Methods and Methodology

Methods to refer to techniques and procedures used to obtain and analyse data. Methodology refers to
the theory of how research should be undertaken.

Plagirism V/s Similarity Index

Plagiarism: presenting the work and ideas of other people and passing them off as your own, without
acknowledging the original source of the ideas used

1 Stealing material from another source and passing it off as your own, for example:
• buying a paper from a research service, essay bank or term-paper mill (either specially written
for the individual or pre-written);
• copying a whole paper from a source text without proper acknowledgement;
• submitting another student’s work with or without that student’s knowledge (e.g. by copying a
computer disk);
2 submitting a paper written by someone else (e.g. a peer or relative) and passing it off as your own;

Similarity Index is the measure of how similar a specific content is to the text available in the
turnitin.com database. Turnitin will highlight ANY matching material in a paper—even if it is properly
quoted and cited. Just because it appears as unoriginal does not mean it is plagiarized; it just means that
the material matches something in the Turnitin databases.

ATTRIBUTES OF A GOOD RESEARCH

Academic Research is defined as a process of collecting, analyzing and interpreting information to

answer questions or solve a problem. But to qualify as good research, the process must have certain
characteristics and properties: it must, as far as possible, be controlled, rigorous, systematic, valid and
verifiable, empirical and critical. The main characteristics for good quality research is listed below:

1. It is based on the work of others.

2. It can be replicated and doable .
3. It is generalisable to other settings.
4. It is based on some logical rationale and tied to theory. In a way that it has the potential to
suggest directions for future research.
5. It generates new questions or is cyclical in nature.
6. It is incremental.
7. It addresses directly or indirectly some real problem in the world.
8. It clearly states the variables or constructs to be examined.
9. Valid and verifiable such that whatever you conclude on the basis of your findings is correct and
can be verified by you and others.
10. The researcher is sincerely interested and/or invested in this research.

A good research alone is of relevance in solving the problem under consideration. Hence
it becomes imperative that we understand the attributes that define a good research. Some of the
essential features of a good research are:
1.A good research has a well-defined goal. It should have a clear statement of objectives.

2.It should also have a systematic plan of word. A specific programme helps in monitoring and carrying
out the research within a budgeted time and cost framework and at the same time yields conclusive
results.! A g o o d r e s e a r c h c o n t r i b u t e s t o w a r d s t h e e x i s t i n g k n o w l e d g e
b a n k . I t a i m s a t i n c r e a s i n g t h e understanding of existing and new facts and ideas. Good
research is logical.

Research Philosophy

Research philosophy is a vast topic and here we will not be discussing this topic in great details. In business
and economics dissertations at Bachelor’s level, you are not expected to discuss research philosophy in a
great level of depth, and about one page in methodology chapter devoted to research philosophy usually
suffices. For a business dissertation at Master’s level you may need to provide more discussion of the
philosophy of your study, but even there, about two pages of discussions has to be accepted as sufficient
by your supervisor.

Discussion of research philosophy in your dissertation should include the following:

1. You need to specify the research philosophy of your study. Your research philosophy can be
pragmatism, positivism, realism or interpretivism as discussed below.

2. The reasons behind philosophical classifications of the study need to be provided.

3. You need to discuss the implications of your research philosophy on the research strategy in general
and the choice of primary data collection methods in particular.

The Essence of Research Philosophy

Research philosophy deals with the source, nature and development of knowledge[1]. Although the idea
of knowledge creation may appear to be profound, you are engaged in knowledge creation as part of
completing your dissertation. You will collect secondary and primary data and engage in data analysis to
answer the research question and this answer marks the creation of new knowledge.

In essence, addressing research philosophy in your dissertation involves being aware and formulating your
beliefs and assumptions. As it is illustrated in Figure below, the identification of the research philosophy
is positioned at the outer layer of the ‘research onion’, accordingly it he first topic to be clarified in
research methodology chapter of your dissertation.

Research philosophy in the ‘research onion’[2]

Each stage of the research process is based on assumptions about the sources and the nature of
knowledge.

The philosophy of a study will reflect the author’s important assumptions and these assumptions serve as
base for the research strategy. Generally, research philosophy has many branches related to a wide range
of disciplines. Within the scope of business studies in particular there are four main research philosophies:

1. Pragmatism
2. Positivism
3. Realism
4. Interpretivism (Interpretivist)

The Choice of Research Philosophy

The choice of a specific philosophy for a research is impacted by practical implications. There are
important philosophical differences between studies that focus on facts and numbers such as an analysis
of the impact of foreign direct investment on the level of GDP growth and qualitative studies such as an
analysis of leadership style on employee motivation in organizations.

The choice between positivist and interpretivist research philosophies or between quantitative and
qualitative research methods has traditionally represented a major point of debate. However, the latest
developments in the practice of conducting studies has increased the popularity of pragmatism and
realism philosophies as well.

