Research Philosophy

The upcoming subsections critically examines four paradigms or rather worldviews namely positivism, interpretivism, critical theory, post positivism and pragmatism to ascertain their suitability for the current research.

3.4.1 Positivism

The nineteenth-century French philosopher and sociologist August Comte between 1798 and 1857 in attempt to discover universal truths in both the physical and the social world (Thomas, 2004:42-43) coined the term ‘positivism’. According to Willis (2007), this term was a direct reaction to religious and metaphysical beliefs that dominated society during the 19th _century. Historically, the positivism in the social science is based on the approach used in the natural sciences (Collis and Hussey, 2003). Positivism is an epistemological position that advocates the application of the methods of the natural sciences to the study of social reality and beyond (Bryman and Bell, 2011). Positivism seeks the facts or causes of social phenomenon, with little regard to the subjective state of the individual. The key idea of positivism is that social world exists externally, and that its properties should be measured through objective methods, rather than being inferred subjectivity through sensation, reflection or intuition (Easterby-Smith et al., 1991). As such, knowledge is gained with experimentation and quantitative methods (ibid). Positivism is founded on the belief that the study of human behaviour should be conducted in the same way as the study in the natural sciences (Hussey and Hussey, 1997).

3.4.1.1 Limitation of Positivism

A drawback with positivism is its apparent disregard for socio-cultural perspectives. The study of socio-cultural phenomena requires to some extent ‘immersion’ of the investigator into the setting of the participants (Banks, 1998; Schein, 1999). This kind of principle disregards any independent relations between the researcher and the subjects and ‘masking’ of the former’s values and emotions. Positivism especially in the social sciences is not regarded as an approach that will lead to interesting or profound insights into complex problems especially in the field of business and management studies (Remenyi et al., 1998). Apart from its dominance in management research, a number of researchers have criticized this paradigm. Hussey and Hussey (1997) outline basic criticisms of the positivistic paradigm as follows:

It is impossible to treat people as being separate from their social contexts and that they cannot be understood without examining the perceptions they have of their own activities.

55

Furthermore, a highly structured research design imposes certain constraints on the results and may ignore relevant and interesting findings. Researchers bring their own interest and values to the research and that capturing complex phenomena in a single measure is, at best misleading.

For this particular study, there was a focus on investigating the determinants of brain drain of registered nurses in Malawi to understand the current situation and attempt to curb brain drain rather than testing an existing framework theory. In addition, the researcher of this project believes that different researchers have different assumptions of reality so there is more than one way to understand a situation. In view of this, positivist’s approach was found less appropriate hence not adopted for this study.

3.4.2 Interpretivism

According to Collis and Hussey (2014), interprevitism is underpinned by the belief that social reality is not objective but highly subjective because it is shaped by our perceptions. The term subsumes the views of writers who are critical of the application of the scientific model to the study of the social world and who are influenced by different intellectual traditions. They share a view that the matter of the social sciences-people and their institutions is fundamentally different from that of the natural sciences (Bryman and Bell, 2011). Advocates of interpretivism such as (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Mittman, 2001; Denzin and Lincoln, 2000; Myers, 1997) highlight that, use of qualitative orientation or approaches is ideal for theory development and research in the management sciences. Methodologies in particular, ethnography, exploratory analysis, field experiments are encouraged. According to Schwandt (2000) and Sciarra (1999), hermeneutical approach underlying interpretivism maintains that meaning is hidden and must be brought to the surface through deep reflection. The interaction between the investigator and the object of investigation is central to and a distinguishing characteristic of interpretivism. In fact, it is only through this interaction that deeper meaning can be uncovered (Ponterotto, 2005). In this respect, the research process is not directed by an external knowledge goal, but consists of developing an understanding of the social reality experienced by the subjects of the study. By immersing oneself in the context, the researcher is able to develop an inside understanding of the social realities being studied (Alain Thietart et al., 2001). According to Bryant and Higgins (2009), interprevitism is influenced and shaped by the pre-existing theories and researcher’s view of the world. Interprevitists do not believe in making general statements. Instead, they require an in-depth understanding of a particular situation. Strauss and Corbin (1990) add that interprevitism explores the richness, depth and complexity of phenomenon.

