Research method

According to McMillan and Schumacher (2006:12), the research method is an explanation of how data was collected, analysed, interpreted, and assigned meaning.

Saunders et al., (2016:720) defined methodology as “the theory of how research should be undertaken, including the theoretical and philosophical assumptions upon which research is based and the implications of these for the method or methods adopted”. The method is very important to describe in detail as it ensures accuracy and relevancy of data collected and analysed to enable realisation of the research objectives. The research onion in Figure 3.1, displays three methodical choices guided by the choice of applying a numeric or non-numeric data collection method in the design of the study. There are three main research methods in the social sciences and psychological studies namely: quantitative, mixed-methods, and qualitative are discussed, and the argument for their appropriateness in this study design is given in the sub-sections that follow.

3.2.3.1 Quantitative

Quantitative research is well suited to numbers and logic while qualitative research includes the interpretation of words and images. According to McMillan and Schumacher (2006:12), “their differences are said to be grounded in the variances of how people understand the world, the nature of knowledge and the purpose of the research”. O’Leary (2004:99) also supported these definitions, differentiating qualitative and quantitative methods based on the data types collected and how the data is to be analysed: a quantitative method is characterised through numbers and analysed using statistics, whereas a qualitative method, where data is represented through statements, arguments, pictures, or icons, is analysed using thematic exploration (content analysis).

Henwood and Pidgeon (1993:16) stated that quantitative research was originally used to study natural scientific phenomena, hence its origin in the natural sciences studies. Saunders et al. (2016:166) stated that “quantitative research is generally associated with positivism when used with predetermined and highly structured data collection techniques”. As a positivist or empirical researcher, application of a quantitative method restricts the researcher to data and rejects assumptions or speculation (Du Plooy, 2005:21). Neuman (2000:66) further states that “the positivist approach can be summarised as a social sciences’ organised method used for combining deductive logic with precise empirical observations of individual behaviour to discover and confirm a set of probabilistic casual laws that can be used to predict general patterns of human activity”. There are, however, advantages and disadvantages of quantitative

research methodology gathered from explorations of different researchers (Henwood & Pidgeon, 1993:16; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004:16; Kolakowski, 1993:4; Mouton & Marais, 1989:167; Wimmer & Dominick 1983:50) as shown in Table 3.4.

TABLE 3.4: Advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research methodology

Advantages Disadvantages

Consists of quantifiable concepts embedded in hypothesis or theoretical schemes that allow for observations, manipulation and testing

Due to the quantifiable concepts, it neglects the context and observations which could be added in the analysis to manipulate data

Precise, replicable, and generalizable numeric results that emerge from the study

Has a rigid procedure that defines, measures, and analyses variables instead of considering the social constructs

Considered as being more credible due to the

objective nature of this methodology More than one theory can fit a single set of data

Permits powerful methods of analysis including the Thurstone scale for probability prediction

Although considered to be impartial and objective, researchers are involved in the study which could lead to subjectivity as the researcher’s analysis would be based on what they choose to observe and interpret based on own values

Sources: Adopted from Henwood & Pidgeon (1993:16); Kolakowski (1993:4); Johnson & Onwuegbuzie (2004:16); Mouton & Marais (1989:167); Wimmer & Dominick (1983:50)

3.2.3.2 Mixed methods

Creswell (2013) stated that there is a relatively new and different research approach in the social and human sciences called the mixed method. Creswell (2013:4) stated that “mixed method of research is one that involves collecting both qualitative and quantitative data, integrating the two forms of data, and using distinct design that may involve philosophical assumptions and theoretical frameworks”. Although considered a relatively new research approach, it is already seen as a key research element, especially with objectives becoming more complex. According to Mackenzie and Knipe (2006:6), mixed method allows the research problem to guide the data collection and analysis strategy. Creswell (2013:4) stated that “the core assumption is that the combination of these approaches provides a far more comprehensive understanding of the research than does a single research methodology”. Mixed methods are further associated with the use of two philosophical approaches: realism and pragmatism.

Creswell (2013:15-16) gives three models of the mixed research method, which include:

• “Exploratory sequential mixed method – where the researcher first explores the research subject using qualitative measures to generate data which is then used in the second quantitative phase”.

