Quantitative v Qualitative research

Quantitative and qualitative research methods have been adopted processes used in the built environment. Quantitative research is aligned to the representation of numbers used within a positivism approach. Glatthorn (1998) describes quantitative research as being derived from a positivist epistemology, which is adopted for studies that are experimental in nature, using measurement and a search for relationships whereas qualitative research is based on a phenomenological view. Phenomenology was a movement which originated by Edmond Husserl in around 1905 and is a philosophy which contends that reality consists of objects and events which are understood in human consciousness and not that of anything independent of human consciousness. Studies derived from a qualitative stance are associated with meaning and understanding which take place in a natural environment (McMillan, 1996). A qualitative study is therefore confirmed to be associated with an interpretive research strategy. Although there is little available research on small construction firms, qualitative analysis has become dominant (Shaw, 1999). Biggam (2008) justifies what is quantitative or qualitative research by stating that in general quantitative research answers the how questions and qualitative research answers the why questions. Qualitative research is based on a phenomenological view. Studies derived from a qualitative stance are associated with meaning and understanding which take place in a natural environment (McMillan, 1996).

Table 3-2 indicates the different elements associated with quantitative and qualitative research. The quantitative and qualitative columns indicate different criteria that will have influenced the choice of research method. The research program does not have to be either quantitative or qualitative but can be improved and culminate in a more informed result by employing a mixture of both methods (King et al., 1994). It can be seen that neither method is a complete solution to problems. Depending on circumstances, different approaches are advisable and useful. Table 3-2 broadly sets out how both strands of research have come to be associated with certain types of enquiry in academia.

103 There are five qualitative strategies that Creswell (2009) listed, including:

 Ethnography – the researcher studies a group in a natural setting over a prolonged period of time by collecting observational and interview data (Creswell, 2007).

 Grounded Theory – The researcher derives a general, abstract theory of a process, action, or inter-action grounded in the view of the participants. Multiple stages of data collection and the refinement and interrelationship of categories of information (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss and Corbin, 1990). Two characteristics of this design are the comparison of data with emerging categories and theoretical sampling of different groups to maximize the similarities and the differences of information.

 Case Studies – the researcher explores in-depth a programme, event, activity, process, or one or more individuals. Case studies are bound by time and activity, researchers collect detailed information using a variety of collection procedures over a given time period (Stake, 1995).

 Phenomenological research – the researcher identifies the essence of human experiences about a phenomenon as described by participants. This is accomplished by studying a small number of subjects through extensive and prolonged engagement thereby developing patterns and relationship of meaning (Moustakas, 1994).

 Narrative research – the researchers studies individuals and asks them to provide stories of themselves. This information is collected by the researcher into a narrative chronology. In the end the narrative combines view from the participants and researcher’s life in a collaborative narrative (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000).

104

Table 3-2: The So-Called Quantitative-Qualitative Dichotomy

Quantitative Qualitative

Interested in finding out numerical qualities of an event or case: how many, how much?

Interested in the nature and essence of an event, person or case

Goal of investigation is prediction, control, description, hypothesis-testing

Goal of investigation is understanding, description, discovery, hypothesis- generation

Uses hard data (numbers) Soft data (words or images from documents or observations, etc.)

Objective Subjective

Usually tackles macro-issues, using large, random and representative samples

Tends to analyse micro-issues, using small, non-random and non-

representative samples

Employs a deductive research strategy Employs an inductive research strategy Its epistemological orientation is argued

to be rooted in the positivist tradition

Its epistemological orientation is argued to be rooted in the interpretative tradition Aims at identifying general patterns and

relationships

Aims at interpreting events of historical and cultural significance

Measures are created prior to data collection and are standardized

Measures are created during interaction with data and are often specific to the individual setting

Survey methodology Interview (in-depth case-study) Procedures are standard, replication is

presumed

Research procedures are particular, replication rare

Value-free Political

Abstract Grounded

Concepts are in the form of variables Concepts are in the form of themes and motifs

Findings attempt to be comprehensive, holistic and generalisable

Findings are seen to be precise, narrow and not generalisable

105

Source: Adapted from Mason (1998); Silverman (2000); Neuman (2000): 123;

Danermark et al. (2002).

Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) have used “insider accounts” as ethnographic research technique for listening and asking questions in the context of sociological and anthropological studies. Ekanem (2007) wanted to develop “insider accounts”

into a research method in its own right to overcome the shortcomings of small firm research (Curran and Blackburn, 2001). The philosophical underpinning of “insider accounts” is to treat people as subjects and therefore they are able to produce accounts of their world.

Atkinson and Hammersley (1994) described similarities as detailed below between “insider accounts” and ethnography.

1. To explore the nature of phenomenon rather than testing hypotheses 2. To work with unstructured and semi-structured data

3. To assess the data which involves explicit, verbal and explanatory descriptions, interpretation of the meanings and functions of human actions?

“Insider accounts” has its origins in ethnography. Its approach is neither purely ethnographic nor as Glaser and Strauss (1967)’s grounded theory. Ekanem (2007) modified “insider accounts” into a longitudinal, case study methodological approach consisting of “in-depth interviews” and “direct observation”. It is therefore different in the following ways:

1. Interviews are semi-structured as opposed to unstructured which are found in “ethnography” and “grounded theory”.

2. The researcher is only present at the place of research sporadically for example to carry out interviews.

3. More reliance is placed on in-depth interviews and observations taken whilst the researcher is at the organization. Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) place more emphasis on “participant” observation as in ethnographic and grounded theory.

106 This approach to “Insider accounts” research is much more practical than

“ethnography” particularly in small firm research, which by definition employs less than 50 people; the researcher would become conspicuous, in the way, and his presence is likely to become less welcome.

Other problems associated with ethnographic study include bias Hammersley and Atkinson (1995). By “going native”, in an ethnographic study, the researcher becomes a member of the organization and is involved in the everyday lives of the subjects. The researcher cannot become dispassionate or detached, thus through bias is unable to think theoretically about what he has seen (Glaser and Strauss, 1967).

Through less familiarity with the organisation and its staff “insider accounts” provides detachment between the researcher and the organization. Because “insider accounts” provides a good understanding of the small firms and that of the owner-manager it helps to answer the basic questions relating to the decision-making process (Ekanem, 2007).