Designing the Research Framework: From Chaos to Case Study

1 Starting with Organised Chaos

In the initial research endeavours, the application of the originally planned qualitative research and case study methodology was experienced as somewhat chaotic and confusing processes, revealing the need to rethink the research framework, and create a significantly more comprehensive framework. In formulating a more fit-for-purpose framework, the researcher drew on various approaches already established extensively in the academic literature. The resulting research design framework driving the choices made for this research consists of two main parts, namely the research paradigm and the research process, with the figure showing the relationship between the two main parts and the levels within each (see Figure 3.1 on page 36).

The research paradigm covers abstract considerations about the underlying philosophy at the conceptualisation and formulation phases of the research. The paradigm is informed by the two-pronged nature of the research questions as already discussed in Chapter 1 about the descriptive-analytic aspects of state-society strife, and the theoretical-conceptual questions about the value of strife in governance, which draw from the literature on agonism (covered in Chapter 2). The research paradigm consists of a constructivist epistemology, an interpretivist-naturalistic theoretical perspective, inductive and deductive research approaches and filters of agonism, a concern for the view of those working within the state on governance practices and the researcher's affinity with local governance matters.

Flowing from the research paradigm, the research process incorporates pragmatic decisions about the research methodology, method, strategies, techniques and tools at the operationalisation, evaluation and resolution phases. The research process starts with the choice of a qualitative research methodology and the selection of the case study method. The iterative and interlinked research strategies of document review and interviewing, to collate and create data, are combined with the research techniques of document analysis and case study formulation to consolidate, reduce and reconstruct the data in the final case study.

The case study method serves as both the research method for, and the research output from, this research. The case study, nested within the thesis, provides "thick description" for "thick interpretation" (Ponterotto 2006, pp. 542-543) about past strife, responses that contributed to better outcomes for citizens and speculations to inform future thinking about strife.

2 Research Paradigm

Underlying Philosophy

'Organised chaos', or "order without predictability" (Cartwright 1991), seemed to characterise best the early progression of the research endeavours. As the research design unfolded, the

Li Pernegger | Stories of City Strife in Johannesburg: Agonism in Local Democracy and Service Delivery | Page 36

Figure 3.1: Designing the Research Framework – Paradigm and Process

Ontology

Research approach Inductive and deductive

Research filters

Agonism, affinity, state perspective Research methodology

Qualitative research Research method

Case study Research strategies

Document reviewing and interviewing [Data collation and creation]

Research techniques

Document analysis and case study formulation [Data consolidation, reduction and reconstruction]

Research tools

Hardware, software and human resources PHILOSOPHY

METHODOLOGY

METHOD

MEANS

CONCEPTUALISATION

FORMULATION

OPERATIONALISATION

EVALUATION

RESOLUTION Problem

Theoretical perspective Interpretivist-naturalistic

Epistemology Constructivism

Source: Own formulation (partly derived from Crotty 1998, p. 4; Niglas 2001; Jonker & Pennink 2010, p. 23)

researcher realised that the research design paradigm had not been sufficiently understood at the proposal stage of the research, nor in the initial process-oriented 'roadmap' for the research (see Figure 3.2 on page 38), which does not fully describe the actual iterative analytical procedures in the research process, as in Box 3.3 on page 61. The research paradigm represents "how the researcher views 'reality'" (Jonker & Pennink 2010, p. 25) at the

"philosophical level" (Niglas 2001, p. 2) and describes the underlying concepts for "the way knowledge is studied and interpreted" (Mackenzie & Knipe 2006, p. 2). However, the terminology and definitions for the different aspects of a research framework in the literature are contradictory, confusing and overlapping (Niglas 2001; Mackenzie & Knipe 2006, p. 4;

Porter 2006, pp. 307-308), and had to be clarified for this research.

Initially, the researcher made process decisions based on intuition, a common approach (Flick 2009, p. 440), and considered a positive contribution to precise research outcomes (Jick 1979;

Heron & Reason 1997). However, it became evident to the researcher that the originally planned qualitative research process contained an implicit but unclear shorthand about the make-up of the underlying research paradigm (Fischer, Miller et al. 2006, p. 406; Babbie 2010, p. 40). Further, the researcher also experienced, as many other researchers did, that various aspects of the research were 'messy' and 'chaotic' (Bryman & Burgess 1994, p. 2; Burawoy 1998, p. 10; Mellor 2001; Gabriel & Griffiths 2004, p. 152; O'Dwyer 2004; Rugg & Petre 2004, p. 26; Ritchie & Lewis 2005, pp. 202, 213; Yang & Miller 2008, pp. 75, 76; McGregor &

Murnane 2010, p. 420).

