Modern Organisational Theory and Applied Science - Assignment Example

Modern Organisational Theory and Applied Science Modern organisational theory and applied science demonstrate increasing sophistication of research methods and demands to the research process itself. This tendency is fully in line with the sophistication turn observed in the majority of research fields. Thus according to different sources, almost 90% of modern surveys in social, natural and applied sciences utilize different kinds of research methods and further computerized procession of data (Bishop, 2005). Modern studies in different areas of science are practically impossible without a comprehensive qualitative analysis in many aspects the methods employed are either used wrongly or have little practical effectiveness. As a result, many researchers reject empirical quantitative methods and make hypothesis based on their own vision of the problem that contradicts major principles of science, i.e.: verification of retrieved data. Properly selected and carefully employed research methods are a critically important part of any type of study either a survey or analysis of existing quantitative data. Correctly (from methodological perspective) received and interpreted data would provide a researcher with a variety of information and findings concerning different aspects of problem researched. The abovementioned makes the question of methods effectiveness and appropriateness to each certain case extremely important. This project will examine appropriateness and effectiveness of qualitative research methods in organisational studies as well as provide overview of the specific characteristics and methods of qualitative research. Main Discussion Historically, quantitative approaches and methodologies have been the first and foremost choice in the area of professional organizational and management research. The quantitative bias can probably be explained by the origins of modern organizational science which relies heavily on the natural sciences such as mathematics, economics, and sociology. Quantifiability and precision have traditionally been among the most essential features of these sciences and quantitative paradigm was undoubtedly the best choice to maintain and reinforce them (Patton and Appelbaum, 2003: 60). The primary task of a qualitative study is to provide the researcher with data that relates to a specific context or setting, for example, explaining participants’ perception of an organisation, understand participants’ understanding of various phenomena, reveal their experiences, motivations, etc. At the same time, extrapolation of the qualitative study results to other similar situations and contexts is also an important aspect of qualitative research (Hoepfl, 1997). There are various definition of qualitative research found in the literature. Strauss and Corbin (1990) define qualitative research as “…any kind of research that produces findings not arrived at by means of statistical procedures or other means of quantification” (p. 17). Denzin and Lincoln (1998) describe qualitative research as “...multi-method in focus, involving an interpretative, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them' (Denzin and Lincoln 1998: 3). Cassel and Symon (1994) claim that the most characteristic feature of qualitative research is “...a focus on interpretation rather than quantification, an emphasis on subjectivity rather than objectivity” (p.7). These three definitions identify the basic distinctions between qualitative and quantitative research and highlight the key features of qualitative methodology mentioned above. It shall be noted though that quantitative and qualitative research shall not be perceived as absolutely antagonistic to each other: “qualitative research usually does use some form of quantification, but statistical forms of analysis are not seen as central” (Mason 1996: 4). Qualitative research has a number of specific features that can be summarised as follows. Firstly, its philosophical underpinning is largely interpretivist which means that qualitative inquiry seeks to clarify how participants understand and interpret various social phenomena and eventually produce new social reality and different aspects thereof. Secondly, methods of data collection used in the qualitative research are characterised by greater flexibility and sensitivity than rigidly standardised and structured quantitative methods. And finally, qualitative research involves methods of analysis that facilitate understanding of details, contexts, and complexity. As Mason (1996) brilliantly words it, “Qualitative research aims to produce rounded understandings on the basis of rich, contextual, and detailed data. There is more emphasis on ‘holistic’ forms of analysis and explanation in this sense, than on charting surface patterns, trends and correlations” (Mason 1996: 4). These specific characteristics of qualitative research enable the researcher to use qualitative data as a good basis in building a variety of models and theories to evaluate different aspects of an organisation’s functioning. A model or theory built upon the qualitative foundation is likely to be more flexible than a model built on the quantitative basis. Furthermore, the improved flexibility does not require sacrificing the rigour and accuracy as many proponents of the quantitative approach claim. Instead qualitative researchers take a different perspective on the criteria of validity and reliability than quantitative researchers do. Defined in qualitative terms