CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 5.1 Introduction

This chapter aims to examine the research methodology used in this study so as to properly understand and identify the relevant approaches needed to adequately address the research questions underlying this research. The methodologies would further take into account the various components in formulating and designing research such as the philosophy of the research, approach and research strategies and techniques used in order to better understand the aims and objectives of the research.

Furthermore, issues such as validity, reliability and the ethics of research will be elaborated. In order to achieve the aim of the research, the following guidelines were formulated in order to fulfill each phase of the research process and progression:

1. To elaborate the significance of research and the meaning of research.

2. To discuss and justify the research approach adopted

3. To explore the research philosophy and establish the epistemological and ontological positions which form the foundation of the approaches undertaken.

4. To justify the research design chosen and theoretical framework used in the research.

5. To study and justify the most appropriate data collection techniques used.

6. To select the most suitable method for the analysis and interpretation of data collected.

7. To elaborate on the issue of research validity and reliability.

8. To discuss the issues of ethics in research and how it was strictly observed.

There are different methodologies used to understand how to conduct a research. Walsh (2001) argues that the most common approach views research as a series of practical skills and activities that are used in order to conduct a particular type of investigation. This type of research views a project from the perspective of what the researcher does and the methods in which they conduct the research. However, Kumar (1996) views research as a way of thinking and further explains that the approach aims to understand research by using critical questions, examination of data collected and using them to understand a problem more thoroughly.

94 5.2 Research Model

In order to adapt a model for a research design, there is a need to comprehensively review literatures on various research methodologies and designs. However, there are varied views, interpretations and frameworks used by researchers throughout the description of the research process. Also many authors are not categorically clear on how the sequencing of the research deliverables is within their models. Authors such as Saunders et al (2016) and Crotty (1998) argue that in most social research literature, the majority of the discussion and the terminology relates one way or the other to four elements namely methods, methodology, theoretical perspective and epistemology. This research has adopted a theoretical path based on Crotty’s (1998) study of the hierarchal levels of research and Saunders et al. (2016) ‘research onion’. This methodological pathway will guide the researcher in order to systematically approach and conduct the research study effectively.

Figure 5.1: Methodological Theoretical Phases (Adopted from Saunders et al., 2016; Crotty, 1998)

Each of these stages are now discussed insofar as they relate to the current research.

Phase 1: Research Philosophy

Phase 2: Research Paradigms

Phase 3: Research Classification

Phase 4: Research Approach

Phase 5: Research Questions

Phase 6: Research Choices

Phase 7: Time Horizon

Phase 8: Data Collection & Analysis

Phase 9: Validity, Reliability & Ethics

95 5.3 Research Philosophy

The research philosophy a researcher adopts is based on certain assumptions of ways they view the world. These assumptions form the basis for a researcher’s strategy and the methods to be used as part of those strategies (Saunders et al 2016). Saunders et al., 2012 (p.102) further argues that the philosophy a researcher adopts would be influenced by practical considerations and more so by the perception the researcher has of the relationship between knowledge and the process by which it is developed.

The relationship between the data collected or analysed and theory is one of the heavily contested debate amongst philosophers for centuries and the failure to properly understand philosophical issues can negatively affect the quality of research (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson 2008).

Easterby-Smith (2008) argues that there are three critical reasons why philosophical understanding of research is so important. Firstly, it assists in clarifying the research design. This not only includes considering what kind of evidence is needed and how it is collected and analysed but also how it provides appropriate answers to fundamental questions investigated in the research. Secondly, having a knowledge of philosophy helps a researcher to make the best decision in choosing which design is most appropriate. It guides the researcher to avoid wasting time on figuring out which design approach to use and also to recognise their limitations.

Thirdly, it helps researchers to identify and create designs that are not part of their previous research experience. It further suggests how to adapt research designs according to limitations of different subject areas.

Oates (2014) argues that, in understanding that researchers have different roles of either being subjective or objective, different research strategies can be both acceptable and good academic research because they have different “underlying philosophical paradigms”.

According to Saunders et al. (2016) a clearly thought out and consistent set of assumptions will make a credible research philosophy which will determine the methodological choice, research strategy, data collection methods and analysis. Clearly, it is the researcher’s assumptions about the world that determines what approach and strategies to use. Researchers in business and management need to be conscious of the philosophical commitments that are considered

96

throughout the choice of the research strategy because it has an impact on how research is understood and undertaken. Saunders et al. (2016) also agrees that the philosophy of research is an important foundational phase in any research process.

5.3.1. Epistemology and Ontology

Oates (2014) argues that philosophical paradigms consist of “different views about the nature of our world (ontology) and the ways we can acquire knowledge about it (epistemology)”.

Ontology can be defined as the assumptions about the nature of reality. It also shapes the manner in which we see and study our research objects; therefore, ontology determines how we see the world and the choices of what to research in a research project (Saunders et al. 2016). Easterby-Smith et al (2008) argues that amongst philosophers of natural science, the discussions and debate is between realism and relativism. Realism comes in several forms. Traditional realists begin by stating that the world is concrete and external and that only through observation can science progress to have a direct correlation with the phenomenon being investigated (Easterby-Smith et al. 2008). On the other hand, Easterby-(Easterby-Smith et al. (2008) argue that internal realists concentrate more often on the process of observation (epistemology) and they accept that scientific laws once discovered are absolute and independent from further observation. The relativist states that scientific laws ‘may not be quite immutable’. As Collins (2010) argues, the relativist identifies that there are many truths and that scientific laws are not just to be discovered but that these truths are determined by the views of the observer. Therefore, relativist ontology assumes that different observers would have varied views that what is important can vary from time and place.

O’Leary (2007) defines nominalism as a view that abstract concepts do not exist outside our mind and have no corresponding reality. Nominalism can therefore be seen as the opposite of realism. The position of nominalism argues Easterby-Smith et al. (2008), is that it includes the labels and names we associate with experience and events which are important.

Ontology must be considered together with epistemology as the two are equally dependent on one another and difficult to conceptually distinguish when discussing issues related to research (Crotty 1998). Crotty (1998) further argues that talking about the construction of meaning (epistemology) is talking about the construction of a meaningful reality (ontology). Therefore,

97

epistemology involves knowledge and embodies an understanding of what it means to know, that is ‘how we know what we know’ (Crotty, 1998:8). Easterby-Smith et al. (2008:60) defines epistemology as a ‘general set of assumptions about the best ways of inquiring into the nature of the world’. These positions have been depicted in the table 5.1 below

Ontology of Social

Facts Are concrete, but cannot be accessed directly Table 5.1: Ontologies and Epistemologies in Social Science (Adapted from Easter-Smith et al. 2008) Based on the analysis above, this researcher’s ontological position is that of relativism due to the fact that different observers would have varied views which are interpreted differently at various times and various places. This position was reached as Easterby-Smith et al. (2008) argued that ontology dealt with the nature of reality while epistemology dealt with the connection between reality and the researcher.