Business Research

©Authored by David McHugh

Bryman & Bell, Business Research Methods, 2nd edition,

Chapter 16

The nature of qualitative research

‘…qualitative research subsumes several diverse research methods that differ from each other

considerably.’

©Authored by David McHugh

Features of Qualitative Research

• An inductive view of the relationship between theory and research, whereby the former is generated out of the latter

• An epistemological position described as interpretivist, meaning that, in contrast to the adoption of a natural scientific model in quantitative research, the stress is on the understanding of the social world through an examination of the interpretation of that world by its participants; and

• An ontological position described as constructionist, which implies that social properties are outcomes of the interactions between individuals, rather than phenomena `out there' and separate from those involved in its construction

©Authored by David McHugh

Main Research Methods Associated With Qualitative Research

• Ethnography/participant observation• Qualitative interviewing• Focus groups• Language-based approaches:

conversation analysis; discourse analysis

• Collection and qualitative analysis of texts and documents

©Authored by David McHugh

The Main Steps in Qualitative Research

1. General research questions

2. Selecting relevant site(s) and subjects

3. Collection of relevant data

4. Interpretation of data

5. Conceptual and theoretical work

6. Writing up findings/conclusions

5a. Tighter specification of the research question(s)

5b. Collection of further data

Fig. 16.1

©Authored by David McHugh

Four Traditions of Qualitative Research

• Naturalism - seeks to understand social reality in its own terms; `as it really is'; provides rich descriptions of people and interaction in natural settings.

• Ethnomethodology - seeks to understand how social order is created through talk and interaction; has a naturalistic orientation.

• Emotionalism - exhibits a concern with subjectivity and gaining access to `inside' experience; concern with the inner reality of humans.

• Postmodernism - there is an emphasis on `method talk'; sensitive to the different ways social reality can be constructed.

Gubrium and Holstein (1997) : see Key Concept 16.1

©Authored by David McHugh

Hochschild 1983: see Research in focus 16.2

©Authored by David McHugh

Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research

• External reliability - the degree to which a study can be replicated

• Internal reliability - whether, when there is more than one observer, members of the research team agree about what they see and hear

• Internal validity - whether there is a good match between researchers' observations and the theoretical ideas they develop

• External validity - the degree to which findings can be generalized across social settings

Based on: LeCompte and Goetz (1982)

©Authored by David McHugh

Guba and Lincoln’s Criteria for Evaluating Qualitative Research

• Trustworthiness:

– Credibility

– Transferability

– Dependability

– Confirmability

• Authenticity:

– Fairness

– Ontological

– Educative

– Catalytic

– Tactical

©Authored by David McHugh

What is Respondent Validation?

Respondent (or member) validation - a process whereby researchers provide the people on whom they have conducted research with an account of their findings.

Forms:

• researchers provide each research participant with an account of what they have said to the researcher in interviews and conversations or of observations of participants in observational studies.

• the researcher feeds back to a group or an organization their impressions and findings in relation to that group or organization.

Practical difficulties:

• respondent validation may occasion defensive reactions and even censorship on the part of research participants.

• it is highly questionable whether research participants can validate a researcher's analysis, since this entails inferences being made for an audience of social science peers. see Key concept

16.3

©Authored by David McHugh

What is Triangulation? Triangulation:

• entails using more than one method or source of data in the study of social phenomena.

• is an approach that uses `multiple observers, theoretical perspectives, sources of data, and methodologies‘ (Denzin)

• has tended to emphasise multiple methods of investigation and sources of data

• can operate within and across research strategies

• can to refer to a process of cross-checking findings deriving from both quantitative and qualitative research (triangulation of methods)

• may often allow access to different levels of reality see Key concept 16.4

©Authored by David McHugh

©Authored by David McHugh

The Critique of Qualitative Research

•Qualitative research is too subjective

•Difficult to replicate

•Problems of generalization

•Lack of transparency

©Authored by David McHugh

Common Contrasts Between Quantitative and Qualitative

Research Quantitative Qualitative Numbers Words Point of view of researcher Points of view of participants Researcher distant Researcher close Theory testing Theory emergent Static Process Structured Unstructured Generalization Contextual understanding Hard, reliable data Rich, deep data Macro Micro Behaviour Meaning Artificial settings Natural settings

Table 16.1

©Authored by David McHugh

Definition of Action Research• Experiments on real problems within an

organization that are designed to assist in their solution

• This involves an iterative process of problem identification, planning, action and evaluation