Moreover, as it is illustrated in table below, there are popular data collection methods associated with
each research philosophy.
 Pragmatism Positivism Realism Interpretivism
Highly structured,
Mixed or multiple
Methods chosen Small samples, in-
Popular data large samples, must fit the subject depth
method designs,
collection matter,
method(s) measurement, quantitative or investigations,
quantitative and
quantitative, but qualitative qualitative
qualitative
can use qualitative
Ethical issues in data collection

• fully disclose your presence, affiliations and intentions to the online community during your research,
• ensure confidentiality and anonymity to informants;
• seek and incorporate feedback from those being researched;
• take a cautious position on the public versus private debate and contact informants to obtain their
permission (informed consent) before quoting specific postings.

Privacy:
Not causing harm or intruding on an intended participant’s privacy. This was in relation to the
participant’s right not to take part. Once participants have consented to take part in your research, they
still maintain their rights. This means that they have the right to withdraw as participants, and that they
may decline to take part in a particular aspect of your research. You should not ask them to participate
in anything that will cause harm or intrude on their privacy, where this goes beyond the scope of the
access agreed. We have also referred to rights in relation to deceit. Once access has been granted, you
should keep to the aims of your research project that you shared and agreed with your intended
participant(s)

Objectivity:
During the data collection stage this means making sure that you collect your data accurately and fully –
that you avoid exercising subjective selectivity in what you record. The importance of this action also
relates to the validity and reliability of your work.

Confidentiality and Anonymity:

Confidentiality and anonymity may be important in gaining access to organisations and individuals
(Section 6.3). Once such promises have been given, it is of great importance to make sure that these are
maintained. Where confidentiality has been promised, then you must ensure the data collected remain
confidential

Netiquettes
Use of the Internet and email during data collection will lead to the possibility of serious ethical, or
netiquette, issues related to confidentiality and anonymity. For example, it would be technically possible
to forward the email (or interview notes) of one research participant to another participant in order to
ask this second person to comment on the issues being raised. Such an action would infringe the right to
confidentiality and anonymity, perhaps causing harm. It should definitely be avoided.

Emotional maturity and individual rights:

The relatively greater level of control associated with interview-based techniques should be exercised
with care so that your behaviour remains within appropriate and acceptable parameters. In face-to-face
interviews, you should avoid over-zealous questioning and pressing your participant for a response.
Doing so may make the situation stressful for your participant (Sekaran 2003). You should also make
clear to your interview participants that they have the right to decline to respond to any question
(Cooper and Schindler 2008).

Avoid Irrelevant Observation:

The use of observation techniques raises its own ethical concerns (Section 9.3). The boundaries of what
is permissible to observe need to be drawn clearly. Without this type of agreement the principal
participants may find that their actions are being constrained (Bryman 1988). You should also avoid
attempting to observe behaviour related to your participant’s private life, such as personal telephone
calls and so forth.
MISC
Case Study
PG 132
Consultancy research for a not-for-profit organisation
Karen Handley, Oxford Brookes University

Thomas’s work placement is at a management consultancy firm, Spectrum, which provides strategic and
financial advice to organisations in the UK not-for-profit ('NFP') sector. The NFP sector has different
segments, the largest of which includes organisations which have a public interest objective, and which
are known as charities. These are typically organisations dedicated to improving the quality of life for
specific groups or individuals (e.g. children or the elderly), or focused on relieving poverty or distress.
NFP organisations are growing in importance in the UK economy, and have an increasing role in the
provision of public services (Brandsen and Pestoff, 2008).

One of Spectrum's clients is the Association for Voluntary Organisations for the Elderly ('AVOE'), a UK
organisation providing a range of services to charity members who give care and support to the elderly.
AVOE is traditionally known as providing information (e.g. a monthly newsletter on developments in the
elderly-care sector); representation (e.g. at government consultations on matters relating to the elderly,
including pensions); and support (e.g. advice on changes in Statutory Law; and networking opportunities
through regional conferences and workshops). The main source of income for AVOE is membership fees.
It also receives a fixed annual government grant to support its work.

In the past year it has become apparent that the cost of providing membership services is rising more
quickly than income from membership fees. Jill Baxter, AVOE's Chief Executive, recently asked Spectrum
to conduct an internal operational review to identify ways of generating additional income. Jennifer,
Thomas's work-placement supervisor, managed this project which was completed last week.

The internal review identified several opportunities as well as potential problems for AVOE. An
important finding was that AVOE currently provides more services to its members than was the case
several years ago, even though all members pay a flat fee which has not increased in the past five years.
For example, AVOE hosts some of its members' websites. The review also identified that although all
large charities supporting the elderly are members of AVOE, some of the medium-sized charities and
many of the small, regional and local charities are not (or in some cases have recently cancelled their
membership).
Following the review, AVOE asked Spectrum to undertake a research project to investigate what its
members really want from the umbrella body, and how it can attract new members. Jill Baxter, Jennifer
and Thomas met in AVOE's Manchester offices, and agreed that the principal research question would
be:
Why do charities supporting the elderly decide to join (or not) or leave an umbrella organisation such as
AVOE?
The answer to this exploratory question should enable AVOE to develop strategic options for increasing
membership revenues at a reasonable cost. Jennifer has asked Thomas to prepare a research proposal
for the new project.

