Ata ul Musawir

Riphah School Of Business and Management

Riphah International University
Lahore, Pakistan
Please introduce yourselves:

1. Educational background

2. Current employment and industry (if applicable)

3. Any previous knowledge of or experience in research?

4. Why did you enroll in this program?

5. Career plans after graduation?

2
• Many everyday uses of the term ‘research’ are not research in the true meaning of the word.

• Research is NOT:

• Just collecting data with no clear purpose

• Reassembling and reordering data without interpretation

• A purely academic or theoretical activity with no or little relevance to reality

• A term to get your product or idea noticed and respected

3
• Research is the systematic process of studying a particular subject matter in order to increase
our knowledge of it.

• Although research often involves the collection of information, it is more than just reading a
few books or articles, observing the behavior of a few people, or asking people questions.

• It is a systematic process of asking questions, making guesses, and testing ideas based on the
principles of the Scientific Method.

• Everything that we can claim to know is a product of research.

4
Research allows us to test opinions using data in order
to generate facts.

Without research, all opinions would be equally valid

and facts would not exist.

Without facts, we cannot claim to know anything

about on a topic or have productive discussions on it.
5
The ancient Greeks believed that one of Apollo's most important daily tasks was to harness the four
6
horses (Aethon, Pyrois, Phlegon, Eous) that would pull his golden chariot, in order to pull the Sun.
• Rising wave of anti-intellectualism and a distrust of the
Scientific Method by people who do not understand it.

• Graduates increasingly challenged by uneducated and/or

‘street-smart’ people to defend the validity of their knowledge.

7
• Scientific illiteracy is causing people to be misinformed and
misled by corrupt scholars and corporations:

1. Historic misinformation about the dangers of smoking by

the tobacco industry:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21565663

2. Historic misinformation about the dangers of climate

change by the oil industry:
https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/holding-major-fossil-
fuel-companies-accountable

3. ‘Junk science’ and sensationalist media articles spreading

misinformation: https://bit.ly/2VTXy0N
8
• Managers with knowledge of research have an advantage over those without. Though you
yourself may not be doing any major research as a manager, you will have to understand,
predict, and control events that are dysfunctional within the organization.

• A grasp of research methods enables managers to understand, predict, and control their
environment.

• Knowledge of research and problem‐solving processes helps managers to identify problem

situations before they get out of control.

• Managers with knowledge about research methods will be able to identify, understand, and
apply the insights from relevant papers in business journals.

• Ultimately, knowledge of research helps managers make better decisions.

9
• Some organizations have their own consulting or research department, which might be called
the Management Services Department, the Organization and Methods Department, R&D
(research and development department), or some other name. This department serves as
the internal consultant to subunits of the organization that face certain problems and seek
help.

• Such a unit within the organization, if it exists, is useful in several ways, and enlisting its help
might be advantageous under some circumstances, but not others. The manager often has to
decide whether to use internal or external researchers.

• To reach a decision, the manager should be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both,
and weigh the advantages and disadvantages of using either, based on the needs of the
situation.

10
Internal Consultants/Researchers
+ Better acceptance by internal teams
+ Understanding of organizational structure
and culture
+ Availability after research concluded
+ Typically less costly than external
- Lack of an outsider’s perspective
- May be politically motivated or influenced
- May not be perceived as experts by internal
teams
- Possibility of organizational biases
External Consultants/Researchers
+ Typically have a wealth of experience from
previous research projects
+ Typically have more knowledge of current
sophisticated research and problem-solving
tools and techniques
- Usually cost more than internal
consultants/researchers
- Require time to understand the
organization and its culture
- Charge additional fees for services during
solution(s) implementation & evaluation
11
 Time Availability Nature of the Benefits
Constraints of Data Decision vs. Costs
Is the infor- Does the value
Is sufficient time Yes Yes
Is the decision Yes Yes Conduct
mation already of the research
available before of considerable Business
on hand information
a managerial strategic
inadequate exceed the cost Research
decision or tactical
for making of conducting
must be made? importance?
the decision? research?

No No No No

Do Not Conduct Business Research

12
• Lack of resources

• Research results would not be useful

• Decision has already been made

• Managers cannot agree on the information required

13
 Costs
Value •Research
expenditures
•Decreased certainty
•Delay of business
•Increased likelihood
decision and
of a correct decision
possible disclosure
•Improved business
of information to
performance and
rivals
resulting higher
•Possible erroneous
profits
research results

14
Source: Saunders, M.,
Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A.
(2016). Research methods
for business students (7th
ed.). Essex: Pearson
Education Limited.

15
Source: Saunders, M.,
Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A.
(2016). Research methods
for business students (7th
ed.). Essex: Pearson
Education Limited.

16
Source: Sekaran,
U., & Bougie, R.
(2016). Research
methods for
business: A skill
building approach
(7th ed.). John
Wiley & Sons.

