Research methodology can be described as the procedures and techniques that are used to enable the systematic process of enquiry and discovery of knowledge (Saunders et al., 2015). Its aim is on achieving the set objectives of the research (Rorty, 2013). Creswell (2012) pointed out that quantitative researchers usually derive a problem from the literature, in which case a substantial body of literature may be available in terms of variables and existing theories and which may need testing or verifying. Similarly, Trochim (2006) observes that quantitative methods concentrate directly on relationships among variables. Moreover, Näslund (2002) mentioned that quantitative researchers tend to abstract themselves from the world and consequently they seldom study it directly, being less concerned with the importance of rich descriptions of the phenomenon. Bryman (2012) stated that, in quantitative research, researchers emphasise careful control and measurement by assigning numbers to measurements. This was further addressed by Bryman (2012 p.35) who stated that quantitative research can be construed as a research strategy that emphasises quantification in the collection and analysis of data.
On the other hand, Bryman (2012) argues that the “qualitative” concept implies an emphasis on words rather than quantification in the collection and analysis of data. Equally, Corbin and Strauss (2014) mentioned that the strengths of such a qualitative approach lie mainly in their success in ascertaining deeper underlying meanings and explanations of the phenomenon. Bell (2014) also came up with the idea that perspective is more concerned with the understanding that they seek insight rather than statistical analysis. Table 4.3 which provides a summary of the fundamental differences of both approaches is adapted from suggestions of Stainback and Stainback (1988 p.8) and Bryman (2012 p.36). In addition, Table 4.4 highlights the advantage and disadvantage for quantitative and qualitative methods.
88 | P a g e
Table 4. 3 Summary of differences between quantitative and qualitative research strategies
Dimensions Quantitative Qualitative Research stance
Principal orientation to the role of theory in relation to research
Deductive; testing of theory for confirmation
Inductive; generation of theory
Mainly inductive
Epistemological orientation
Natural science model, in particular positivism
Interpretivism Interpretivism
Ontological orientation Objectivism Constructivism Constructivism
Conditions Controlled Natural Natural condition
Data Objective Subjective Subjective data
Focus Defined by variables Holistic view Focusing on the whole
Viewpoint Outsider- where reality
develops from quantifiable data Insider- reality is determined by perception of people Insider- reality is determined by the actors involved
Results Reliable Valid- the focus is on
design and procedures to gain real, rich and in- depth data
Valid- the focus on design and procedures to gain real, rich and in- depth data
Source: adapted from Stainback and Stainback (1988 p.8); and Bryman (2012 p.36)
Table 4. 4 The major advantage and disadvantage for quantitative and qualitative
Quantitative Qualitative Implementing adopted
strategy
Advantage Useful for testing large
sample; information on many characteristics and variables
In-depth investigation of a particular subject; deeper understanding
In-depth study of the phenomenon using semi- structured interviews and focus group techniques
Disadvantage Concern tends towards
representativeness Difficulty in generalising to a larger population Mitigating weakness of qualitative strategy by triangulating data sources and data collection techniques
89 | P a g e
4.7.1 Justification of the chosen methodology (qualitative)
A qualitative design was adopted for the study as the objectives of this research were focused on understanding the in-depth meaning of the phenomenon being studied. The underpinning ontology which states that reality is socially constructed and the epistemological stances which suggests that the researcher interacts with participants being researched, makes the choice of a qualitative research methodology more suitable. It can be argued that as implementation of RM by Business Schools with international students is the focus for this study, it will only be possible to gain a holistic understanding of the implementation of the RM approach by investigating the perception of international students. This research focuses on business school managers, academic staff, and international students’ (i.e. human rather than non-human) experiences, and the meanings the participants place on the implementation of RM by Business Schools. Additionally, the researched and researcher are close. The researcher interacts and works with research respondents (i.e. Business School managers, academic staff and international students), in order to discover new knowledge relating to Business School practices through one voice and perceptions of the participants.
Therefore, it can be argued that Tables 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 can be viewed as frameworks that provide a range of fundamental selection criteria to assure that the choice of qualitative research approaches are not determined randomly, neither is it predetermined by the researcher. Hence, it can be argued that the selection of qualitative methods is as a result of the underpinning constructive assumption of a subject reality that is interactively discovered. In addition to the assessment criteria discussed above, Carson et al. (2001, p.63) suggested three reasons why a qualitative research methodology is valuable in business studies: “1) a qualitative methodology focuses on acquiring a deep understanding of the phenomenon; 2) a qualitative methodology examines the phenomenon, without requiring the researcher to have any preconceived opinion; and 3) a qualitative methodology concentrates on the ‘how’ and ‘why’, in addition to the ‘what’, when trying to understand the phenomenon.” For the current study, firstly, one of the research objectives is to gain an in-depth understanding of the complex nature of the implementation of RM initiative with international students. Secondly, the researcher in this case did not have any preconceived opinion of the phenomenon being researched, as the researcher was relying on information provided by the participants. Thirdly, due to the analytical/descriptive nature of this research which addresses the how and why Business Schools implement a RM approach with international students.
90 | P a g e
In the light of the justification discussed above, the adoption of a qualitative research methodology is deemed to be the most suitable in evaluating and producing valid data within this study.