Research Methods

Week 1: What is research?

Introduction
The aim of your dissertation experience is to develop the skills, knowledge and
confidence needed to conduct research into business and management issues. But
what does this really mean? Over the next 4 weeks, you will explore the idea of
management research as the process through which you will set out to develop or
extend knowledge on a particular problem or topic. The challenge, of course, is that
there are many different ways in which this knowledge is defined, gathered,
interpreted, confirmed and understood within the research community. In other words,
you must be concerned from the start about epistemology in management research.
Epistemology refers to the philosophy of knowledge, addressing questions about how
we know what we think we know, what we regard as evidence and how one goes about
claiming that something is true.
As a field that draws heavily upon the social sciences, management research can
address diverse goals, involve a variety of stakeholders and be conducted using a wide
range of approaches (Easterby-Smith, et al., 2008). Faced with these choices, the
management researcher must be clear about what he or she is trying to accomplish and
for whom.
The focus this week is on considering the epistemological choices before you, as a
management researcher, and clarifying your own epistemological perspective. This is
an important first step in the research process. Crotty (1998) proposes a four-part model
of the research process that defines the series of choices a researcher must make:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Epistemology
Theoretical perspective
Methodology
Method

In Crottys model, both epistemology and theoretical perspective have to do with the
nature of the knowledge to be gained from the research process, while methodology
and method have to do with the approach taken to the research, and how it is designed
and conducted. Crotty acknowledges that many scholars use different names for the
same aspect of the research process, while others co-opt the same name for different
Research Methods
1/5
Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 20002012,
The module, in all its parts: Syllabus, guidelines, Weekly Notes, Discussion Questions, technical notes, images and
any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V.
Last update: 24 April 2012

elements, leading to confusion and disagreement (1998, p.3). In fact, Easterby-Smith, et

al. (2008) propose a similar four-part model, but include ontology (the nature of reality),
epistemology, methodology and method (p.60). This frequent use of different
terminology for similar ideas makes it important for the new researcher to approach
research with a clear and critical view. You should be able to ask questions about the
epistemological, theoretical and methodological underpinnings of published studies you
read, and to be clear about your own definitions and choices as you proceed with your
research.
In this Research Methods module, Week 1 focuses on epistemological perspectives,
while Weeks 2-4 focus, respectively, on theoretical foundations, methodologies and
methods. These Weekly Notes provide a closer look at epistemological perspectives,
ways of knowing and the philosophy of knowledge in management research, and then a
brief overview of the other three elements of Crottys framework.
Ways of knowing in management research
In your first module, Being a Leader, you were introduced to the differences between a
positivist and a constructionist view of leadership. The positivist view focuses on
dissecting the skills, attitudes and strategies of leadership, while a constructionist view
sees leadership as a socially constructed, negotiated phenomenon (Smircich & Morgan,
1982). These distinctions can be made for almost any social phenomenon that can be
studied, including others important in management research. Your philosophy of
knowledgeyour starting assumptions about the nature of knowledge and what counts
as truthimpacts the way you go about studying any phenomenon.
In their discussion of the philosophy of management research, Easterby-Smith, et al.
(2008) begin by contrasting positivism and social constructionism. The positivist
perspective assumes that there is a real world out there that can be understood apart
from our values, beliefs and interpretations. This perspective aims to explain
phenomena in generalisable, universal terms, and it employs a logic of falsification and
rigorous testing to determine objective truths. The social-constructionist perspective, on
the other hand, assumes that our understanding of the real world is inseparable from
our values, beliefs and interpretations. It aims to describe or understand the particular
contextual aspects of phenomena and seeks to interpret events and phenomena to
uncover their meaning and implications for the actors or participants involved.
Researchers working from a constructionist stance embrace the notion that the
researcher is part of the study environment, and brings a plethora of prior knowledge,
including beliefs that will inevitably colour the way the study is conducted and
Research Methods
2/5
Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 20002012,
The module, in all its parts: Syllabus, guidelines, Weekly Notes, Discussion Questions, technical notes, images and
any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V.
Last update: 24 April 2012