17
Source: Sekaran, U., &
Bougie, R. (2016).
Research methods for
business: A skill building
approach (7th ed.). John
Wiley & Sons.

18
• The hallmarks or main distinguishing characteristics of scientific research may be listed as
follows:

1. Purposiveness
2. Rigor
3. Testability
4. Replicability
5. Precision and confidence
6. Objectivity
7. Generalizability
8. Parsimony
19
 Employee Commitment Example
• We will explain each of these characteristics in the context of the following example:
consider the case of a manager who is interested in investigating how employees’ commitment
to the organization can be increased.

1. Purposiveness

• The manager has started the research with a definite aim or purpose.

• The focus is on increasing the commitment of employees to the organization, as this will be a
beneficial in many ways.

• An increase in employee commitment will translate into less turnover, less absenteeism, and
increased performance levels, all of which would definitely benefit the organization.
20
2. Rigor

• A good theoretical base and a sound methodological design would add rigor to a purposive
study.

• Rigor is the quality of being extremely thorough and careful.

• Let’s say that the manager of an organization asks 10 of its employees to indicate what would
increase their level of commitment to the organization.

• If the manager depends solely on the basis of their responses reaches to several conclusions
on how employee commitment can be increased, the whole approach to the investigation
would be unscientific.

21
2. Rigor

• An approach to an investigation would lack rigor for the following reasons:

1. Incorrect conclusions because they are based on the responses of just a few employees
(lack of methodological sophistication).
2. The manner of framing and addressing the questions could have introduced bias in the
responses (lack of methodological sophistication).
3. There might be many other important influences on organizational commitment that
this small sample did not verbalize during the interviews, and the researcher would have
failed to include them (lack of a good theoretical framework).

• Conclusions drawn from an investigation that lacks a good theoretical framework and
methodological sophistications would be unscientific.
22
3. Testability

• After taking random selection of employees of the organization, and the study of previous
research done of the area of organizational commitment, the researcher develops certain
hypotheses on how employee commitment can be enhanced. Then these hypotheses can be
tested by applying certain statistical tests to the data collected for the purpose.

• Scientific research tends itself to testing logically developed hypotheses to see whether or
not the data support the hypotheses that are developed.

23
4. Replicability

• The results of the tests of hypotheses should be supported again and again when the same
type of research is repeated in other similar circumstances.

• If the results are repeated we will gain confidence in the scientific nature of our research.

24
5. Precision and Confidence

• Precision refers to the closeness of the findings to reality based on a sample.

• Precision reflects the degree of accuracy of the results on the basis of the sample to what
really exists in the universe.

• In business research, we are not able to draw “definitive” conclusions on the basis of the
results of data analysis. The reasons are:
1. We have to base our findings on a sample that we draw from the universe
2. The sample may not reflect the exact characteristics of the phenomenon we try to study
3. Measurement errors and other problems are bound to introduce an error in our findings

• We would like to design the research in a manner that ensures that our findings are as close
to reality as possible, so that we can place reliance or confidence in the results.
25
5. Precision and Confidence

• Confidence refers to the probability that our estimations are correct.

• It is not enough to be precise, but it is also important that we can confidently claim that 95%
of the time our results would be true and there is only a 5% chance of our being wrong. This
is also known as confidence level.

• The greater the precision and confidence we aim at in our research more scientific is the
investigation and the more useful are the results.

26
6. Objectivity

• The conclusions drawn through the interpretation of the results of data analysis should be
objective.

• The conclusions should be based on the facts of the findings derived from actual data, not on
our own subjective or emotional values.

• The more objective the interpretation of the data the more scientific the research
investigation becomes.

27
7. Generalizability

• Generalizability refers to the scope of applicability of the research findings in one

organizational setting to other settings.

• The wider the range of applicability of the solutions generated by research the more useful
the research is to the users.

28
8. Parsimony

• Parsimony refers to simplicity in explaining the phenomena or problems that occur and in
generating solutions for the problems.

• Economy in research models is achieved when we can build into our research framework a
lesser number of variables that would explain the variance far more efficiently than a
complex set of variables that would only marginally add to the variance explained.

• Parsimony can be introduced with a good understanding of the problem and the important
factors that influence it.

• A good conceptual theoretical model can be realized through interviews with the concerned
people thorough literature review of the previous research in the particular problem area.
29
8. Parsimony

• Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor) is a principle from philosophy.

• Suppose there exists two explanations for an occurrence. In this case the one that requires
the smallest number of assumptions is usually correct.

• Another way of saying it is that the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely
an explanation.

• Therefore, a research design that adequately explains a phenomenon with a smaller number
of variables is better than one that uses a large number of variables.

30
• The scientific method is an empirical method of acquiring knowledge that has characterized
the development of science since at least the 17th century.

• It is a step-by-step, logical, organized, and rigorous method for the analysis and interpretation
of empirical evidence (facts from observation or experimentation) to confirm or disprove
prior conceptions.

