with the aim of describing and explaining the phenomena reflected by the observations. According to Wright (2010), the researcher after deciding on what to study, asks specific narrow questions, collects quantifiable information from the participants, uses statistical methods to analyze the data obtained and conducts the inquiry in an objective and unbiased manner. The data gathered is then used in making a conclusion against a set of hypothesis. Researchers using the quantitative research method adopt a positivist approach through objective explanation and description. Through the method, researchers explain the organization’s behavior through use of gathered data, models and theories developed in advance as well as statistical data manipulation methods to arrive at a conclusion from the given set of hypothesis (Dillman, 2004). This is unlike qualitative research method which mainly relies on observation through use of closed research question and generalizing their observation to the whole population. Quantitative research methods apply deductive approach in collection of numerical data that acts as evidence in testing the hypothesis and drawing conclusions. As such, quantitative research has to make use of large sample sizes so as to increase reliability of the research results. One of the greatest advantages of using quantitative research is that it allows the researcher to conduct a large study with a large sample which in turn generalizes the results. The method allows for a high degree of objectivity given that the research involves a small number of variables and the prescribed procedures give a reliable set of results. The research method also uses standards which can be analyzed and compared with studies of similar nature while the procedures ensure that the research outcomes are valid and reliable (Symons, 2006). The quantitative research method allows for avoidance of personal opinion and bias owing to the large size of the research sample preferably composed of people unknown to the researcher. ‑­ However, the method has been blamed for giving results that are of a narrow set and limited owing to the very little detail they provide and the limited room for elaboration by respondents. As such, the quantitative research results have been termed ‘laboratory’ as opposed to real world as there is a degree of control to the questions implying that some respondents could just agree to the answer that closely matches the one they wanted to give. Furthermore, the development of standard questions could give room for bias from the researcher as he/she may intentionally or unintentionally frame the questions to favor a particular set of responses (Crotty, 1998). Nevertheless, owing to the simplicity of the method and its appropriateness for application in the current research, the method has been chosen despite the few weaknesses.  There are two major types of quantitative research methodologies which include controlled experiments which are studies that introduce changes into process and evaluate the effects of the changes and hence are able to give evidence of causation in addition to evidence of association. On the other hand, in observational studies the researcher does not interfere with the process but only observes what’s happening. This type of research only gives evidence of association. Controlled experiments Controlled experiments are often used in physiological and medical research although they have found use in the social discipline in recent times. The experiments mainly focus on data collection and are useful in determination of patterns of cause and effect. In this case, two groups consisting of an experimental group and a control group. The experiment group is subjected to the factor being investigated while the other group is not. It is also important that the external factors or influences be held constant (Salant, 1994). For ion stance in the current research, the researcher would need to have two groups of financial institutions subjected to similar conditions. One of the groups would be subjected to implementation of the balanced score card while the other one would continue operating normally. As such, the researcher would clearly observe the differences in financial performance of the two groups and hence make a deduction on the effects of implementing balanced scorecard on financial performance of organizations. As such, the greatest strength of this methodology is the ability to establish cause and effect between variables. In addition, with all external factors being held constant, the methodology is able to zero in on a single independent variable (Maxwell, 2005). In addition, controlled experiments are only possible in a controlled environment such as the laboratory setting and hence eliminate real life effects. As such, the experiments would need to include judgments on how much the artificial conditions affects the overall research results. This methodology is ideal for application in cases where the researcher aims at establishing probable cause and effect as it permits one to deduct that the outcome has been caused by the treatment. Controlled experiments design involves the researcher deciding units and treatments before finding the techniques of allocating the treatments to the subjects. The subjects are then introduced to the conditions of the treatment variable (Johannes, 2010). As such, controlled experiments find their use in cases where the study is aimed at examining the probable cause and effect between dependent and independent variables and where the researcher has control over the participants. As such, controlled experiments will not be appropriate for the current research owing to the researcher’s lack of control over the subjects. Furthermore, the researcher may not be able to arrange the participants into treatment groups and subject them to treatment conditions (Isaacs, 1997). This is because each financial institution operates independently and can change its operating environment as and when it deems it necessary hence affecting the results of the research. Furthermore, the aim of the research is to establish the effect of implementation of BSC strategies and