Qualitative Methods of Business Research: Research …gsom.spbu.ru/files/en/upload/master_program/materials/2009-2010/... · Qualitative Methods of Business Research: Research Design,

Dr. Maria RumyantsevaSt. Petersburg State University – Graduate School of Management

MIB ProgramSt.Petersburg – 2 November 2009

Qualitative Methods of Business Research:

Research Design, Methods, and Style

Class 1

Research Design, Methods, and StyleClass I – Introduction - 2 -

Course OutlineSchedule

Class # Date Time Topic1. 2

November13:00 –16:15

IntroductionTheoretical and philosophical background of qualitative research

2. 3 November

14:45 –18:00

1. Research designResearch question, sampling, methods, validity and reliability

3. 5 November

9:00 –12:15

2. MethodologiesQualitative methods: Case studies, participant observation and action research, interviews, archival data analysis

4. 6 November

13:00 –16:15

2. MethodologiesAdjacent quantitative methods: Survey, scalingOther adjacent methods: Social network analysis, experimental methods

5. 16 November

13:00 –16:15

3. Research Style Basic rules of academic writing: Composition and formPresentation of papers (1,2,3)

6. 17 November

14:45 –18:00

3. Research Style Basic rules of academic writing: Misused and Latin wordsPresentation of papers (4,5,6)

7. 20November

13:00 –18:00

SummaryPresentation of papers (7,8,9,10,11,12)


Course OutlinePaper Presentations

Research is a craft,

and as such,

it is best taught by doing


Course OutlinePaper Presentations – Method Papers

# Focus Paper Details

1. Theory Sutton, R.I. and B.M. Straw (1995). “What Theory is Not.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.

2. Methodology Edmondson, A.C. and S.E. McManus (2007). ”Methodological Fit in Management Field Research.” Academy of Management Review, 32(4): 1155- 1179.

3. Qualitative research Morgan, G. and L. Smircich (1980). “The Case for Qualitative Research.” Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.

4. Quantitative –qualitative research

Shah, S.K. and K.G. Corley (2006). “Building Better Theory By Bridging The Quantitative–Qualitative Divide.” Journal of Management Studies, 43(8): 1821-1835.

5. Single case studyresearch

Siggelkow, N. (2007). “Persuasion With Case Studies.” Academy of Management Journal, 50(1): 20-24.

6. Multiple case studyresearch

Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). “Building Theories From Case Study Research.” Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.

7. Theory-building Snow, C.C. and J.B. Thomas (1994). “Field Research Methods in Strategic Management: Contributions to Theory-Building and Testing.” Journal of Management Studies, 31(4): 457-480.


Course OutlinePaper Presentations – Exemplary Papers

# Focus Paper details8. Qualitative study

(single case study)Vaughan, D. (1990). “Autonomy, Interdependence, and Social Control: NASA and The Space Shuttle Challenger.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 225-257.

9. Conceptual study Grant, R.M. (1996). “Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm.” Strategic Management Journal, 17: 109-122.

10. Experimental research

Meloy, M.G., Fusso, L.E. and E.G. Miller (2006). “Monetary Incentives and Mood.” Journal of Marketing Research, 43: 267–275.

11. Quantitative research

Levitt, S. and S. Venkatesh (2000). “An Economic Analysis of a Drug-Selling Gang's Finances.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3): 755–89.

12. Participant observation

Bourgois, P. and J. Schonberg (2007). “Intimate Apartheid: Ethnic Dimensions of Habitus Among Homeless Heroin Injectors.” Ethnography, 8(1): 7-32.


