Management Research Methods
The thesis statement of this essay is to establish a critical discussion of various philosophical assumptions which are being considered in the management research in this present scenario.
The research paradigm refers to the philosophical framework which provides guidance for the proper completion of a research process. It basically provides a brief idea about the common set of beliefs and actions within a particular research community about different types of processes (Kaushik and Walsh, 2019). It is identified that there are two major types of research paradigm such as positivism and interpretivism (Shakhnovich, 2018). The researcher is independent from the study in positivism paradigm and there are no provisions for human interest in this type of research (Park, Konge and Artino, 2020). On the other hand, the interpretivism approach integrates the human interest in a particular study where the researcher is not independent. The paradigm is objective in positivism whereas it is subjective in the interpretivism process (Rapley, 2017). There are different other paradigms for research study such as constructivism and pragmatism. The research paradigm is crucial for research study to describe the management approach and beliefs for different communities and organisational stakeholders.
The ontological system is a crucial lament of the research paradigm which focuses on the nature of reality (Buch-Hansen and Nesterova, 2021). On the other hand, it can be stated that the ontological assumption is concerned with the identification of the overall nature of the existence of a particular phenomenon (Zhong et al., 2019).
The ontological assumption for positivism believes that the reality is objective and external to the researcher (Berryman, 2019). On the other hand, the ontological approach for interpretivism believes that the social reality is a subjective process as it is socially constructed (Wiltshire, 2018). The process is effective for the identification of reality practices in management processes.
The epistemological approach is focused on how knowledge is obtained and the investigation of the valid systems which are required for the achievement of truth (Boon and Van Baalen, 2018). It is crucial for the development of a relationship between the researcher and reality (Hothersall, 2018). The epistemological assumption for positivism believes that the phenomenon which can be observed and measured can only be considered as knowledge (Holtz and Odağ, 2018).
On the other hand, the epistemological assumption for interpretivism focuses on the minimisation of the distance between the researchers and topic of the research (Zeng, Deschênes and Durif, 2020). The process is effective for the development of proper relationships between different aspects of management research and the researcher.
The axiological approach focuses on the information that a researcher values most in a certain research study (Zaidi and Larsen, 2018). It is important for a researcher as it provides information about the influence of the values on the research process and findings (Smyrnovaet al., 2021). The axiological approach is crucial for the positivism approach as it provides information for the practical measurement of values (Class et al., 2021). On the other hand, the axiological approach for the interepretivism process focuses on the development of values and interest for a research study (Shan, 2021). It is effective as it provides opportunities for the delivery of information regarding the values for different management parameters in a research study.
Critical Evaluation of Research Methods
The research method is a crucial process of a particular research study as it provides opportunities for the identification of proper tools and techniques for the effective completion of the research study (Snyder, 2019). It is identified that the three main elements of research methods are research philosophy, data collection process and data analysis procedure.
The research philosophy process is effective for the development of information regarding the belief, view and approach of the research. It is effective for the identification of the perception of different social groups about the factors included in a particular research study. It is identified that there are two major types of research philosophy such as positivism and interpretivism (Moon et al., 2019). The researcher is independent from the study in positivism and there are no provisions for human interest in this type of research. On the other hand, the interpretivism philosophy integrates the human interest in a particular study where the researcher is not independent (Blok, 2017). The process is objective in positivism whereas it is subjective in the interpretivism process. There are different other philosophies for research study such as constructivism and pragmatism.
The data collection process is another important factor of the research methods. It focuses on the nature of the information collection system. There are different types of data collection processes such as qualitative and quantitative, primary and secondary and descriptive and experimental. The qualitative information is effective for the development of solutions for the questions which are focused on ideas, meanings and experiences whereas the quantitative information is focused on the development of more mechanistic information of a particular topic (Aguinis, Hill and Bailey, 2019). The primary data is selected for the research study which is focused on the inclusion of original information which is collected from survey, observations or experiments. On the other hand, the secondary information refers to information which has already been collected by different researchers such as government censuses or previous scientific studies (Wall, Jenney and Walsh, 2018).
The descriptive information provides opportunities to collect data about the study subject without much intervention. The validity of the research in this process is dependent on the sampling technique. The researcher systematically intervenes in a particular process and measures the outcome of the research study. The validity of the research study is dependent on the experimental design procedure (Wall, Jenney and Walsh, 2018).
The data analysis process is effective for the analysis of the information which is collected in the research study. It is identified that there are two major types of data analysis procedure such as quantitative data analysis and qualitative data analysis. The quantitative data analysis procedure implements numbers and statistics for the analysis of the frequencies, average and correlation in descriptive research studies whereas the process provides cause and effect relationships in experiments. The qualitative analysis process is implemented for the understanding of the words, ideas and experiences (Assarroudiet al., 2018).
In present scenario, marketing research is required to sustain in competitive edge; that is why selection of prper methodology is essential. In this essay, a critical discussion on philosophical assumptions has been made along with proper evaluation of three essential research methods.
