Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Topic 1
WHAT IS RESEARCH?
INTRODUCTION
Topic introduction video
This topic is introductory in nature, aiming to give you an overview of some of the
themes and concepts you will study as you progress through later topics in this
module. The readings we have chosen topic provide a set of ‘first ideas’ about the
nature and purpose of research. They establish some key concepts and principles,
and set out some underpinnings for your subsequent considerations of research
design and application.
The first reading has been prepared by members of the module team. Much of it is
original work but in places it refers specifically to two texts: Doing research in business
and management by Mark Saunders and Philip Lewis (2012: 1st edition, Harlow:
Pearson Education Ltd) and Research methods for business students by Mark Saunders,
Philip Lewis and Adrian Thornhill (2012: 6th edition, Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd).
Do note that although we will refer to these works, the specific chapters referred to
are not included here in Topic 1. Doing research in business and management is the set
text that is provided throughout much of the module and will explore in more depth
many of the ideas mentioned here.
The second reading for this topic is an online journal article by Claire Williams, which
provides a clear consideration of three commonly-used approaches and their
associated research designs.
As this is your first week of study, there are no quizzes or reflective exercises in this
topic − just one case study, which you are advised to complete. Do note, however,
that in other topics you will engage with quizzes and other types of activity that will
enable you to get immediate feedback on your progress in the module, so they are
well worth doing.
ESSENTIAL READING 1
This paper, Thinking about the nature of research is a reading prepared by the module
team.
Remember that all the essential reading for this programme is provided for you. Click
the link (which may take you to the Online Library where you can search for a journal
article) or click ‘next’ to go to the next page and start reading.
In these (and many more) circumstances when we are exposed to the findings of
research, can we be at least reasonably certain that we can trust them? Are the
findings applicable to just one setting, or can they be generalised to other settings?
To trust the findings we would need to have confidence in the design of the research,
the application of that design, the collection and analysis of relevant data, and the
subsequent interpretation of the analyses.
That’s fine, but what does that term research really mean? Perhaps we might start
answering that question by identifying what it is not, especially as the term is used in
different ways by different people and organisations. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill
(2012) cite Walliman’s identification of a number of ways in which the term is often
used inappropriately, and sometimes completely incorrectly. Instances cited include:
To be of value, the outputs of research should contribute ‘something new’ to the area
studied and must emerge from a robust process. Data (be it quantitative, qualitative,
or both) must be collected systematically and in the context of a clear purpose − the
purpose being to find out about something of interest and relevance to both the
researcher(s) and a wider audience. Scholars identify the following major purposes:
• Describing.
• Explaining.
• Understanding.
• Criticising.
• Analysing.
(Ghauri and Gronhaug (2010) cited in Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2012, p.5)
The data collected must be analysed in the right way(s) and the analyses interpreted
appropriately. Accordingly, the research author(s) must able to demonstrate
robustness and rigour: in other words, the method(s) used to collect and analyse data
must be explained and justified. There must be sound argument and evidence
supporting any claim that the research results are meaningful, and any limitations of
the research should be recognised and articulated. An immediate point to note
about data is that it may be secondary data (data which already exists), primary
data (new data to be collected during the research study) or a combination of both.
• Collection of data.
• Analysis of data.
This set of activities certainly appears, at least on the surface, to be linear. That said,
activities may overlap rather than being strictly sequential. Furthermore, the research
process may develop an iterative nature, in which content, ideas and activities are
revisited following reflection and refinement by the researcher(s).
Once you have gone through this process and arrived at an appropriate topic idea,
the next stage in the research process is to add substance to it by formulating
meaningful research questions and objectives. Saunders and Lewis define research
questions as ‘those questions which the research process will address’ and define
research objectives as ‘clear, precise statements that identify what you wish to
accomplish as a result of doing the research’ (Saunders and Lewis, 2012, p.18). It is
not enough to formulate research questions − the objectives are key in that they set
out the intended destination of the journey the research process will undertake.
The research questions should, naturally if not obviously, flow from the thrust of the
research idea. It is important to not formulate questions that cannot be answered in
sensible ways. Some questions are too big and difficult and may result in a study
which cannot reasonably be undertaken. Others may be too small and result in
descriptive answers that have no real meaning. Some may be impracticable because
they are connected with very sensitive issues.
In our chosen example, an appropriate research objective might be: to establish ways
in which the location of confectionery displays near tills will improve sales of
confectionery.
The purpose of the research will clearly have a significant impact on the articulation
of the objectives, and in that context it is worth noting now that there are three
broad categories of research purpose:
1. Exploratory: seeks new insights, asks new questions, look at matters in a new
light.
Research design
In designing a research study there will inevitably be options. To ensure that the most
appropriate design is selected the design needs to be thought about deeply, with
competing options identified and evaluated before selection. Earlier it was suggested
that research involves following a series of themed stages, usually sequential but
occasionally overlapping and often necessitating iteration. The formulation of an
appropriate research design also follows a series of stages based on themes, in which
the researcher must make fundamental choices about the purpose and nature of the
research. These choices can lead to very different designs.
Research philosophies
The point at which a design starts to be formulated is the adoption of a particular
and specific research philosophy. The research philosophy adopted by a researcher
reflects assumptions they make about the surrounding world. If the researcher
believes that phenomena can be observed and measured, a particular type of design
will emerge. But if the researcher is more interested in the values and beliefs of
individuals or groups, this different philosophy feeds into a different design. In this
module, the main strands of research philosophy considered are positivism, realism,
interpretivism, and pragmatism.