• “Convergent parallel mixed method – where the researcher collects both types of data and integrates the information in the interpretation of the overall results. The method allows for further investigation of any inconsistencies that may occur”.

• “Explanatory sequential mixed method – where the researcher conducts the research first using the quantitative method, then shifts to using the qualitative research method to build on the results for greater insights and interpretation ability. The main challenge with this method lies in creating variance in the sample size across the different methods and pinpointing the variables of the different methods”.

3.2.3.3 Qualitative

According to Creswell (2013:13), the qualitative research method enables researchers to observe, analyse and understand social and cultural phenomena. Qualitative research aims to understand rather than measure. Scholars such as Babbie and Mouton (2001:170), Lincoln (1994:2), Marshall and Rossman (1995:1-5), Mason (2002:2-3) concur with Du Plooy (2005:29), who described qualitative research as “a method that allows the researcher to obtain an insider perspective on social action, allowing for contextual description and understanding of social phenomena”. Denzin and Lincoln (2004:2) further stated that “qualitative method enables researchers to study and interpret phenomena and their perceived meanings in their natural settings”. According to Saunders and Pinhey (1983:356), qualitative research is a formal methodology that consists of three steps that help to achieve three objectives. The three steps include: setting up analytical categories, gathering data, and analysing data to achieve three objectives, namely to describe, compare, and attribute interdependence (Saunders & Pinhey, 1983:356).

The qualitative research method is often viewed as appropriate only for exploratory purposes, used to increase knowledge, clarify issues, define problems, and generate hypotheses (Day, 1997:9). It facilitates understanding of “consumption constellations and systems, cultural and personal meanings attached to objects and experiences, and the participants’ views of the world” (Day, 1997:9). According to Mouton and Marais (1989:1), qualitative data is associated with the following methods of data collection: field studies, interviews, observations, and case studies, to mention just a few. Furthermore, “qualitative research is often associated with interpretivism because the researcher needs to make sense of the subjective and socially constructed meanings expressed about a phenomenon being studied by interpreting the interviewees’ meaning” (Saunders et al., 2016:168). Like any other method, there are advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative research methodology as explained in Table 3.5.

TABLE 3.5: Advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research methodology

Advantages Disadvantages

Can be used prior to, in lieu of, or after quantitative studies conducted

Often viewed as fitting only for exploratory study purposes

Aims to understand rather than measure

Data reliability can be problematic due to subjective nature of qualitative research data collection methods

Helps to increase knowledge, clarify issues, define problems, and generate hypotheses

Data based mainly on what was implied by the researcher rather than demonstration of what was observed and witnessed

Risk for lack of focus in the study

Source: Adapted from Day (1997:9); Field & Morse (1996:8); Streubert & Carpenter (2011:17)

3.2.3.4 Method chosen for this study

Saunders et al. (2016: 166, 168) stated that “quantitative research examines relationships between variables measured numerically and analysed using a range of statistical and graphical techniques, while qualitative research studies participants’ meanings and relationships between them using a variety of data collection techniques and analytical procedures to develop a conceptual framework and theoretical contribution”. To answer the primary research question, the study adopted a qualitative research approach.

Qualitative research takes place in the participant’s natural setting and can use one or a combination of interviews, observations, and document reviews (Myers, 1997:2). Saunders et al. (2016:168) stated that “qualitative research is often associated with an interpretive philosophy in that researchers need to make sense of the subjective and socially constructed meanings expressed about the phenomenon being studied”. This study was based on exploring skills transfer among generational cohorts within Group IT in Bank X. Joshi, Dencker and Franz (2011) stated that academic research on generational diversity in the workplace has been more expressive and investigative in nature to date, rather than explanatory (using cause and effect relationships to explain the situations with quantitative techniques).

Lyons and Kuron (2014) further stated that even with the recent increase of research on generational cohorts in the workplace, scholars, and researchers are faced with a confusing order of evidence engendered in a variety of context, with different methodological and theoretical perspectives. Since little is known about South African retail bank generational succession planning, the method for the study seemed best as qualitative in nature. Qualitative research seeks to build a holistic narrative and picture to understand this specific phenomenon.