56

For the interpretivist researcher, reality is not a rigid thing, but a creation of individuals involved in the research. Collis and Hussey (2003); Saunders et al. (2012) state that reality does not exist within a vacuum, its composition is influenced by its context, and many constructions of reality are therefore possible. The interpretivist paradigm is based on a relative ontology and subjective epistemology. For the relativist, reality is socially constructed. Relativism is the doctrine that no absolutes exist. It is expressed by the dictum that Man is the measure of all things; that are that they are, and of things that are not that they are not. In its epistemological application, relativism holds that what counts as warranted knowledge, truth and reason are always relative to (that is conditioned by) some historical epoch and/or place and/or cultural context and/or (as Kuhn‘s case) paradigm.

According to Saunders et al. (2012), the heritage of interpretivism comes from two intellectual traditions: phenomenology and symbolic interactions. Other authors Collis and Hussey (2003); Hussey and Hussey (2007) refer postmodernism to interpretivist paradigm. Postmodernism is concerned with understanding human behaviour from the participants own frame of reference. For the intepretivist, the act of investigating reality has an effect on that reality such that considerable regard ought to be paid to the subjective state of the individual by focusing on the meaning rather than the measurement of social phenomena, as in positivism.

According to Ponterotto (2005), an interprevitist’s view is that, reality is subjective and influenced by the context of the situation, namely the individual’s experience and perceptions, the social environment, and the interaction between the individual and the researcher. In particular, the researcher will recognize and grasp the participant’s problems, motives and meanings. The research problem and interviews were carried out to investigate determinants of brain drain of registered nurses in the Malawi health sector. Employees’ experience, perception, understanding of brain drain issues could not be underestimated as far as this study was concerned. In this view, Shah and Corley (2006) suggest that, in order to have an in-depth understanding of the particular research phenomenon, the researcher should directly interact with people in the field. Reinharz (2007) supports this view by highlighting that even in this technological age, the best overall source of information still mainly originates from people.

An interprevist paradigm was adopted for this research because communication between the researcher and participants in the Malawi health sector was required in order to obtain richness of information to have an in-depth understanding of determinants of brain drain phenomenon. Rubin and Rubin (1995) confirm that using semi-structured interviews with the participants help to have a comprehensive understanding of the current phenomenon.

57

3.4.2.1 Limitation of Interprevitism

The major limitation of the interpretivist approach lays in the researcher‘s proximity to the investigation. It is argued that the research is so personal to the researcher that there is no guarantee that a different researcher would not come to radically different conclusions. However, in this study this limitation was overcome by triangulation where different data collection methods through semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions were used.

3.4.3 Critical Theory

According to O’Donnell (1999), critical theory is a self-evaluation that is aimed at emancipation from exploitation by a highly commercial world. The theory is an intellectual tradition inspired by Marx initiated by the Frankfurt school in the early 1930s and 1940s (Partington, 2002). It is used to tackle the injustices of society and focuses on authorizing human beings to transcend the constraints by race, class and gender (Fay, 1987) while (Kincheloe and McLaren, 1994, 2000) state that critical theory is aimed at disrupting the status quo. Crotty (1998) who argues that present social critics aim their criticism at the social order itself supports this. Critical researchers see organizations in general as social historical creations, born in conditions of struggle and domination (Alvesson and Deetz, 2000). Critical theorists, actors and authors are often caught up in an ideological milieu of which they themselves are unaware. This means that a truly critical hermeneutic understanding must seek to reach beneath the everyday presentation of things and the seeming obviousness of human situations (Partington, 2002). Critical theory offers extremely powerful and inspiring stimuli for rethinking contemporary society and its institutions, including management (Alvesson and Deetz, 2000). However, researchers are cautioned to interpret critical theory broadly, as there is no single critical theory (Kincheloe and McLaren, 2000).