Course OutlineIndividual Evaluation

Basis for current evaluation – Class participation and contributions– Group assignment and presentation

Basis for final evaluation – Research proposal

Grading policy 60% - Research proposal 20% - Course participation and contributions20% - Presentation


Course OutlineIndividual Evaluation – Research Proposal

26th EGOS Colloquium: Lisboa, Portugal, July 1–3, 2010

Deadline for submission of short papers to sub-themes: January 10, 2010

46 sub-themes Further information: www.egosnet.org

Submission of Research Proposals:

http://www.egosnet.org/�


Course NavigatorClass 1 | Introduction

Research Design1

Introduction

Summary

Research Methodologies

Research Style

2

3



Research Design1

Introduction

Summary


Research Style

2

3

Philosophy of Research

Instrumental Notions

Ethics in Research

B

C

Qualitative and Quantitative Research

Induction and Deduction Methods

Falsifiability Trade-offs in Theory

Building

D

Qualitative Research DefinitionA


IntroductionQualitative Research

What is qualitative research?


IntroductionQualitative Research and Methods

Qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them

Focus

Investigate the why and how, not just what, where, whenQuestions

Small and focused sample, rather than large and random sampleSample

Definition of Qualitative Research

Source: Based on Denzin, (1994).


IntroductionQualitative vs. Quantitative Research

How do qualitative methods differ from quantitative?


IntroductionQualitative vs. Quantitative Research

Exploratory

Inductive in nature

Theory building - used to explain new phenomenon or puzzling quantitative results

Qualitative Methods

Confirmatory

Deductive in nature

Theory testing - used to test hypotheses

Quantitative Methods

The strength of qualitative research lies in establishing content validity -do measures measure what a researcher thinks they measure?


IntroductionInduction vs. Deduction Methods

Two Methods of Reasoning

Inductive reasoning, by its very nature, is more open-ended and exploratory, especially at the beginning

From the more general to the more specific

“Top-down" approach

Source: www.socialresearchmethods.net

Deduction (Quantitative)

ObservationFinding

Theory FindingObservation

Theory

Induction (Qualitative) From specific observations to

broader generalisations and theories “Bottom up" approach

Deductive reasoning is more narrow in nature and is concerned with testing or confirming hypotheses

Most social research involves both inductive and deductive reasoning processes at some time in the project


IntroductionInduction: Example of Gravitation Law

In the inductive logic, all observations that seem to validate the theory, do not prove its truth

One counter-example can prove the theory is false

OR

If A implies B Then not B implies

not A

Newton’s law of gravitation was considered true for over 170 years

All observations seemed to validate his equation Eventually, telescopes became powerful enough to see a

slight discrepancy in the orbit of Mercury It was the General Relativity theory developed by Einstein that

first explained this discrepancy One counter-example (Mercury’s orbit) was sufficient to prove

that there was something wrong with Newton’s theory So far, Einstein’s theory of General Relativity has been

supported by all observations But Einstein’s theory now has the same status as Newton’s

theory of gravitation prior to Mercury’s case: It is highly credible and validated with all knowledge

available, but it is not proven It is only the best we have at this point in time

Source: www.wikipedia.org

SummaryInductive Logic


Research MethodologiesFalsifiability (1)

- 16 -

A hypothesis, proposition, or theory is scientific if it is falsifiable.

Adapted from Karl Popper


Example: “All men are mortal” - unfalsifiable“All men are immortal” - falsifiable – e.g. one dead man

Unfalsifiable theory can not be proved as true or false

Not all statements that are falsifiable in principle are falsifiable in practice

Unfalsifiable statements are important for science, they exist in scientific theories as unfalsifiable consequences

Example: “All men are mortal” is a consequence of the falsifiable theory that “every man dies before he reaches the age of 200 years“


Research MethodologiesFalsifiability (2)

- 17 -


Metaphysical research program – Popper’s definition for the abstract unfalsifiable ideas

Example: Ancient abstract idea of the existence of atoms led to corresponding falsifiable modern theories

Statements are senseless if they cannot be verified or falsified

Positivism

Popper’s falsifiability is merely a special case of the more general notion of criticisability

Falsifiability

Falsification is one of the most effective methods by which theories can be criticized


IntroductionFalsifiability Question

How important is falsifiability criterion for quantitative methods?