• Action research leads eventually to re-education, changing patterns of thinking and action. This depends on the participation of research subjects (who are often referred to in action research as clients) in identifying new courses of action

• It is intended to contribute both to academic theory and practical action

Argyris et al. (1985) : see Research in focus 16.11

©Authored by David McHugh

Outcomes of Good and Effective Action Research

• It must have implications that relate to situations other than the one that is studied

• As well as being usable in everyday life, action research should also be concerned with theory

• It leads to the generation of emergent or grounded theory which emanates from the data in gradual incremental steps

• Action researchers must recognize that their findings will have practical implications and they should be clear about what they expect participants to take away from the project

Eden and Huxham (1996)

©Authored by David McHugh

Cognitive Mapping• A predominantly qualitative method

– used widely by business and management researchers in a variety of contexts

• Is complementary to action research – can be used as a problem-solving device– commonly used as a management consulting technique

• Used to capture individual perspectives – a tool for reflective thinking about a problem that

enables steps to be taken towards its solution

• Relates to the thinking processes of individuals, groups, organizations or even industries– researchers need to be clear about the level of analysis

they are adopting see Research in focus 16.12

©Authored by David McHugh

Interviewer tape-records the interview, rather than taking notes

Interviewee talks openly and spontaneously, rather than just answering the questions in a defensive manner

Interviewer maintains flexibility by following up on particular issues raised by the interviewee and varying the order of questions as appropriate

Interview takes place in a quiet, private setting

Interviewer maintains impression of actively listening to interviewee, maintaining eye contact and showing interest in what s/he is saying

Interviewer uses language that is comprehensible and relevant to the interviewee

Tape-recording is of a quality that is suitable for transcription and subsequent analysis

Interviewee feels positive towards the interviewer and about the process of being interviewed

An Example of a Part of a Cognitive Map to Show the Process of

Qualitative Interviewing

Fig. 16.2

©Authored by David McHugh

The Feminist Critique of Quantitative Research

• According to Mies (1993), quantitative research suppresses the voices of women either by ignoring them or by submerging them in a torrent of facts and statistics

• The criteria of valid knowledge associated with quantitative research are ones that turn women into objects. This means that women are again subjected to exploitation, in that knowledge and experience are extracted from them with nothing in return, even when the research is conducted by women (Mies 1993)

• The emphasis on controlling variables further exacerbates this last problem, and indeed the very idea of control is viewed as a masculine approach

• The use of predetermined categories in quantitative research results in an emphasis on what is already known and consequently in `the silencing of women's own voices' (Maynard 1998: 128)

• The criteria of valid knowledge associated with quantitative research also mean that women are to be researched in a value-neutral way, when in fact the goals of feminist research should be to conduct research specifically for women

©Authored by David McHugh

Feminism and Qualitative Research

Qualitative research allows:

• women's voices to be heard

• exploitation to be reduced by giving as well as receiving in the course of fieldwork

• women not to be treated as objects to be controlled by the researcher's technical procedures; and

• the emancipatory goals of feminism to be realized.

©Authored by David McHugh

However…• Many of the worst excesses of discrimination against

women might not have come to light were it not for the collection and analysis of statistics revealing discrimination (Maynard 1994; Oakley 1998).

• It is difficult to see why feminist research that combines quantitative and qualitative research would be incompatible with the feminist cause (Jayaratne and Stewart, 1991 & Maynard, 1994, 1998).

• Qualitative research is not ipso facto feminist in orientation and some writers have preferred to write about feminist research practice rather than about feminist methods (Maynard 1998).

©Authored by David McHugh

An Example of Participative Research

Brown and Kaplan’s work illustrates five aspects of participative research:

1. diverse parties, including management and union leaders, whose interactions could not be predicted or controlled

2. ideological choices, the researchers were unable to remain neutral in their research as they were pressed to take sides with either union or management (eventually deciding to work exclusively with management – who had financially supported the research initially)

3. diverse perspectives of different parties had somehow to be integrated, despite the high degree of misunderstanding and conflict that existed between them

4. research was organized in a way that enabled the use of resources to solve concrete problems as well as to generate abstract knowledge

5. outcomes of the research were complex and ambiguous, producing competing explanations that reflected multiple realities

Brown & Kaplan (1981): see Research in focus 16.15