Knowledge Driven Research Methodology (KDRM) Model

The research aim and objectives established in chapter (1) drives the philosophical choice for this study. Research must be a systematic process to find the answers with a rational investigation of the facts behind the reasoning (see Table 3-2 and section 3.1.5 below). To establish the philosophical choice of this research, this study reflects on the research title, aim and objectives. A systematic process model, “Knowledge Driven Research Methodology”, (KDRM) is developed and adopted throughout this study based upon the literature review conducted in section (3) of chapter (2). Figure 3-3 below provides a clear and deep perception on how to systematically choose the philosophical stance of the study and, furthermore, to inform the choice of the research approach, strategies, choice and tools and techniques.

Step one of the KDRM model establishes the foreground of the research methodology of this study. Step (1) lays down the ground for the RM of this research. The second step portrays the ground for the epistemological and axiological choice in this study. The third step highlights the identification of the research methods and tools and techniques to conduct the research. Afterwards, the fourth step establishes the ground to choose the research strategies ( see also 3.1.11 below) based on the type of knowledge needing investigation. Step five lays down the choice of the tools and techniques of data analysis.

3.1.3.1 Research Methodology based on the Research Title and Aim and Objectives

Title of study:

A Framework for Transfering and Sharing Tacit Knowledge in Construction Supply Chains in the Context of Lean and Agile Processes

Aim of Study:

The aim of this study is to develop a framework for the transfer and sharing of tacit knowledge within the context of Lean and Agile processes and to improve the understanding and awareness of Tacit Knowledge in Construction Supply Chains.

113 • To critically review the concepts of Knowledge Management, Supply Chain Management and Lean and Agile processes in general and, specifically, within Construction Supply Chains.

• To examine the contribution of Tacit Knowledge in the application of Lean and Agile principles within Construction Supply Chains.

• To investigate and document the challenges associated with the effective Transfer and Sharing of Tacit Knowledge through the application of Lean and Agile principles in Construction Supply Chains.

• To identify the critical success factors associated with the effective Transfer and Sharing of Tacit Knowledge in Construction Supply Chains through the application of Lean and Agile principles.

• To develop and validate a knowledge communication framework that improves the level of efficiency in Construction Supply Chains through the application of Lean and agile thinking.

The research title, aim and objectives (see 1.1.5) reflect the fact that the research is investigating Lean, Agile and CSC processes and principles. This suggests the investigation of a particular course of actions and establishes the need for the investigation to explore procedural knowledge. Moreover, the aim and objectives of this research also reflect that the investigation is in the domain of both tacit and explicit knowledge.

The first objective demands to the investigation of the existing literature that falls within the domain of explicit knowledge. The second objective requires investigating explicit knowledge but also demands a validation of the findings through real-life perception through investigating the tacit (personal or procedural) knowledge domain. Likewise, the remaining objectives also demand investigation in both the tacit and explicit knowledge domains. The resultant, investigated explicit knowledge suggests employing the deductive (Qualitative) approach for this study. On the other hand, it demands inductive (Quantitative) study. However, the validation of the findings is also possible with qualitative (interviews) study. The need to employ qualitative or quantitative approaches, or both, to validate the findings depends on the source of knowledge (Unit of Analysis).

114 Figure 3-3: Knowledge Driven Research Methodology for Social Science Research

Source: Original This also establishes the investigation into personal and/or self-knowledge. Investigation into both personal and procedural knowledge establishes the existence of propositional knowledge (a combination of both personal and procedural knowledge; discussed in chapter 2, section 3). Having investigated both the tacit and explicit characteristics of knowledge establishes an early indication that this study demands more than one (1) research method to be adopted in order to fulfil the investigation into explicit and tacit knowledge. This shows that the study demands mixed or multiple methods of research.

Step (3) of the KDRM model establishes the grounds of the unit-of-analysis and the target population for this study. Since, personal and procedural knowledge needs are investigated for this study it requires the exploring of self-knowledge (see 2.3.4.2) and of the Unit of Analysis (UoA). This leads to stage (4) of the KDRM model, the choice of the appropriate research strategy (survey, grounded theory, archival research, etc.) to conduct the investigation.

This also establishes the UoA for this study based on the investigation into Tacit Knowledge and on the employment of a survey (questionnaire and interviews) as the chosen research strategy. To investigate Tacit Knowledge the UoA are the persons involved in construction processes who will respond to the questionnaire and the interviews. However, both types of knowledge requires

115 review of the literature and investigates the theory in the form of published media, books, journals and archive databases and documents. On the other hand, investigation into Tacit Knowledge requires a survey questionnaire (Quantitative), interviews (Qualitative) and observation. This leads this research into the inductive approach. On the other hand, the relevant strategy for explicit knowledge requires an investigation of the literature (Qualitative) and databases from different organisations (Quantitative) covering past years and identifying and analysing challenges, and CSFs, which leads to an deductive approach while testing the theory. See section (3.1.9) below for more discussion on qualitative and quantitative approaches and section (3.1.10) below for inductive and deductive approaches and the additional reasons for employing the varied method approach for this study.

Since stages 1, 2 and 3 of the KDRM model establish that personal perception (views, opinions) can be investigated using a mixed method approach it also establishes this investigation would conclude with multiple realities.

The ontological grounds of this research is based on, the personal knowledge (see chapter 2, section 3) that comes from the mental world (Tacit Knowledge) based on the experience of the knowledge holder. Similarly, an investigation of processes (procedural knowledge) could produce various results since the study demands the investigation of individual knowledge to validate the findings from literature review. This establishes that the ontological assumption for this study is subjective, which will authenticate multiple realities and further support the epistemological assumption as interpretivism (Anti-positivism). Moreover, having an investigation into personal knowledge leads the axiological choice of this research to the value laden approach (see 3.1.7).