conclusions are drawn. Similarly, social constructionists hold that one should not strive
to separate the phenomena under study from their context, since what is important in
much of this type of research are the meanings and interpretations that the studys
subjects (a word that constructionists often disdain) ascribe to their experiences, which
are naturally highly contextual.
While individual researchers may naturally gravitate towards one particular
epistemological perspective, Moses and Knutsen (2007) advocate for methodological
pluralism (p.288), the ability to understand, appreciate and even adopt multiple
perspectives in ones work. Although these authors use the term methodology, in fact
they are referring to the same kinds of epistemological perspectives you have been
examining so far, including positivism and constructivism. Without this pluralistic view,
the danger is that emerging researchers will unconsciously adopt the epistemological
perspectives of their knowledge community, making them unable to talk with or work
with those holding other viewpoints, and causing them to dismiss out of hand research
that is done from other perspectives. This situation would be particularly problematic for
management researchers, who are typically working to accomplish something within
naturally diverse environments, and who may need to apply and build upon the work of
scholars in a variety of disciplines.
Theoretical perspectives
The second element of Crottys (1998) research process framework is theoretical
perspective. Easterby-Smith, et al. (2008) conclude their discussion of management
research philosophy with a look at a number of other philosophies, such as critical
theory, hermeneutics and pragmatism. Crotty would categorise many of these under his
header of theoretical perspective, while Easterby-Smith, et al. consider them to be
epistemologies. Regardless of terminology, an understanding of the role of theory and
theoretical perspectives in management research is an important next step in
conceptualising and planning research.
Theories are logical and self-consistent models or frameworks explaining certain natural
or social phenomena. Easterby-Smith, et al. (2008) make the distinction between using
theory in research, an appropriate goal for masters dissertations, and contributing to
theory, a goal more appropriate for doctoral theses (p.107). In using theory, the
researcher takes a theoretical model or framework as a starting point and applies it to
the study of a particular problem. The management researcher who aims to better
understand, for example, human motivation in the workplace may choose a particular
motivational theory to use in studying a practical workplace problem or may conduct a
Research Methods
3/5
Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 20002012,
The module, in all its parts: Syllabus, guidelines, Weekly Notes, Discussion Questions, technical notes, images and
any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V.
Last update: 24 April 2012

study to determine which theory of motivation is most explanatory in certain

circumstances. In contributing to theory, a researcher can generate propositions or
predictions from theory that can be tested and confirm or cast doubt upon the theory.
You will have an opportunity next week to explore the role of theory in management
research in greater depth.
Research methodology and methods
Methodology is the set of principles and beliefs that guide ones choice of methods
(Crotty, 1998). Methods, on the other hand, are the distinct activities one engages in to
gather information about phenomena. Many researchers use the terms interchangeably,
and there is much disagreement over whether research approaches such as case
study, survey research or action research represent methods or methodologies. It may
be easier to think about methods as what the researcher actually doesfor example,
conducting interviews, administering surveys, or observing actual workplaces. These
methods may be deployed as part of a research design that was developed from the
standpoint of a particular methodology, which is in turn informed by ones
epistemological perspective. Easterby-Smith, et al. (1998) provide a useful analysis of
the relationship between epistemologies and methodologies (p.63). For example, an
ethnographic methodology might be best pursued using methods such as in-depth
interviews and participant-observation.
A useful metaphor from everyday life for the methodology-method distinction might be
that of a highly trained and experienced cook or chef. A particular chef might use a
methodology that represents a particular cuisineSzechuan Chinese, Provencal
Frenchor a particular dietary regimenvegan, macrobiotic. Any chef from any of
these traditions may use a variety of cooking methodsgrilling, baking or sauting, for
example. An expert chef should be able to prepare foods from a variety of traditions, for
a variety of purposes, and select the appropriate cooking method for the occasion.
Continuing the analogy, while the expert chef may be able to choose from a variety of
traditions and methods, it would be unfortunate for the chef to arrive at a wedding ready
to barbecue when elegant hors doeuvres are called for. The researcher must be clear
about his or her methodological perspective before embarking on a research project,
and use that understanding to select appropriate methods and approaches and use
them in appropriate ways. You will have the opportunity in Weeks 3 and 4 to further
explore the methodological options available to you as a management researcher.

Research Methods
4/5
Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 20002012,
The module, in all its parts: Syllabus, guidelines, Weekly Notes, Discussion Questions, technical notes, images and
any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V.
Last update: 24 April 2012

Cited References and Links:

Crotty, M. (1998) The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the
research process. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. & Jackson, P. (2008) Management research. 3rd
edition. London: SAGE Publications.
Moses, J. & Knutsen, T. (2007) Ways of knowing: competing methodologies in social
and political research. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Smircich, L. & Morgan, G. (1982). Leadership: management of meaning, Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, 18 (3), pp.257-273.

Research Methods
5/5
Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 20002012,
The module, in all its parts: Syllabus, guidelines, Weekly Notes, Discussion Questions, technical notes, images and
any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V.
Last update: 24 April 2012