these concepts do not apply to the quantitative paradigm and visa versa. Thus, the replicability criterion is not applicable to qualitative research, while the criteria of credibility, transferability and precision are treated as critically important in assessment of qualitative research results (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2007). A number of theorists believe that qualitative researchers shall develop their own concepts of qualitative validity and/or elaborate other validity and reliability criteria for each specific case when qualitative methodology is utilised (Creswell & Miller, 2000). Qualitative research employs a broad range of study designs, data collection methods, and research strategies that share certain features such as inductive logic and focus on internal rather than external causes and factors. Generally, qualitative researchers tend “...to collect their data through sustained contact with people in settings where subjects normally spend their time – classrooms, cafeterias, teacher’s lounges, dormitories, street corners” (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998: 2). At the same time, each qualitative method or strategy has some unique characteristics that determine the researcher’s choice in each particular case depending on the purpose and objectives of study. There is no uniform perspective shared by different authors in distinguishing between or categorising of qualitative research methods and approaches. The terminologies, procedures and strategies are extremely diverse. Thus, Denzin and Lincoln (2000) list the following types or strategies of qualitative research: case study, ethnography, phenomenology, grounded theory, biographical, historical, participatory and clinical. At the same time, Patton (2002) identifies as many as 16 strategies: ethnography, reality testing, constructivism, phenomenology, heuristic enquiry, ethnomethodology, symbolic interactionism, semiotics, hermeneutics, narrative analysis, ecological psychology, systems theory, chaos theory, grounded theory and orientational. The below overview focuses upon the most frequently mentioned qualitative strategies Case Study Case study is a type of qualitative research strategy very frequently utilised in organisational studies. The main reason for its popularity is that it enable the researcher to reveal in-depth understanding of the topic on the one hand, and allows for certain transferrability and generalisability of study results to different settings and contexts on the other hand (Yin, 1994). Normally, two kinds of case study are identified: instrumental and intrinsic case study. The instrumental study is defined as an attempt “…to provide insight into an issue or refine the theory, while the case [itself] is of secondary interest; it plays a supportive role, facilitating our understanding of something else” (Stake 1994: 237). The intrinsic case study is, on the contrary, defined as: “...not undertaken primarily because the case represents other cases or because it illustrates a particular theory or problem, but because in all its particularity and ordinariness, [the] case itself is of interest… The purpose is not to come to understand some abstract concept or generic phenomena...The researcher temporarily subordinates other curiosities so that the case may reveal its story” (p.237). In other words, the instrumental case studies are used as teaching devices, while the intrinsic cases aim to develop or test theory or hypothesis. A case study may involve the use of combined data collection techniques such as interviews, observation, questionnaires, and document and text analysis. Besides, the multimethod approach in data collection and analysis is acceptable for a case study: qualitative and quantitative methods may be used together, though the nature of case study research is qualitative. Ethnography The ethnographic design of qualitative research is rooted in the field of anthropology where it was utilised to explore entire cultures. Ethnographic research bears much resemblance to other methods of qualitative inquiry with the researcher being a part of the explored environment and, therefore, an instrument of research. The process of data collection and analysis has cyclic nature in the ethnographic research. Once the researcher collects a batch or type of data, it may stimulate him to retrieve other data or involve other participants to confirm or challenge the findings (Byrne, 2001). Participant observation has traditionally been considered the main method within ethnographic research, but other methods such as interviewing and exploration of documents and images are also used (Creswell, 1997). Modern ethnography comprises a variety of methods and applications one of these applications being organisational studies. Research of organisational cultures is the area where ethnographic research can be very useful and more appropriate than other qualitative methods because it enables the researcher to identify the specific beliefs, ideas, meanings, and narratives adopted by representatives of a specific organisational culture (Patton, 2002). Field Research Field approach or fieldwork is usually defined as either a broad approach to qualitative inquiry or a method of qualitative data collection. It has been traditionally employed by anthropologists and implies immersion of the researcher in the study context: “...data tend to be collected in the field as opposed to laboratories or other researcher-controlled situations” (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998, p. 