The experience prompted closer attention to the formulation of the research paradigm and the consequent research process. Hence, the research paradigm was deliberately and iteratively refined in this thesis in an approach labelled as the "circular model" (Flick 2009, p.

142), until a coherent research framework emerged with "practical steps" (Niglas 2001), seen as critical for good quality research outputs (Baxter & Jack 2008, p. 545). Organisations are seen as different to other subjects of study, with their own "special form of reality" (Jonker &

Pennink 2010, p. 4), which is hard to read due to their complexities (McKelvey 1997; Jonker &

Pennink 2010, p. 4). Hence, the research paradigm builds on approaches from the fields of public policy and administration, management, sociology and organisational studies for its structure (Morgan & Smircich 1980; Crotty 1998; Fischer et al. 2006; Yang & Miller 2008; Gray 2009; Tierney & Clemens 2011).

In interpreting the work of various writers on research for this research, the researcher tried to make sense of the paradigm, made up of the ontology, epistemology, theoretical perspective, research approach and research filters (see Figure 3.1 on page 36). These elements overlap each other (Mackenzie & Knipe 2006, p. 5), and influence the way the researcher 'sees' the world and progressively guide the researcher to a specific set of influences affecting the design of the research (Taylor & Callahan 2005; Mackenzie & Knipe 2006; Gray 2009, p. 19). The paradigm shapes how the knowledge was made (Crotty 1998, p. 4; Niglas 2001; Jonker &

Pennink 2010, p. 23).

Li Pernegger | Stories of City Strife in Johannesburg: Agonism in Local Democracy and Service Delivery | Page 38 Figure 3.2: Diagram of Roadmap at Start of Research

The problem State-citizen protest

Research paradigm and process Exploring a possible contribution to a new narrative from the state’s perspective - one that incorporates conflict as a constructive force of

democracy rather than as a destructive one – through a qualitative research methodology and the method of the case study of state-citizen city strife in Joburg using

agonism as a prism and periodisation; seeking evidence of agonistic practices of governance in state service delivery using empirical appraisal of state responses to selected conflicts (1996 -2012) through research strategies of document reviewing and

interviewing of state respondents

Q2 In considering the case of local government, what types of public protests characterised post-apartheid Johannesburg; how did the service delivery strife unfold over time; and how did the city administration respond to the protests?

Q3 To what extent were the city administration's practices agonistic; did these practices result in outcomes beneficial for citizens; and what were the constraints to agonistic practices of governance?

Working argument Citizens protest when perceive democratic ideals are unmet and service delivery is poor; state prefers conventional democratic approaches of conciliation in conflict processes and formal channels of protest; where agonistic engagement occurs, constructive change can occur but not always; factors against agonistic governance include state’s lack of appetite to see conflict as a constructive force for change; even if state-society link is agonistic, outcomes are not always positive; however, the state can potentially draw on agonism to perceive and manage conflict in new ways but constraints are evident

Agonism Broad approach and detailed normative framework

• Intersection of state and protest complex

• Scope for state to be more agonistic but challenges in doing so, including lack of appetite or insight

• These complexities and challenges not considered by theorists of agonism; some strategies and examples but power in practice uncertain and limited

• Notion of agonism itself has limitations

• Failures or successes of governance not solely due to absence or presence of agonism

• Agonistic interaction on its own is not enough

• Main value is state can draw on agonism in daily practice as appropriate and increase its ability to interact productively to realise constructive change

Source: Own formulation; refer also to Box 3.3 on page 61

Starting with the Problem

The research design as in any other research started with a problem leading to a set of questions (see Figure 3.1 on page 36). Taking an organisational perspective, a problem is a problem if "someone is bothered by something: a situation, a result, or specific behaviour (Jonker & Pennink 2010, pp. 5-6). Further, "curiosity is the reason for research" (Fischer et al.

2006, p. 47). The aim of this research is to satisfy the researcher's interest by asking questions about troubling strife and the state, describing and understanding the problem and applying the resultant insights to the problem (Jonker & Pennink 2010, pp. 10, 12). In this way, the problem and the aim of the research are integrally interlinked with the choices made in the design of the research (ibid., p. 13).

Ontology

The research paradigm starts with the underlying ontology, namely "the study of being… the nature of existence and what constitutes reality... ontology embodies understanding what is"

(emphasis in the original, Gray 2009, p. 19). Most writers on research in the academic literature do not delve deeply into this philosophical and abstract notion and many seem to sidestep it completely. For example, Crotty (1998) argues, as informed by his own research processes, that the ontological consideration does not necessarily impact on the research framework (ibid., pp. 10-12). Similarly, Seale (1999) argues that research practices can be separated from the research paradigm, as the researcher's awareness of the challenges in the research design process is adequate for him or her to make the appropriate decisions (ibid., p.