hence one does not need to have control over the institution’s practices in a bid to arrive at valid results. Survey Survey research is a methodology used in answering research questions raised to solve problems observed, assess needs and determine whether objectives have been achieved as well as establish baselines with which to make future comparisons, in analyzing trends across times and describe what exists in what context and in what amount. As such, survey research quantitatively describes specific aspects of a population by examining relationship between variables using subjective data collected from a sample of the population (Johannes, 2010). However, unlike in controlled experiments, the researcher is not in control of the research variables. In research survey, the researcher predicates the model identifying the expected relations among the variables before embarking on the research. Hence, the survey is conducted to test the model against the observation of the phenomena.  This was found to be the most appropriate methodology for the current research. Johannes (2010) describes a survey as any process involving collection of data about a population. The population can include groups of people, a group of organizations, businesses, episodes or events. In other words, the population is composed of the group of units in which the researcher is interested in making deductions. Surveys vary widely depending on their subjects, complexity, size and the purposes for which they are intended. As such, the different steps involved in a survey research must fit well together in order to avoid the various errors that a survey is prone to have. This calls for proper planning of the survey process (Biemer and Lyberg, 2003). The survey process starts with a research hypothesis after which a statistical hypothesis is formulated. This has been explained in the research proposal and a conceptual framework has been developed as well.  Then the experiment is designed in which the researcher decides on the pattern of observations to be collected. This includes decisions regarding decisions on sample sizes. In this case, a sample of 49 financial organizations has been selected while each organization will have four to five respondents. The fourth step involves conducting the survey before performing analysis on the data collected and making deductions about the research hypothesis. In choosing survey as the methodology for research in the current research, a number of factors were considered. a)      Cost- the current research is expected to cost $7900. This was considered as being cheap when compared to other research methods. The cheap cost per participant will give room for a detailed survey which will result in quality and reliable conclusions being arrived at. b)      Data collection- Survey will enable the researcher to use easy to read data sources that will be compiled and analyzed according to the needs of the current research compared to the use of qualitative methods. c)      Sample size- this methodology was chosen due to the need to use a large sample that will be a better representative of the whole population and hence enable us to arrive at more reliable results before making our deductions. d)      Candid responses – since surveys enable participants feel more candid with their responses due to their anonymity, use of survey methodology will enable the researcher get more honest responses and hence more accurate deductions will be made (Johannes, 2010). In addition, survey was found to be appropriate since it obtains data from large samples which was readily chosen from the 49 financial institutions. The research methodology was found to be inclusive as far as the types and numbers of variables to be studied are concerned hence requiring minimal investment in developing and administering. For instance in the current scenario, a number of variables are being investigated in a single research. It is however worth noting that this methodology will only provide estimates for the entire population and not exact measurement. It is as a result of consideration of the above factors that Survey was found to be a more appropriate methodology for the current research. In addition, the information to be used in the research is numerical in nature and hence the choice of a quantitative research technique (Plano and Creswell, 2010). A survey will enable the researcher accurately compare the performance of all the 49 institutions in all areas of the BSC over the years by using the eight areas identified in the research proposal. However, it should be noted that qualitative research techniques could also be effectively applied in some aspects of the current research. The various qualitative research methodologies have been explained above. Conclusion It should be noted that both qualitative and quantitative research methods are all applicable in research but for different purposes. Qualitative research mainly useful when the researcher intends to establish in detail why a phenomena or a behavior takes place and what should be done to correct a situation and why it should be done. In addition, qualitative research may be used when the researcher aims at identifying the full range of opinions existing in a population. As such, the researcher is able to identify issues and understand why they matter (Kraemer, 2001). For instance, qualitative research would have been appropriate for the current research if its objective was to establish why organizations use the balanced scorecard or why organizations are reluctant in implementing it. On the other hand, quantitative research as the name suggests is mainly used in researches aimed at knowing how many people or organizations share a common characteristic in addition to measuring attitude and behavior. As such quantitative research results in quantitative data that can be subjected to formulaic manipulation such as our conceptual framework in order to proof or disregard a certain hypothesis concerning an entire population (Crotty, 1998). For instance, qualitative analysis was found to be the most appropriate research methodology for the current research since establishing the effect