Research MethodologiesTheory Building Involves Trade-Offs

Is usually accurate and generalisable, but often overly complex

- 19 -

Source: Weick, (1979).

Theory Can be Assessed Along Three Dimensions:

Simplicity - ease of understanding and application Accuracy - conformity to the truth Generalisability - extension to other domains

Any single method of data collection results in trade-offs in the theory’s simplicity, generalisability and accuracy

Might be simple and generalisable, but lacks accuracy

Qualitative research Quantitative research

The solution is to build theory By alternating among methods By alternating among sets of data that provide one or more of dimensions By incorporating complementary research conducted by others


Research MethodologiesExample: Linking Qualitative and Quantitative Data

- 20 -

Source: Weick, (1979).

Example One Qualitative (continuous, integrated collection

of both Quantitative kinds of data)

Quantitative wave 1 wave 2 wave 3

Qualitative continuous fieldwork

Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative(exploration) (questionnaire) (deepen, test findings)

Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative(survey) (fieldwork) (experiment,

confirmation)

Example Two

Example Three

Example Four


Research MethodologiesExample: Induction in Physical and Social Sciences

- 21 -

In physical sciences three laws can explain 99 percent of behaviour, whereas in finance (and management) 99 laws can explain

at best three percent of behaviour.

Adapted from: Andrew Lo (MIT, Sloan School of Management)



Research Design1

Introduction

Summary


Research Style

2

3



Ethics in Research

B

C

The Logic of Qualitative Research

Epistemology and Methodology

Positivism Postpositivism Critical Realism Subjective-Objective

Debate Criteria of Good Theory Scientific Revolutions History of Social Studies

D



IntroductionThe Logic of Qualitative Research


The Qualitative Researcher’s Logic: The best way to understand any phenomenon is to view it in its context

All quantifications are limited in nature and look only at one small portion of a reality that cannot be split without losing the importance of the whole phenomenon

Frequently, the best way to understand phenomenon is to become immersed in it

Rather than approaching measurement with the idea of constructing a fixed instrument or set of questions, the researcher allows questions to emerge and change as (s)he becomes familiar with the phenomenon


IntroductionPhilosophy of Research – Epistemology and Methodology

Two Approaches to Knowledge


Epistemology

The philosophy of knowledge or of how we come to know the world

From Greek word epistêmê –knowledge

Methodology

The practice - is also concerned with how we come to know

Focused on the specific ways - the methods - that we can use to try to understand our world better

Epistemology and methodology are closely related

Qualitative and quantitative researchers usually operate under different epistemological assumptions and use different methodologies

Qualitative - Quantitative Debate is Philosophical

The choice of epistemological approach defines the choice of methods


IntroductionPhilosophy and Approaches to Qualitative Research

Positivism

Approach

Objectivism

Subjectivism

Philosophy

Postpositivism

Critical Realism


IntroductionPhilosophy of Research – Positivism (1)

Positivism Positivism is a philosophy that holds that the only authentic knowledge is based

on actual sense experience The purpose of science is to focus on what can be observed and measured Metaphysical (from Greek μετά (beyond) and φυσικά (physical)) speculation

is avoided

The key scientific method of positivism – empiricism - states that knowledge arises from experience Experiment is the main approach to discern natural laws through direct

observation All hypotheses and theories must be tested based on observations of the

natural world, rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation


Science is considered to be empirical in nature


IntroductionPhilosophy of Research – Positivism (2)

Universalism - processes can be reduced to physiological, physical, or chemical events

Neglect of human behaviour While it predicts behaviour of groups in terms of probability, it fails to explain

the behaviour of each individual Underestimates the role of observer who could unintentionally bias or distort

the event

Social reality produced by positivism is artificially conservative

Criticism of Positivism



IntroductionPhilosophy of Research – Postpositivism (1)