Thomas is now considering how to design the research so that he can answer the agreed question. He
wonders how the research is situated in relation to the two 'paradigms' of research in the social
sciences, which are traditionally labelled positivist and interpretivist. Thomas has read a great deal about
the 'paradigm wars', but feels that the arguments about whether there is or is not an 'external reality'
are tiresome and unproductive. On the one hand he believes that these metaphysical debates are
relevant to a philosophical understanding of research, and how we 'come to know' what we claim to
know (and what we claim to have found out from research). But on the other hand, he worries that
some researchers spend so long debating the metaphysical questions that they fail to 'get on' and do
research which is useful to society. He suspects that some researchers feel constrained believing that,
the paradigm prescribes the method: the positivist paradigm prescribes quantitative methods; the
interpretivist paradigm prescribes qualitative methods; and each paradigm rejects the methods used by
the 'other side'.

Thomas wants to focus on what is pragmatically useful to answer the research question. He also wants
his research design to be robust and useful to AVOE. As he reads more about research design, he comes
to realise that in fact the distance between post-positivists and interpretivists is not as great as it might
seem (after all, he argues, is anyone really a 'pure' positivist these days?). There are important points of
agreement: for example, post-positivists and interpretivists agree that our understanding of reality is
constructed, and that research is influenced by the values of the researchers and the theoretical
frameworks they use (Reichardt and Rallis, 1994, pp. 85-91).

Reading further, Thomas is delighted to find that there really is a third way, which is the pragmatic
tradition developed by American scholars such as John Dewey and William James in the late 19th
century and early 20th century. Pragmatists are driven by the problems which people face, and want to
find out 'what works'. They also argue (e.g. Howe, 1988) that qualitative and quantitative methods are
compatible, and that good research design often involves mixed methods. This means that the decision
about whether to use qualitative or quantitative methods (or both) depends on the research question
and on the current stage of the research cycle (e.g. using inductive or deductive reasoning).

Thomas realises, however, that the pragmatic approach is no 'easy' option. He can't just 'do what he
likes'. Instead, he has to think hard - first about the research question; and then about which methods
are appropriate to answer it. After reading some of the literature on mixed methodology, such as
Tashakkori and Teddlie (1998), he writes a research proposal recommending a parallel mixed model
design. The proposed design combines qualitative and quantitative data collection, analysis and
interference processes.

 All existing members (approximately 80) will be asked to respond to an interviewer-

administered questionnaire with closed questions (for example, eliciting members' perceptions
of the utility of a range of services already provided or proposed), and open questions (for
example, asking for members' opinions about the value of membership). Questionnaire
interviews will be conducted by telephone. The questionnaire will gather categorical
information about members' size (e.g. measured by revenue); service provided (e.g. residential
homes, home care, in-hospital support, networking and support facilities); and geographic
coverage (e.g. national, regional or local).
 During the same time period, Thomas will organise focus groups with a sample of members and
non-members, as well as other stakeholders such as government officials who interact with
AVOE and with UK elderly-care organisations.
 Data will be analysed using quantitative and qualitative techniques. Questionnaire data will be
analysed using correlation, cross-tabulation and other descriptive and statistical techniques. The
focus group and open-question survey data will be analysed to look for key themes and
patterns. Particular attention will be given to respondents' comments on perceived benefits of
 different services. In addition, some of the qualitative interview data will be quantified - for
example by counting the frequency with which specific services are mentioned.

Later that week, Thomas emails the draft proposal to Jennifer. He wonders if she will accept the
argument for a research design based on pragmatist principles, especially as she is known as a
qualitative researcher with an interpretivist philosophy.

Questions

1. How does pragmatism differ from post-positivism and interpretivism, and are there some
shared beliefs?

Pragmatism occurs when it is unrealistic in practice of choosing between one position and
another. Research is situated in relation to two paradigms: Positivist and Interprivist.

On the one hand he believes that these metaphysical debates are relevant to a philosophical
understanding of research, and how we 'come to know' what we claim to know (and what we
claim to have found out from research). But on the other hand, he worries that some
researchers spend so long debating the metaphysical questions that they fail to 'get on' and do
research which is useful to society. He suspects that some researchers feel constrained believing
that, the paradigm prescribes the method: the positivist paradigm prescribes quantitative
methods; the interpretivist paradigm prescribes qualitative methods; and each paradigm rejects
the methods used by the 'other side'. As he reads more about research design, he comes to
realize that in fact the distance between post-positivists and interpretivists is not as great as it
might seem. There are important points of agreement: for example, post-positivists and
interpretivists agree that our understanding of reality is constructed, and that research is
influenced by the values of the researchers and the theoretical frameworks they use

2. How can Thomas respond if Jennifer insists on a 'pure' qualitative method?

Thomas will not respond well because a good research design involves mixed methods.
Qualitative & quantitative both are compatible. The decisions that which method to use
(qualitative & quantitative) depends on research questions and research cycle i.e deductive and
inductive reasoning.

3. If pragmatism argues that the research questions should drive the choice of research methods,
how can Thomas be sure of the quality of the research?

The quality of the research depends upon the method it adopt to conduct research. A good
researcher should identify the research design which is appropriate for the research question
and the technique which is used to collect the data. And in this case mixed method is most
suitable.