476). Specifically relevant to this case study, Watson (2006) cautions researchers and planners to be aware of how much and in what ways the underlying philosophy can inform their processes and that not being aware may mean that the negative effects of globalisation and liberalist democracy, namely deep difference and inequality, may be worsened (ibid.).

Like Gabriel and Griffiths (2004, p. 2), this study recognises that ontological positions represent an entire field of philosophical studies in their own right and it does not matter much which one is chosen as the lower level research framework options cut across all positions. This researcher agrees with Gabriel and Griffiths (ibid.) that what does matter more is that the researcher is aware of value judgments being made during the research process and the agenda driving the research and so did not explore the ontological aspects of the research paradigm further (ibid.).

Epistemology

Then, the epistemology "tries to understand what it means to know… and provides a philosophical background for deciding what kinds of knowledge are legitimate and adequate"

(emphasis in the original, Gray 2009, p. 19). In this study, the aim of the questioning is understanding and so the epistemological foundation of the research paradigm, namely the way one sees and understands 'reality' (Niglas 2001; Gray 2009, p. 19) or one's "overarching world view" (McGregor & Murnane 2010), is accordingly 'constructivism' (Lincoln & Guba 2000, p. 166). Simply put, constructivism details "the individual human subject engaging with

Li Pernegger | Stories of City Strife in Johannesburg: Agonism in Local Democracy and Service Delivery | Page 40

objects in the world and making sense of them" (Crotty 1998, p. 79). "Truth and meaning… are created by the subject's interaction with the world. Meaning is constructed not discovered, so subjects construct their own meaning, even in relation to the same phenomenon. Hence, multiple, contradictory but equally valid accounts of the world can exist" (emphasis in the original, Gray 2009, p. 20). Constructivism was well suited for this research framework as it tried to reveal "the real workings behind 'reality'" (ibid., p. 34).

Theoretical Perspective

The next step was to clarify a particular theoretical perspective, such as 'interpretivism', 'positivism' and 'post-modernism' (Gray 2009, pp. 21-29). The theoretical perspective of 'interpretivism', a way to view 'reality' in sociology (Burrell & Morgan 1979, pp. 22, 28), tends to go hand-in-hand with the constructivist epistemology (Gray 2009, p. 20). The interpretivist researcher tries to understand 'reality' and recognises the impact on the research of the researcher's past experience, make-up and presence in the research process (Crotty 1998, p.

67; Fischer et al. 2006, p. 408; Mackenzie & Knipe 2006, p. 3).

The theoretical perspective can have different foci, for example, 'naturalistic enquiry', 'realism' and ' phenomenology'; 'interpretivism' is used in this study, which is synchronistic with a focus on 'naturalistic enquiry' according to Gray (Gray 2009, pp. 23-27). Expanding on this, he explains that naturalistic enquiry means that the research does not try to generalise but rather it advances "an ideographic body of knowledge that describes individual cases. Within these cases, plausible inferences on events and processes are made, but this falls short of claiming causality. Phenomena can only be understood within their environment or setting; they cannot be isolated or held constant while others are manipulated. The real world is too complex, diverse and interdependent for this" (ibid., pp. 26-27). The uniqueness of the local natural setting for studying the 'real' world is a critical aspect of naturalistic enquiry (Seale 1999, p.

468; Ritchie & Lewis 2005, p. 3).

Whilst other theoretical frameworks could have been used in this study, the interpretivist perspective remained dominant. For instance, there were aspects of 'pragmatism' that responded to the aim of this research for a practical and problem-solving approach (Gray 2009, pp. 28-29). Likewise, Burrell and Morgan's (1979) interpretation of 'functionalism' also fit this research, sharing pragmatism's concern for understanding and applying "practical solutions to practical problems" (ibid., p. 26), as did other interpretations (Morgan 1980, p. 5; Gioia & Pitre 1990, p. 593; Hurt & Callahan 2013, p. 7). Further, highlighting even more subtle nuances in such perspectives, three of the 34 perspectives applied in organisational research detailed by Vibert (2004), namely his 'bureaucracy', 'institutional' and 'sense-making' theoretical perspectives are also mainly oriented to functionalism and could also have fit this research to some extent (ibid., pp. 85-88, 107-110, 134-139).