Postpositivism Postpositivism/Postempiricism is a philosophy and a model of scientific inquiry,

that attempts to reconcile the main criticisms made of positivism Human knowledge is not based on unchallengeable foundations, rather it is

conjectural There are real grounds for asserting beliefs These grounds can be modified or withdrawn in the light of further

investigation

Objectivity is not the characteristic of an individual, it is inherently a social phenomenon It is what multiple individuals are trying to achieve when they criticise each

other's work Perfect objectivity can never be achieved, but it can be approached



IntroductionPhilosophy of Research – Postpositivism (2)

Postpositivism and Methodology Because all measurements are fallible, the postpositivism emphasizes the

importance of multiple measures and observations

Each observation may possess errors Triangulation should be used across multiple sources to achieve a more

truthful reflection of reality


Theories that survive such intense scrutiny are similar to species that survive in the evolutionary struggle of variation, selection, and retention


IntroductionPhilosophy of Research – Critical Realism

Critical Realism Critical realism - there is a reality independent of researcher’s thinking about

it, that science can study All observations are fallible and have errors All theories are revisable

Critical realism is critical of human ability to know reality with certainty

The goal of science is to find the truth about reality

This goal can never be achieved



IntroductionSubjective – Objective Debate within Social Science

Basic Assumptions of the Subjective - Objective Debate

Source: Morgan and Smircich, (1980).

Subjectivist Approaches Objectivist Approachesto Social Science to Social Science

Core Ontological Assumptions

Reality as a projection of human imagination

Reality as a social construction

Reality as a realm of symbolic discourse

Reality as a contextual field of information

Reality as a concrete process

Reality as a concrete structure

Assumptions about Human Nature

Man as pure spirit, consciousness, being

Man as a social constructor, the symbol creator

Man as an actor, the symbol user

Man as an information processor

Man as anadaptor

Man as a responder

Basic Epistemological Stance

To obtain phenomenological insight, revelation

To understand how social reality is created

To understand patterns of symbolic discourse

To map contexts

To study systems, process, change

To construct a positivist science

Some Metaphors

Transcendental Accomplishment, text

Theater, culture

Cybernetic Organism Machine

Research Methods

Exploration ofpure subjectivity

Hermeneutics (interpretation theory)

Symbolic analysis

Contextual analysis of Gestalten

Historical analysis

Lab experiment, survey


IntroductionCriteria of Good Theory (1)

Source: Adapted from Kuhn, (1977).

Empirically adequate with experimentation and observationAccurate

Internally consistent, but also externally consistent with other theoriesConsistent

A theory's consequences should extend beyond that which it was initially designed to explain

Broad Scope

The simplest explanationSimple

A theory should disclose new phenomena or new relationships among phenomenaFruitful

Generalisable

1

2

3

4

Independent of philosophical position and approach criteria of good research remain the same


IntroductionCriteria of Good Theory (2)

Source: Adapted from Kuhn, (1977).

For any theory or research project the question of relevance or

WHY? Should be asked first


IntroductionScientific Revolutions

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

Source: Kuhn, (1962).

Science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge, but undergoes periodic revolutions or "paradigm shifts“, in which both philosophy and practice within a particular field are abruptly transformed

Science is Broken Up Into Three Distinct Stages of Development:

Prescience - lacks a central paradigm, comes first Development of New

Paradigm

Frequent Anomalies

Crisis of Normal Science

Scientific Revolution

Pre-paradigm Phase

Normal Science

Revolutionary science - as anomalous results build up, science reaches a crisis, at which point a new paradigm is accepted. New paradigm subsumes old results along with anomalous results into one framework

Normal science - scientists attempt to enlarge the central paradigm by "puzzle-solving"


IntroductionHistory of Social Studies

Timeline of Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research Development in Social Studies Qualitative research is one of the first forms of social studies

Quantitative revolution - qualitative methodologies diminish in importance - their reach is limited to anthropology and sociology, with substitute terms used for other fields e.g. ethnography, fieldwork, participant observation and Chicago School sociology

Qualitative research regains recognition and is widely applied in various disciplines, including application for business purposes