3). Data collected in the field is coded and thoroughly analysed through a number of ways to reveal the most essential findings. Action Research Another popular type of qualitative study design often employed for the purposes of organisational research is action research. Action research openly challenges the dogmas of traditional social sciences postulating that the process of data collection and theorising shall be active and involve actions of the researcher in the context of his study. This approach rests on the theory of the outstanding social philosopher and sociologists Kurt Lewin who defined action research as “a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action that utilises a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of the action” (Lewin, 1948: 202-203). As Lewin’s definition suggests during action research data and knowledge shall be gained only through action instead of mere observation. Over the recent decades action research has become a relatively popular method of inquiry in social sciences, especially social psychology, education and sociology. However, the number of organisational studies that employ this design still remains scarce: only a few studies have been published up to now mostly justifying the use of action research in organisational sciences and exploring the area of organisational learning and behaviour (Clark, 1972 and 1976; Brown, 1993; Chisholm, & Elden, 1993). Lately the organisational community started to pay more attention to action research: a number of researchers take advantage of this method’s benefits to explore dynamic organisational processes such as organisational change. Phenomenology Literally the meaning of this term means the study of phenomena: it is used to identify a specific type of qualitative research aimed at understanding of various phenomena found in the surrounding social reality. Phenomenology is a method utilised to describe elements of that reality: situation, experience, concept, and event. It requires immersion of the researcher in the social reality of participants as well as comparison of the researcher’s own experiences with those of the participants (Patton, 2002). A typical phenomenological study begins with an acknowledgement that our understanding of a certain social phenomenon is incomplete and seeks to improve it. While phenomenological study can hardly provide an accurate definition to the phenomenon under study, it definitely improves the researcher’s understanding of the phenomenon (Hancock, 1998). Grounded Theory Grounded theory is a systematic methodology often utilised in qualitative research. The key distinction of this methodology is emphasis on generation of theory using data collected during the study. Grounded theory can be defined as “…an inductive, theory discovery methodology that allows the researcher to develop a theoretical account of the general features of a topic while simultaneously grounding the account in empirical observations or data” (Martin and Turner, 1986: 143). Evidently, the logic of scientific inquiry is reversed in grounded theory as compared with the traditional research where data is used to test a hypothesis. Instead of starting research from hypothesis grounded theory requires the researcher to start with data collection and eventually use collected data to build a theory or model (Allan, 2003). As it has already been mentioned above, numerous descriptions of other qualitative research methods, designs and strategies can be found in the literature. They are based on varying philosophical assumptions and theories and often their use is limited to one single discipline; many of them are variations of the ethnographic and phenomenological methods. Heuristics, hermeneutics, ethno methodology, ecological psychology, and social interactionism are the most frequently referred to (Patton, 2002). Numerous methods of data collection are effectively used within the qualitative framework. The most common of them are interviewing, participant observation, fieldwork, analysis of written data and focus groups, but there are also such qualitative data collection techniques as historical research, mapping cultural settings and events, biographies, audio and visual techniques, and even genograms (Denzing and Lincoln, 1994). Each of these data gathering techniques has certain advantages and specific drawbacks, but the most important factor to consider is whether the chosen method is congruent with the purposes of a study. The most popular method of data collection used in modern qualitative research is interviewing. Modern form of this method as used in the qualitative research differs greatly from the layman perception of this term. In modern organisational research interviewing is treated as a specific procedure during which the interviewer and interviewee are involved in the process of eliciting and representing an interpretive relationship of the world (Denzin, 2001). This approach means that the interviewee is not simply a box with information to be retrieved by the interviewer. The interviewee is a unique person who often does not have quick and clear answers to the questions (‘narrative complexity’), may be affected by the perspective taken by researcher (‘contextual shifts’), and may eventually discover new meanings of his own experiences revealed during interview (‘horizons of meaning’) (Gubrium, and Holstein, 1995). The above overview of various types, methods and strategies illustrate the following characteristic features of qualitative research: Qualitative