• Scientific research focuses on solving problems and pursues a step-by-step logical, organized,
and rigorous method to identify the problems, gather data, analyze them, and draw valid
conclusions therefrom.

• Thus, scientific research is not based on hunches, experience, and intuition (though these
may play a part in final decision making), but a purposive and rigorous.

31
• The scientific method was developed in the
context of the natural sciences, where it has
been the foundation of many important
discoveries.

• Although there have been numerous

objections to this method and to using it in
social and business research, it is still the
predominant approach for generating
knowledge in natural, social, and business
sciences.

32
33
• The hypothetico‐deductive method, popularized by the Austrian philosopher Karl Popper, is a
typical version of the scientific method. It provides a useful, systematic approach for
generating knowledge to solve basic and managerial problems.

• The hypothetico‐deductive method involves seven steps:

1. Identify a broad problem area
2. Define the problem statement
3. Develop hypotheses
4. Determine measures
5. Data collection
6. Data analysis
7. Interpretation of data
34
1. Identify a Broad Problem Area

• If the manager notices a drop in sales, incorrect accounting results, low-yielding investment,
disinterestedness of employees in their work, and the like could attract the attention of the
manager to do a research project.

2. Define the Problem Statement

• Scientific research starts with a definite aim or purpose. A problem statement states the
general objective of the research.

35
3. Develop Hypotheses

• The network of associations between the problem and the variables that affect it is
identified.

• A scientific hypothesis must meet two requirements:

1. The hypothesis must be testable

2. The hypothesis must be falsifiable (we can only prove our hypotheses until they are
disproved)

36
4. Determine Measures

• The variables in the theoretical framework should be measurable in some way.

• Some variables can not be measured quantitatively, such as unresponsive employees, we

need to operationalize this variable. Operational variables (or operationalizing definitions)
refer to how you will define and measure a specific variable as it is used in your study.

5. Data Collection

• Data with respect to each variable in the hypothesis need to be obtained

• There are two types of data:

1. Quantitative data
2. Qualitative data
37
6. Data Analysis

• In this step, the data gathered are statistically analyzed to see if the hypotheses that were
generated have been supported.

• Analyses of both quantitative and qualitative data can be done to determine if certain
relations are important.

• Qualitative data refer to information gathered through interviews and observations. These
data usually for objects than can not be physically measured, like feelings and attitudes.

• Quantitative data refer to information gathered about objects that can be physically
measured. The researcher could obtain these data through the company records,
government statistics, or any formal records.
38
7. Interpretation of Data

• Now we must decide whether our hypotheses are supported or not by interpreting the
meaning of the results or the data analysis.

• Based on these results, the researcher would make recommendations in order to solve the
problem in hand.

39
 The CIO Dilemma
• The Chief Information Officer (CIO) of a firm observes that the newly installed Management
Information System (MIS) is not being used by middle managers as much as was originally
expected.

• “There is surely a problem here,” the CIO exclaims.

1. Information Gathering through Informal Interviews

• Talking to some of the middle-level managers, the CIO finds that many of them have very
little idea as to what MIS is all about what kinds of information it could provide, and how to
access it & utilize the information.
40
2. Obtaining More Information through Literature Survey

• The CIO immediately uses the Internet to explore further information on the lack of use of
MIS in organizations.

• The search indicates that many middle-level managers are not familiar with operating
personal computers.

• Lack of knowledge about what MIS offers is also found to be another main reason why some
managers do not use it.

41
3. Formulating a Theory

• Based on all this information, the CIO develops a theory incorporating all the relevant factors
contributing to the lack of access to the MIS by managers in the organization.

4. Hypothesizing

• From such a theory, the CIO generates various hypotheses for testing. One among them
being: knowledge of the usefulness of MIS would help managers to put it to greater use.

42
5. Data Collection

• The CIO then develops a short questionnaire on the various factors theorized to influence the
use of the MIS by managers, such as:
1. The extent of knowledge of what MIS is
2. What kinds of information MIS provides
3. How to gain access to the information
4. The level of comfort felt by managers in using computers in general
5. How often managers have used the MIS in the preceding 3 months

6. Data Analysis

• The CIO then analyzes the data obtained through the questionnaire to see what factors
prevent the managers from using the system.
43
7. Interpretation of data

• Based on the results, the manager deduces or concludes that managers do not use MIS
owing to certain factors

• These deductions help the CIO to take necessary actions to solve the problem, which might
include, among other things:

1. Organizing seminars for training managers on the use of computers

2. MIS and its usefulness

44
In line with the principles of the scientific method, the characteristics of good research are:

• Purpose clearly defined

• Research design thoroughly planned
• Research process explained in detail
• Limitations frankly revealed
• High ethical standards applied
• Adequate analysis for addressing purpose of the research
• Findings presented unambiguously
• Conclusions justified
45