3.0 I NTRODUCTION 99
3.1.2. R ESEARCH D IMENSIONS 100
Before we conduct this design research involving several research domains, it is important to identify and understand the process of conducting research and the use of the results of the research. This decision can lead a researcher to use a specific data collection technique in a certain way in the research design. In consideration of this research aim and domains, it is posited in applied social research that is aimed to ‘explore’ and to ‘create’ new pictures regarding a relationship between organizational cultures and design practices.
Each research project has fundamentally different purposes for the specific audiences who will see the study. Neuman (2012) presented the types of use of research and categories of the purposes of a study in social science. Firstly, the findings of social science research are used in broadly two key areas:
Pure basic and applied social research (also Easterby-Smith et al., 2012).
101
Pure basic research: aims to present knowledge and fundamental understanding about the social world, focusing on developing, testing, and supporting theories to deliver fundamental scientific ideas and ways of thinking to academic areas.
Applied social research: advances specific concerns about particular problems. The purpose is to offer practical solutions for problematic real life events that happen in organizations, social movements and so on. This does not necessarily require a long term general
understanding of the world, yet it is aimed to present specific solutions for practical problems with significant considerations about the generalisation of the findings to be applied to a specific question.
The debates on those two types of research have been, however, controversial especially in practice-based organization and management studies that emphasize the performance of private and public corporations. Because pure academic theory and the research cannot fully cover eclectic practical areas of those workplaces-e.g. the political concerns of researchers, multiple units and levels of analysis to conceptualize such complicated organizational events- those concerns are never divorced from the given research topic (Easterby-Smith et al., 2012; Langley, 1999).
In this connection, research must therefore clarify its purpose as determining the purpose of research can result in clarifying a way to approach a research aim by determining the basic logic of a research frame, to explore, to describe, or to explain about a certain topic. For this, three types of research purposes should be considered prior to setting the research design: exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory (Neuman, 2012; summarised table 3.1).
This research therefore considers about such complex human enactment in design practices in organizations, which is not easily replicated and tested under universal questions. To view
problematic situations and explore the contexts are the main purpose for this research. With a basic understanding of those, the next section will discuss a connection between theory and research to conceptualise this research design.
102 Table 3.1 Types of research by purpose
3.1.3. Distinction of Theory and Research
Prior to conducting research, identifying the research purpose is associated with the term ‘theory’.
The issue is whether the research aims to develop a theory, to test or generate a new theory for future research (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Neuman, 2012). The term theory implies to some extent the meaning of regularities that can explain the outcomes observed and a method of approaching a theory with a certain research technique determines whether to build or to test a theory in the research (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Thus, a major aspect of research is to characterize the nature of the link between theory and research and this is critical, especially in social science areas like natural science (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Neuman, 2011). Most topics in relevant social science research are
characterized by a higher level of abstraction, which is not easily implemented into those theoretical perspectives due to complex humanity issues (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Corbin & Strauss, 2008).
In this sense, this study takes into account its research domains, which encompass multiple research domains regarding a human being’s relevant material actions: design, organizational cultures, and international studies. It also leads us to consider the research audiences who will use the research findings. This thesis takes into account and understands the different meanings of theory. For instance, social science theory is referred to as an explanation of observed regularities to explain a certain social phenomenon (Bryman & Bell, 2011), and so it helps to clarify thinking, extends understanding, deepens discussion, and enriches analysis about the eclectic social world around us by providing clear explanations of abstract ideas about a given issue (Neuman, 2011).
However, all theories do not necessarily constitute a theoretical perspective, and sometimes it is featured in a higher level of abstraction in relation to research findings only (Neuman, 2012; Bryman
& Bell, 2011). Bryman and Bell (2011) stress that there are broadly two types of theories: grand
103 theories that operate at a more abstract and general level, yet that are used in a limited range of social research due to its abstract nature; and theories of the middle range that are characterized as
intermediate to general theories that are likely to focus on empirical enquiry. In similar ways, Neuman (2012) classifies a specific range of theories with three points according to the required empirical inquiries: Empirical generalisation, Middle-Range Theory, and Theoretical framework.
Empirical generalization is addressed in the lowest level of an abstract theoretical statement within a narrow range, and so the empirical generalization is built through a few simple and concrete concepts, so that it is rather easy to test and observe. For instance, “more men than women choose engineering as a college major.” which is only discussed in a relationship between gender and choice of college major.
Middle-range theory is discussed in more abstract way than the former one. This is focused on a specific substantive topic area and so it often needs multiple empirical generalizations and building a theoretical explanation by being placed between grand theories and empirical findings (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Neuman, 2012). So, the research topic often represents trials to understand and explain a limited aspect of social life such as organization studies (Bryman
& Bell, 2011).
Lastly, theoretical framework is placed at the most abstract level amongst them. It is also named a paradigm or theoretical system. It provides collections of assumptions, concepts and forms of explanations in a shared scope of research from the micro-level of social phenomena to the macro. Within the framework, the research tests parts of an abstract theory in a research topic and so the framework is necessarily involved in multiple relevant substantive areas of a research topic.
However, it is needed to be aware that the distinctions amongst the types of theories cannot be clearly explained with a certain boundary, because if an attempt is made to clarify what a theory is for research it can be prone to being dismissive of research where there are no clear connections with either grand theory or middle range theory. The term theory is often employed when using a certain collection of literature that informs a generation of research questions and influences research focus which is a little remote from the actual complexity of the social world, such as organizational issues (Bryman & Bell, 2011). It can become ‘naïve empiricism’. In other words, theory should be considered only as a guide for the collection and analysis of data to answer research questions.
On this basis, the next section will discuss the direction of theorizing to logically connect abstract ideas to empirical ideas and test them.
104