Heavy criticism of quantitative methods leads to development of new methods of qualitative research that address perceived problems of reliability and imprecise modes of data analysis

Broad acceptance of qualitative research in academia as valid scientific methodology, e.g. by journal publishers and editors

1950 1960

1970

1980 1990

20002009




Research Design1

Introduction

Summary


Research Style

2

3



Ethics in Research

B

C

Structure of Research Research Question Types of Relationships Hypotheses Unit of Analysis Errors in Reasoning

D



IntroductionStructure of Research

Traditional Research Structure Can be Compared to the Shape of Hourglass

Research question Research method Hypotheses Unit of analysis Observation Data analysis Conclusions Generalisation



IntroductionMajor Types of Research Questions

Descriptive Questions

Example: A public opinion poll that seeks to describe the proportion of people who hold various opinions

Describe what is going on or what exists


Example: A public opinion poll that compares what proportion of males and females say they would vote for a particular political party - relationship between gender and voting preference

Example: A public opinion poll that tries to determine whether a political advertising campaign changed voter preferences -whether the campaign (cause) changed the proportion of voters (effect)

Look at the relationships between two or more variables

Determine whether one or more variables causes or affects one or more outcome variables

Relational Questions Causal Questions


IntroductionMajor Types of Research Questions

Where do you see the largest part of management research?


IntroductionTypes of Relationships (1)

Example: A city’s ice cream sales and the number of ice stands

The relationship where two variables perform in a synchronised manner


Correlation does not imply causation

The relationship between an event (the cause) and a second event (the effect), where the second event is a direct consequence of the first

The misleading correlation between two variables is produced through the operation of a third causal variable

Example: A city's ice cream sales and the rate of drownings in city’s swimming pools

Example: Ice cream sales and hot weather

Correlation Causal Relationship Spurious Relationship

Relational Questions Causal Questions


IntroductionFreakonomics: Example of Spurious Relationship

Crime and Abortion in the US

Abortion1973 – Roe v. Wade case - abortion made legal in the US Typical child who went unborn was 50 percent more likely than average to live in poverty, 60

percent more likely to grow with one parent Predictors of criminal future: Poverty, single parent household, teenage mother, low

maternal educationSource: Donohue and Levitt, (2001).

Common Crime-Drop Explanations # of Citations Innovative policing strategies 52 Increased reliance on prisons 47 Changes in crack and other drug markets 33 Aging of the population 32 Tougher gun control laws 28 All other explanations 34

United States – rapid decline of crime rate in the 1990s

Causal (independent) variable

Correlation factors


IntroductionFreakonomics: Example of Spurious Relationship

How could this spurious relationship be tested?


IntroductionTypes of Relationships (2)

Patterns of Relationships

Sources: www.socialresearchmethods.net

Values on one variable are unconnected to values on the otherNo relationship

High values on one variable are associated with high values on the other / low values on one are associated with low values on the other

Positive relationship

Implies that high values on one variable are associated with low values on the other

Negative (inverse) relationship

E.g. curvilinear relationshipOther relationships


IntroductionExample of Curvilinear Relationship

Income vs. Propensity to Intoxication

Sources: www.economist.com

A recent study has shown that consumption of cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs in the UK is dominated by poor and very rich

Immobility of British society – a father’s income determines that of a son more than in any other rich country (OECD report, 2008)

Positions in life fixed at the top and bottom

Reasons:


IntroductionTime Horizon

Cross-Sectional StudyTakes place at a single point in time, captures a 'slice' or cross-section of whatever is observed or measured


Takes place over time, there are at least two and often more waves of measurement involved Repeated measures – could be both qualitative and quantitative, involve two or

more measurements (usually less than 20) Time series – quantitative waves of measurement over time (requires at least 20

observations)

Longitudinal Study


IntroductionHypotheses

When are Hypotheses Needed? A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for an observable phenomenon, it

describes what is expected to happen in the study

Hypotheses can be tested

Not all studies require hypotheses

Exploratory (inductive) studies do not require formal hypotheses as they explore the field in order to develop hypotheses that can be tested in future research