Research Approach

The research approach, namely the logic or the reasoning, used in this research is a combination of inductive and deductive approaches in response to the dual nature of the

research questions posed. 'Inductive' reasoning, namely that applied to thinking from "the particular to the general" (Babbie 2010, p. 22), or from the inside to the outside by looking for its internal, inherent logic (Gray 2009, p. 24), was used in assessing the case study. The case study itself was prepared through multiple inductive processes of working with the data to find general principles particular to the case study. This approach was undertaken iteratively and in tandem with 'deductive' reasoning, namely that applied to thinking from "the general to the speciﬁc" (Babbie 2010, p. 23), or from the outside to the inside by applying an external logic (Gray 2009, p. 24). In this research, the deductive reasoning is framed by the testing of the broad approach and detailed principles of agonistic practices.

Research Filters, a Note on Positionality

The paradigm is completed by considering the research filters for this research. The line of questioning uses the tenets of the notion of agonism as "sensitizing concepts" (Flick 2009, p.

431), to shape the research process and to filter and focus the data for the research. Alongside this, there is a concern in the research on the role of the state in processes of conflict, rather than that of the citizens, which has already well covered in academic literature. The researcher's affinity with municipal urban governance arising from her past professional involvement in development challenges related to local government (Jonker & Pennink 2010, pp. 27, 106; Creswell 2013, pp. 20-21), also shaped the research process.

The author has had a formal role in relation to processes of state-society conflict although this was some time ago. She worked for the city administration of Johannesburg, initially as an Architect and Project Manager between 1989 and 1996, and then as its Manager of Economic Empowerment and Business Support in the Southern Metropolitan Local Council between 1996 and 1999. Further, she had responsibilities for area regeneration in local government in the United Kingdom and then again for the City of Johannesburg between 1999 and 2006. She did not engage formally in the issues and stories covered in this thesis other than with informal trading management between 1996 and 1999. Since 2006, her role as a Chief Director in the South African National Treasury until 2011 provided continued engagement with local processes of governance and fuelled her ongoing interest in local government management matters.

Now, from the perspective as an observer, having had some distance to reflect more critically and objectively about her experiences in Johannesburg and having no immediate or specific involvement or direct interest in the issues raised in this thesis, she draws on her own experiences to think through some of these local government matters.

She accepts that agonism is a two-way process and that understanding the motivations and actions of the other parties is equally important and acknowledges that she does not have the same experiences with community organisations. However, given her long experience in government, which has provided her with rich insights into government processes, she has made a deliberate choice to consider the conflictual processes in this thesis from the vantage of the government's role.

Li Pernegger | Stories of City Strife in Johannesburg: Agonism in Local Democracy and Service Delivery | Page 42

In her learning process of research and writing of the thesis, the shift from a government to a purely academic environment was not an easy transition, and likely remains an incomplete one. However, the enrichment gained from being able to engage in a more autonomous space with other critical thinkers.

3 Research Processes

Pragmatic Decisions

The second main part of the research design framework, namely the research process, moves away from the conceptualisation and formulation stages of the research paradigm to the operationalisation, evaluation and resolution of the research framework. The research process includes decisions made in terms of five components, namely the research methodology, the research method, the strategies for inquiry, the techniques used and the tools for the research process (see Figure 3.1 on page 36), which are detailed in the rest of this sub-section 3.

Qualitative Research Methodology

A research methodology was needed that could uncover the complexities of city strife about state service delivery and the state's views and responses to it. Further, the methodology needed to be capable of finding evidence that state-society interactions in processes of conflict were agonistic or resulted in positive outcomes with the potential to contribute to the reframing of the state-society relationship in creative ways with potentially more democratic outcomes, though the researcher expected to also find that some processes and outcomes were destructive. The qualitative research methodology (see Figure 3.1 on page 36) is used for

"exploring and understanding the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem" (Creswell 2013, p. 4). Creswell describes this as the inquiry process typically comprising "emerging questions and procedures, data typically collected in the participant’s setting, data analysis inductively building from particulars to general themes and the researcher making interpretations of the meaning of the data" (ibid.). For this study, the qualitative research methodology was considered appropriate for four reasons as described next.

Firstly, the qualitative methodology is well suited to the theoretical perspective of interpretivism and typically paired with it (Mackenzie & Knipe 2006, p. 3). The way to understand the context that prompted the research questions is only possible through the qualitative methodology to describe its complexities (Creswell 2013, pp. 4, 19), although quantitative data was drawn on where necessary, especially in the counting of protests. The strength of the qualitative methodology is that, particularly important for identifying conflict management details, it surfaces data to "provide depth and detail to create understanding of

In document Stories of city strife in Johannesburg: agonism in local democracy and service delivery (Page 52-85)