QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE METHODS

Broadly speaking there are two main philosophical positions from which research methods are derived in the social sciences. The first of these is positivism which is based on the assumption that "there is an objective truth existing in the world which can be revealed through the scientific method" (Cassell & Symon, 1 994, p. 2). It asserts that the social world and its properties should be measured by using objective means to gather facts. It relies on quantitative methods and key concerns are that measurements should be valid, reliable and generalisable. In this approach "theory is deduced as a result of testing hypotheses" (Cassell & Symon, 1 994, p. 2).

The other position is phenomenology, sometimes referred to as hermeneutics (see for example Gummesson, 1 99 1 ), which emphasises explanation based on appreciating and understanding the different constructions and meanings that people place on their experiences. There is no objective or clear-cut reality and researchers use qualitative methods to gather data which they attempt to accurately describe and interpret. "Theory is generated from the data collected, that is, it is ' grounded' in the data" (Cassell & Symon,

1 994, p. 2).

Researchers tend not to hold steadfastly to one approach or the other and "many .. . especially in the management field .. . adopt a pragmatic view by deliberately combining methods from both traditions" (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe, & Lowe, 1 99 1 , p. 22). Combined approaches also enable the researcher to take advantage of the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative methodologies and gain a wider perspective of the phenomena being studied. This will be discussed later in the chapter under triangulation.

The main differences between qualitative and quantitative methods are in the procedures used and in the emphasis and objectives of the study. The two are not mutually exclusive, however. Data collected qualitatively may be coded in such a way that they can be analysed statistically (Ghauri, Gronhaug, & Kristianslund, 1 995). In addition, as in this study, qualitative and quantitative methods may be used at different stages of the research and for different purposes.

In the first stage of this study where the construct of quality was being explored with three different stakeholder groups, it was important not to constrain subjects by using set questions and rigid formats. As the aim was to find out how these three groups defined quality and what they saw as its major dimensions, they needed to be able to give free expression to their beliefs and attitudes. Qualitative techniques are particularly well suited to this purpose. As they are flexible and unstructured, they yield rich open-ended data which are not constricted by predetermined ideas. They also provide in-depth insight into a phenomenon.

Ghauri et al. ( 1 995) also point out that at the stage of a research project where a problem is relatively unstructured, qualitative methods are most useful as they can lead to hypothesis building and explanations. In this case, the qualitative techniques of focus groups and individual interviews permitted a thorough exploration of the construct of quality where both researcher and subjects came to a clearer understanding of its meaning. They resulted in five phenomenological scales grounded in the views and perceptions of the participants.

Van Maanen ( 1 983) says that "qualitative methods .. . seek to describe, decode, translate and otherwise come to terms with the meaning, not the frequency, of certain more or less naturally occurring phenomena in the social world" (p. 9). So while they have a number of advantages, they also have some important limitations. The first of these is that there is considerable room for ambiguity as they reflect the perceptions, beliefs and attitudes of individuals and as such are highly subjective. This makes the data difficult to code as they can be open to many different interpretations. It is hard to rank order and attribute value to responses as each response is as valid as the next. However, this makes qualitative techniques well suited to a construct like quality where there is such a strong subjective element.

There are also threats to reliability in that it is difficult to replicate the data or repeat situations. If situations are repeated there is the problem of lack of control and the danger of collecting more and more data which in turn raises the problems associated with coding and interpretation. The amount of data generated by qualitative techniques can be overwhelming, presenting the researcher with information of great breadth as well as depth. As there is, therefore, an inherent danger that the research will just keep expanding, it is important to set limits on both the scope of the project and the data collection.

Quantitative methods, however, can be used to overcome some of these limitations. As their primary purpose is to "determine the quantity or extent of some phenomenon in the form of numbers" (Zikmund, 1 994, p. 88), they can be used to clarify ambiguities and the frequency of the occurrence of particular perceptions, beliefs and attitudes can be checked.

Quantitative methods are easy to code and interpret and can usually be computer scored. They are able to be replicated with different groups of subjects, they lend themselves to statistical analysis and are less prone to criticisms about validity and reliability. However, if used alone quantitative methods run the risk of overlooking important variables as they tend to be driven by the statistics rather than the data. They take a mathematical view of the world and are based on assumptions, like normal distributions, and consequently rely on a norm-referenced interpretation of data. This can impose limits on interpretation and can exclude other equally valid ways of viewing data.

For this study a questionnaire was designed based on the phenomenological scales derived from the qualitative data and from the literature. The questionnaire data were gathered from a sample of students and staff and were subjected to some statistical analysis. It is this interrelationship of qualitative and quantitative data that is so powerful in research. Rich, diverse and illuminative information was yielded by the qualitative methods of focus groups and individual interviews. The quantitative data gathered from the questionnaire will help to increase the validity of the study.

The central concepts of validity and reliability will now be discussed.