Hypothetical (deductive) studies use alternative hypothesis that serves as prediction and supposed to be supported by the study and null hypothesis that describes the remaining possible outcomes



IntroductionUnit of Analysis

Patterns of Relationships The unit of analysis is the major entity that is being analysed in the study

It is the 'what' or 'whom' that is being studied

Units of analysis in social science research include: Individuals Groups Geographical units (e.g. town, census tract, state) Social interactions (e.g. dyadic relations, divorces, arrests) Artefacts (e.g. books, photos, newspapers)



IntroductionErrors in Reasoning

Errors Based on Mistaken Assumptions Ecological fallacy occurs when conclusions about individuals are based only on

analyses of group data

Exception fallacy is a reverse of the ecological fallacy – it occurs when a group conclusion is reached on the basis of exceptional cases




Research Design1

Introduction

Summary


Research Style

2

3



Ethics in Research

B

C

Treatment of Research Participants

Scientific Misconduct

D



IntroductionEthics in Research – Treatment of Research Participants

Basic Rules Principle of voluntary participation requires that people not be coerced into

participating in research

This includes requirement of informed consent - prospective research participants must be fully informed about the procedures and risks involved in research and must give their consent to participate

Confidentiality – participants are assured that identifying information will not be made available to anyone who is not directly involved in the study

Anonymity – stricter standard – participant will remain anonymous throughout the study – potentially even to the researchers themselves. While the anonymity standard is a stronger guarantee of privacy, it is sometimes difficult to accomplish, especially in situations where participants have to be measured at multiple time points (e.g. pre-post study)


Protect against human experimentation at all costs

Allow anyone who is willing to be experimented onDilemma


IntroductionEthics in Research – Scientific Misconduct

Three Types of Research Misconduct

Source: U.S. National Science Foundation

Making up of results and recording or reporting them (e.g. only reporting positive outcomes and not adverse outcomes)Fabrication

Manipulation of research data and processes in order to change data/results or prevent a certain result

Reverse engineering – testing data, then formulating hypotheses

Falsification

Appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit

Citation plagiarism – wilful or negligent failure to appropriately credit other or prior discoverers. Also known as "citation amnesia“ or "disregard syndrome“. Arguably, this is the most common type of scientific misconduct

Plagiarism



Research Design1

Introduction

Summary


Research Style

2

3



Ethics in Research

B

C

D



IntroductionSummary (1)

Qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them

Qualitative methods are usually used for theory building – they are exploratory and inductive in nature

Quantitative methods are usually used for theory testing – they are confirmatory and deductive in nature

Theory can be assessed along three dimensions: Simplicity Accuracy Generalisability



Positivism is a philosophy that holds that the only authentic knowledge is based on actual sense experience Positivism neglects human behaviour as it predicts behaviour of groups in

terms of probability and fails to explain the behaviour of each individual

Postpositivism/Postempiricism attempts to reconcile the main criticisms made of positivism Objectivity is not the characteristic of an individual, it is inherently a social

phenomenon Postpositivism emphasizes the importance of multiple measures and

observations

Critical realism is critical of human ability to know reality with certainty

Science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge, but undergoes periodic revolutions or "paradigm shifts“, in which both philosophy and practice within a particular field are abruptly transformed



Ecological fallacy occurs when conclusions about individuals are based only on analyses of group data, exception fallacy occurs when a group conclusion is reached on the basis of exceptional cases

Ethical research is based on principles of: Voluntary participation Informed consent Confidentiality/anonymity

Research misconduct encompasses: Fabrication – making up of results Falsification – manipulation/reengineering of research data Plagiarism – appropriation of another person’s ideas or results without

giving a fair credit

Documents

Qualitative Methods of Business Research: Research …gsom.spbu.ru/files/en/upload/master_program/materials/2009-2010/... · Qualitative Methods of Business Research: Research Design,