research aims to disclose subjective data produced by individuals, namely experiences, opinions, views, feelings, perceptions, etc Qualitative research has the potential to study social phenomena that unfold naturally, not artificially as, for example, during laboratory experiment Success of qualitative research greatly depends on the researcher’s ability to correctly identify the variable that will enable him to gain holistic perspective on the phenomenon being studied. Qualitative research is inductive in nature which means it seeks to develop theories, concepts and models to improve the researcher’s understanding of the social reality. Quantitative research is, by contrast, deductive: quantitative data helps to test existing concepts and theories Qualitative research is time consuming: data are collected through direct contacts with human beings either trough observation or interview. Consequently, samples in quantitative research are bigger, while qualitative research implies small samples Qualitative research implies sampling techniques different from those used in quantitative research: information is collected from a specific group/subgroup, while random sampling is rejected Validity and reliability criteria utilised to evaluate qualitative research differ greatly from those used to assess quantitative research. Each of the above characteristics of qualitative research may be considered a weakness or strength: the judgement depends upon the purpose of research. Apparently, in case of organisational research the majority of qualitative research features are beneficial, although the findings and outcomes of a qualitative study are often difficult to generalise to a population larger than the sample of participants. Conclusion The issue of justification of qualitative research in the organization sciences shall probably be approached individually in each particular case after thorough analysis of major strength and weakness associated with proposed qualitative methods. However, there is at least one essential justification problem stressed by a number of experts in the field. The nature of this problem is closely related to the underpinning of scientific research. Traditionally scientific justification of a research method utilises the criteria defined by the traditional positivist science which include reliability and validity. As a result, justification of the results and findings of qualitative research is difficult in terms of these classic criteria (Symon and Cassell 1998: 7), and the alternative criteria mentioned in the above discussion shall be used (Guba and Lincoln 1989). Only this approach ensures that qualitative research is justified within its own paradigmatic domains. References Allan, G. (2003). ‘A critique of using grounded theory as a research method’, Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 2(1), pp. 1-10 Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon Brown, L. D. (1993). “Social change through collective reflection with Asian nongovernmental development organisations”, Human Relations, 46(2), pp. 249-293. Byrne, M. (2001). Ethnography as a qualitative research method. AORN Journal, 74(1), pp. 82-84. Cassell, C., and G. Symon (1994). Qualitative methods in organizational research: A practical guide. London: Sage. Clark, P. A. (1972). Action research and organisational change, London: Harper and Row. Clark, A. W. (ed.) (1976). Experimenting with organisational life: the action research approach. New York: Plenum Chisholm, R. F., and Elden, M. (1993). “Features of emerging action research”, Human Relations, 46(2), pp. 275-298 Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). “Determining validity in qualitative inquiry”, Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-131 Denzin, N.K., and Y.S. Lincoln (1998). The landscape of qualitative research, theories and issues. Thousand Oaks: Sage Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. 2000. (Eds.). Handbook of qualitative research 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Denzin, N. K. (2001). Interpretive Interactionism. 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ehrich, L. (2005). Revisiting phenomenology: its potential for management research. In: Proceedings: Challenges or organisations in global markets, British Academy of Management Conference, Said Business School, Oxford University, 1-13 [available online at http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00002893/01/2893.pdf] Gubrium, J. and Holstein, J. (1995). The Active Interview, Thousand Oaks: Sage Hancock, B. (1998). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. Trent Focus Hoepfl, M. C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers”, Journal of Technology Education, 9(1), 47-63 Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York: Harper Row Martin, P., & Turner, B. (1986). “Grounded Theory and Organizational Research”, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22(2), p. 141 Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative researching. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications, Inc. Patton, E. and Appelbaum (2003). The case for case studies in management research, Management Research News, 26, 60-62 Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business Students (4th ed.). Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall. Stake, R. E. (1994), “Case Studies”, in Handbook of Qualitative Research, Denzin, L. K. & Lincoln, Y. S.(editors), Sage, pp. 236-247 Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc Read More