Aguinis, H., Hill, N.S. and Bailey, J.R., 2019. Best Practices in Data Collection and Preparation: Recommendations for Reviewers, Editors, and Authors. Organizational Research Methods, [online] 24(4), pp.678–693. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1094428119836485 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Assarroudi, A., HeshmatiNabavi, F., Armat, M.R., Ebadi, A. and Vaismoradi, M., 2018. Directed qualitative content analysis: the description and elaboration of its underpinning methods and data analysis process. Journal of Research in Nursing, [online] 23(1), pp.42–55. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1744987117741667 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Berryman, D.R., 2019. Ontology, Epistemology, Methodology, and Methods: Information for Librarian Researchers. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, [online] 38(3), pp.271–279. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02763869.2019.1623614 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Blok, V., 2017. Philosophy of Innovation: A Research Agenda. Philosophy of Management, [online] 17(1), pp.1–5. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40926-017-0080-z [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Boon, M. and Van Baalen, S., 2018. Epistemology for interdisciplinary research – shifting philosophical paradigms of science. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, [online] 9(1). Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13194-018-0242-4 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Buch-Hansen, H. and Nesterova, I., 2021. Towards a science of deep transformations: Initiating a dialogue between degrowth and critical realism. Ecological Economics, [online] 190, p.107188. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800921002470 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Class, B., de Bruyne, M., Wuillemin, C., Donzé, D. and Claivaz, J.-B., 2021. Towards Open Science for the Qualitative Researcher: From a Positivist to an Open Interpretation. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, [online] 20, p.160940692110346. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/16094069211034641 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Holtz, P. and Odağ, Ö., 2018. Popper was not a Positivist: Why Critical Rationalism Could be an Epistemology for Qualitative as well as Quantitative Social Scientific Research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, [online] 17(4), pp.1–24. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14780887.2018.1447622 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Hothersall, S.J., 2018. Epistemology and social work: enhancing the integration of theory, practice and research through philosophical pragmatism. European Journal of Social Work, [online] 22(5), pp.1–11. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13691457.2018.1499613 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Kaushik, V. and Walsh, C.A., 2019. Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm and Its Implications for Social Work Research. Social Sciences, [online] 8(9), p.255. Available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/8/9/255 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Moon, K., Blackman, D.A., Adams, V.M., Colvin, R.M., Davila, F., Evans, M.C., Januchowski-Hartley, S.R., Bennett, N.J., Dickinson, H., Sandbrook, C., Sherren, K., St. John, F.A.V., van Kerkhoff, L. and Wyborn, C., 2019. Expanding the role of social science in conservation through an engagement with philosophy, methodology, and methods. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, [online] 10(3), pp.294–302. Available at: https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/2041-210X.13126 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Park, Y.S., Konge, L. and Artino, A.R., 2020. The Positivism Paradigm of Research. Academic Medicine, [online] 95(5), pp.690–694. Available at: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/wk/acm/2020/00000095/00000005/art00016 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Rapley, E., 2017. “Seeing the light.” Personal epiphanies and moving towards interpretivism; a researcher’s tale of exploring teacher pedagogic practice. Ethnography and Education, [online] 13(2), pp.185–203. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17457823.2017.1315311 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Shakhnovich, V., 2018. It’s Time to Reverse our Thinking: The Reverse Translation Research Paradigm. Clinical and Translational Science, [online] 11(2), pp.98–99. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5866972/ [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Shan, Y., 2021. Philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. Philosophy Compass, [online] 17(1), p.e12804. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/phc3.12804 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Smyrnova, T.A., Bilova, N.K., Lynenko, A.F., Osadchaya, T.V. and Levytska, I.M., 2021. axiological approach to the training of students of pedagogical universities. Linguistics and Culture Review, [online] 5(S4), pp.171–182. Available at: http://lingcure.org/index.php/journal/article/view/1570 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Snyder, H., 2019. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, [online] 104(104), pp.333–339. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296319304564 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Wall, M.A., Jenney, A. and Walsh, M., 2018. Conducting evaluation research with children exposed to violence: How technological innovations in methodologies and data collection may enhance the process. Child Abuse & Neglect, [online] 85, pp.202–208. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0145213418300176 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Wiltshire, G., 2018. A case for critical realism in the pursuit of interdisciplinarity and impact. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, [online] 10(5), pp.525–542. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/2159676X.2018.1467482 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Zaidi, Z. and Larsen, D., 2018. Commentary. Academic Medicine, [online] 93(11S), pp.S1–S7. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/FullText/2018/11001/Commentary___Paradigms,_Axiology,_and_Praxeology.4.aspx [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Zeng, T., Deschênes, J. and Durif, F., 2020. Eco-design packaging: An epistemological analysis and transformative research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, [online] 276, p.123361. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652620334065 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].
Zhong, B., Wu, H., Li, H., Sepasgozar, S., Luo, H. and He, L., 2019. A scientometric analysis and critical review of construction related ontology research. Automation in Construction, [online] 101, pp.17–31. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0926580518305648 [Accessed 18 Jan. 2022].