3.4.3.1 Limitation of Critical Theory

Both Positivists and Interpretivists analyse the critical theory. Positivists claim that it is anti- scientific while post-modernists declare that its scientific and rationalistic aspirations to enlightenment are imaginary (Morrow and Brown, 1994). From a critical theory point of view, a post-modern approach has three downsides. It fails to provide language to articulate what are arguably indispensable concerns with autonomy, rights and justice. Positivists and Interpretivists criticise critical theory for failing to provide a clear exposition of the impact of their approach upon research methods. As such, it creates a gap between extensive traditions of critical empirical research on the one hand and guidelines on how to conceptualize and conduct such research on the other hand.

58

3.4.4 Postpositivism and Pragmatism

Postpositivism, as articulated by Campbell and Russo (1999), recognizes that discretionary judgment is unavoidable in science, that proving causality with certainty in explaining social phenomena is problematic. Both quantitative and qualitative, are needed to generate and test theory, improve understanding over time of how the world operates, and support informed policy makers and social program decision making. Postpositivism is a variant of positivism as it accepts true reality with some modification. According to Ponterotto (2005), postpositivists claim reality can only be apprehended and measured imperfectly. In other words, reality is perceived as existing independently of human thoughts, but is interpreted through social conditions. Postpositivists recommend a modified dualism/objectivism as the researcher may have some influence on that being researched. Nevertheless, objectivity and researcher- subject independence remain important guidelines for the research process. Postpositivist paradigm was not suitable for this research because the individual and experiences of the participants in the Malawi health sector predominantly guided the research.

On the other hand, Pragmatism is a paradigmatic schema, which brings together the philosophical foundations of positivism and interpretivism. There are many forms of this philosophy, but for many, pragmatism as a worldview arises out of actions, situations and consequences rather than antecedent conditions as in postpositivism (Creswell, 2009). Pragmatism has multiple perspectives on ontology, epistemology and methodology. Individual researchers have a freedom to choose the methods, techniques and procedures of research that best meet their needs and purposes (Creswell, 2009). The use of aspects of positivism as a paradigm makes it limited for this research.

Much of the research literature considers to some extent, the research philosophy to determine largely which approach the researcher should choose (Bryman, 1984). Miles and Huberman (1984 cited in Kandadi, 2006) state that knowing what you want to find leads inexorably to the question of how one will get the information. According to authors Denzin and Lincoln (2000); Yin (2002), the nature of the problem to be solved and the determined research questions should provide a clue. Saunders et al. (2003) state that there is no best tradition in terms of bringing best results among the available research approaches. It depends on the context of the study and the nature of the questions being asked.

3.4.5 Determination of the Research Philosophy for the Research

The subsections above have analysed contemporary paradigms in the social sciences. Their appropriateness of the application of each of the paradigm in this research has been evaluated.Ponterotto (2005) states that with an interprevitist’s view, reality is subjective and

59

influenced by the context of the situation, namely the individual’s experience and perceptions, the social environment, and the interaction between the individual and the researcher. Reality does not exist within a vacuum, its composition is influenced by its context, and many constructions of reality are therefore possible (Collis and Hussey, 2003 and Saunders et al., 2009). Interpretivist approach helps offer many avenues to answer the research question in this research. Saunders et al (2009) state that an interpretivist perspective is highly appropriate in the case of business research particularly in such fields as organizational behavior, marketing and human resources management. In this study, the research problem and interviews sought to investigate determinants of brain drain of nurses in the Malawi health sector. As such, participants’ experience, perception, understanding of brain drain issues in this study could not be underestimated. This was the sole reason this philosophy was chosen in this research to necessitate the development of brain drain framework. Although, the major limitation of the interprevitist approach lays in the researcher’s proximity to the investigation this study’s limitation was overcome by triangulation where two different data collection methods were used. Triangulation provided the researcher with the opportunity to develop a balanced and analytical thesis.