of implementation of the balanced scorecard on financial organizations’ financial performance would call for a research that establishes how many organizations have had some or all aspects of their financial performance affected as a result of implementing the balanced score card in their operations. The current research is geared towards establishing whether implementation of the balanced scorecard has any effect on the financial performance of organizations in the financial sector. This research is proposed to be conducted in the 49 financial institutions listed in the Saudi stock exchange and will involve three to five senior management officers in each institution who are directly responsible for the organizations’ financial affairs. Although a multiple of methodologies could be used in this research, the survey methodology was deemed as the most appropriate method of research as it will give the researcher the ability to arrive at reliable and quality conclusions (McIntyre, 1999).  This is because of the anonymity of the whole process and the ability to correct the data from a large sample that will be a fair presentation of the whole population. As such, the researcher will be able to make accurate deductions regarding the hypothesis that will be reliable. In addition, the cost of using the method was deemed to be lower per participant compared with all the other methodologies considering that we will only spend $7900 over the 36 weeks period that the research will take to complete. However, we have also identified potential weaknesses of the adopted methodology and hence measures will be undertaken to overcome the weaknesses. These include potential errors from sampling and the research processes.  As such, it is hoped that the methodology adopted will result in accurate deductions that will go far into guiding organizations on the effectiveness and applicability of the balance scorecard on their financial performance. In addition, a quantitative research methodology was found appropriate for the current research due to the inherent weaknesses of qualitative research (Churchill, 2006). By use of quantitative methodology, it will be easy for us to establish the validity and reliability of the data collected which is not the case with qualitative research. Qualitative research is more prone to researcher bias due to its subjectivity in data analysis. However, in the case of the quantitative methodology we have chosen, the risk of researcher bias is minimal due to the reliability and validity of data and the fact that the data is subjected to a conceptual framework in arriving at deductions. Finally, doing a qualitative research would call for the researcher to use open ended questions which could lead to data overload and hence more time and money will be wasted in transcription and analyzing it (Johannes,2010). As such, a quantitative research methodology was deemed the most appropriate for the current research. References:            Aaron, A&, Aaron, E1997, Statistics for the behavioral and social sciences, A brief course, Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall. Johannes, P2010, Modern research methodologies, London, Rutledge. Cassell& Symon, G1994, Qualitative research in work contexts: Qualitative methods in organizational research, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications Crotty, M1998, The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspectives in the research process, Singapore, Allen and Unwin. Wright, G2010, Research methods, Oxford, Oxford University press. Isaacs, W1997, Guidebook to research and evaluation: Principles, methods and strategies for planning, design and evaluation of studies in social sciences, San Diego, Educational and Industrial Testing Services. Veale, A2005, Business research Methods: Managerial approach, Pearson, Addison Wesley. Kraemer, K2001, Case study research methods for social sciences, New York, John Willey and Sons. McIntyre, J1999, The practical Skeptic: Core concepts in Sociology, Mountain View, CA: Mayfield publishing. Goulding, C1998, Grounded theory: A practical guide for management, Business and market researchers, London, Sage. Salant, P1994, How to conduct your own survey, New York, John Willey and Sons. Strauss, A& Corbin, J1990, Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedure and techniques, USA, Sage publications. Strauss, A1987, Qualitative analysis for social scientists, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Churchill, D2006, Qualitative research approaches, London, Rutledge. Plano, C & Creswell, J 2010, Understanding Research: A Consumer's Guide, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J. Groves, R1989, Survey errors and survey costs, Wiley, New York. Schwadt, T1997, Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms, Thousand Oaks, Sage. Symons, D2006, Research methods, Pearson, Melbourne. Petters, G 2008, Analyzing Qualitative Data, London, Prentice House. Green, M1997, The lived world, Literature and education, Johannesburg: Heinemann. Jacobs, D1995, Phenomenology, London, Rutledge Maxwell, A 2005, Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Johannes, H2010, Qualitative and quantitative research methodologies, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Pinsonneault, K2003, Critical discourse analysis research methodology in business management, Journal of Business Management Information Systems, vol.10, pp.75-95. Biemer, P&, Lyberg, L2003, Introduction to survey quality, Wiley, New York. Wright, G2010, Research methods, Oxford, Oxford University press. Attewell, B2001, Research methodologies applied in business, London, Rutledge. Browne, M&, Keeley, M1998, Asking the right questions: A guide to critical thinking, Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall. Floyd, J2005, Improving research design and analysis, Thousand Oaks, Sage. Lemeshow, S1999, Ethnography as a research methodology: Design and application, New York, John Willey and Sons. Henry, J2001, Methodological issues in social sciences ethnographic research, London, Rutledge. Dillman, D2004, Quantitative and Qualitative research methodologies, New York, John Willey and Sons. Read More