• Realism also relates to scientific inquiry. It espouses the idea that objects have
an existence which is independent of the human mind. Direct realism reflects
the notion that what people experience is an accurate representation of the
world. Critical realism sees our experience of the world as taking place in two
stages. First, as with direct realism, an object and the sensations emitted are
viewed as sufficient in themselves. Second, the sensations are processed, usually
subjectively, by the human mind. In research, direct realism reports what has
happened, but to understand why it has happened the causes of that (and the
interrelationships between those causes) have to be examined.
Underpinning these four options are two key concepts: ontology and
epistemology. Ontology is concerned with the nature of reality and, as Saunders,
Lewis and Thornhill put it, raises questions about the assumptions researchers have
of the way world operates and their commitments to particular views. They identify
two aspects: objectivism and subjectivism. The former espouses the view that
entities ‘exist in reality external to and independent of social actors’. The latter holds
that ‘social phenomena are created through the perceptions and consequent actions
of social actors’ (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2012, pp.130−131). Of course, we may
wonder what all that means in language we understand! Well, think about theories of
management you have previously studied. Do we assume that those theories apply
to all organisations − an objective view − or do we hold the view that managers in
organisations hold individual views about theories and ideas and thus theories
would not apply universally (a subjectivist view)? Epistemology is concerned with
what is considered acceptable knowledge, and how we find it. Do we seek rationale,
scientific data collection and associated analysis approaches, or adopt more
interpretivist approaches?
The deductive approach has a ’top down’ feel to it. It starts by defining research
questions at the outset, questions derived from general theory which already exists.
The design identifies ways in which the questions may be answered, and then
obtains and analyses and answers leading to either the confirmation of the general
theory or the modification of the general theory (usually requiring more testing).
The inductive approach is more ‘bottom up’ − theory is built from observations.
Saunders and Lewis define it as ‘a research approach which involves the
development of theory as a result of analysing data already collected’ (2012, p.109).
It is entirely possible to combine the two approaches in one design. For example, an
exploratory study might be used inductively and arrive at a particular theory, and
that theory could then be tested deductively to establish its credentials.
not restrict ourselves to one choice: we use what is needed to answer questions and
meet objectives.
Methods
To make the selected strategy or strategies work, appropriate methods must be
utilised. At one level, either a quantitative study or a qualitative study may be used −
referred to as mono method, with one technique or a very limited number of
techniques used. A multi method application uses a number of either qualitative or
quantitative techniques. A mixed method application involves both quantitative and
qualitative approaches. Again, the method selected should be derived from the need
to answer questions and meet objectives.
Time horizons
The time-related setting − the horizon − should also be considered a key element of
the research design. Should the time-setting be a ‘snapshot’, collecting data from
research participants in one period in time? This often involves collecting data from
groups of people categorised by pre-determined characteristics such as age, gender,
salary, prior educational attainment, pay grade, and so on. This is referred to as a
cross-sectional study. In such studies quantitative methods may be used to
describe the frequency of characteristics and to explain the relationship between
selected variables. But qualitative methods and analyses may also be used − for
example, to collect and analyse interview data. In contrast, a longitudinal study
observes changes and development in a particular setting over time. In business and
management, cross-sectional studies are often used to gauge opinions (of staff,
existing customers, potential customers) and longitudinal studies are used for tasks
such as reviewing and changing opinions and attitudes over time.
Saunders and Lewis define research ethics as ‘the appropriateness of the researcher’s
behaviour in relation to the rights of those who become the subject of a research project,
or who are affected by it’ (Saunders and Lewis, 2012, p.74). Consent should always be
obtained and the right to opt out at any time must be granted. Universities have
established written codes of ethical conduct as have many private and public
organisations.
• Does the theory, or do the conclusions flow logically from the findings?
• Are the summarised findings consistent with the data collected and
presented?
• Is it plausible to assume that the data are such that it would have been
collected by the methods stated?
• Are the methods employed those that you would expect to find in the
research strategy that has been articulated?
• Is there coherence between the research strategy and the research questions
and objectives?
This reading has summarised key considerations which underpin the research
process, which will enable you to complete your project effectively. All of them will
be explored in greater depth later in this module. Enjoy!
ESSENTIAL READING 2
As revealed in its abstract, this paper discusses three common research approaches:
qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods, along with the various research
designs commonly used when conducting research within the framework of each
approach. It is not an advanced paper and as such explains its content in clear and
unambiguous ways. Do note that in places it does add more to the content of
Essential Reading 1 (as in the instance of the consideration of phenomenology).
Remember that all the essential reading for this programme is provided for you. Click
the link (which may take you to the Online Library where you can search for a journal
article) or click ‘next’ to go to the next page and start reading.
SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE
Attempt the following exercise. This case study, drawn from Saunders and Lewis,
provides a scenario against which you can assess your learning from this topic.
TOPIC SUMMARY
In this topic, through the two essential readings and the case study, we have
engaged with the idea of ‘research’. We identified some examples of the nature and
content of research projects, and looked at the elements of the research process. We
have looked in particular at research questions and research objectives and the
nature and role of theory in research. Overarching all of that is understanding the
concept of ‘good’ research design, so we looked its components, especially in the
context of the ‘research onion’.
Do remember that this is only the first topic in this module so you may never have
encountered these ideas before. You may feel a little overwhelmed, or unclear about
how some of the elements in the research design are actually applied in practice.
Don’t worry! We revisit these aspects in depth as we progress through the module.
PROGRESS LOG
We recommend that you now complete your topic progress log. This should allow
you to monitor and assess your progress and your understanding of the topic before
you move on.