Current Perspectives in Management Research

UU-PHD-802

Week 3

Topic Overview - Research Approaches: Quantitative Versus Qualitative

 UU-PHD-802

Table of Contents

Learning Outcomes .................................................................................................................................. 3

Qualitative and Quantitative Research Approaches/Design .............................................................. 3
Differences among Qualitative and Quantitative Research Approaches Based on their
Characteristics .......................................................................................................................................... 4
Deductive vs Inductive Reasoning and their linkage with qualitative and/or quantitative research
.................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Validity in research ................................................................................................................................... 7
Characteristics of External, Internal, and Construct Validity .............................................................. 8
Formulating research design/Creating your research design ............................................................ 8
Choosing either quantitative, qualitative or multiple methods ............................................................ 9
References .............................................................................................................................................. 10

2
UU-PHD-802

Learning Outcomes:
LO.2 Demonstrate an awareness of the methodological challenges associated with
management research.
LO.3 Evaluate the methodologies and methods employed within these research
projects.
LO.4 Evaluate methodology and method within the context of management studies.

Qualitative and Quantitative Research Approaches/Design

Although the research approaches have been thoroughly examined in the previous
module PHD-801, nevertheless, this topic overview re-examines the 2 main
approaches for better illustration. There are two main research approaches quantitative
and qualitative that can be used based on the chosen topic and the stated research
problem of the study.

Qualitative research is an approach that aims to explore or investigate the human

interaction in regards to a social or human problem or issue that is being observed.
This approach collects, analyzes and interprets data in order to provide further
understanding and meaning of what people do or say. The collection of data is mainly
executed through observations, interviews and conversations from a small focus group
(Morgan, 1980). Those that are participate in a qualitative research follow an inductive
reasoning/logic (bottom – up) since the starting point of the research is based on
different research questions that are used to narrow the scope of the study. Finally,
qualitative studies must establish validity within the context of the specific qualitative
design. The exact dimensions for the establishment of research validity are credibility
and trustworthiness of the research design, as well as dependability and transferability
of research process (Lipscomb, 2012).

On the other hand, quantitative research is an approach for testing objective theories by
examining the relationship (if there is any) among variables. These variables in turn,
can be measured or quantified based on different quantitative

3
 UU-PHD-802

research tools (e.g questionnaire), so that numbered data can be analyzed using
statistical procedures (e.g regression analysis) (Jean Lee, 1992). Since this research
approach aims to examine any relationship that exists among two or more variables it is
also known as correlational design of research. Engaging in a quantitative research a
deductive reasoning/logic is followed (top – down) as the research begins with certain
tested hypotheses (Poggenpoel et al., 2001).

Differences among Qualitative and Quantitative Research Approaches Based on

their Characteristics

The below table is designed to distinguish the two major research approaches by
outlining the major differences that exists between the two approaches (Arghode, 2012;
Jean Lee, 1992).
Quantitative Qualitative
Very objective as the researcher is Very subjective as the researcher is
uninvolved in the research process involved in the process of research
Research questions are stated in terms of Research questions are stated in terms of
How many (measurable) What and Why (interpreting)
Literature review is done in an early stage Literature review is done as the study
of the study progresses
It can test a theory It develops a theory
Large sample size Small sample size (focus group)
Results can be generalized Results cannot be generalized since
theories and different patterns are
developed for understanding
Based on tested Hypotheses or specific Based on research questions aims to
research questions explore and narrow the scope of the study

Uses instruments for data collection like Uses communication and observation as
questionnaires data collection tool like interviews

4
UU-PHD-802

Deductive vs Inductive Reasoning and their linkage with qualitative and/or

quantitative research
In our discussion of the research approaches (above) we highlighted how it is possible
to approach research however it is also important to decide as to whether you will
apporach the research reasoning from either a deductive or an inductive
perspective.
■ Where you commence your research project using a deductive approach
you will seek to use existing theory to shape the approach that you adopt to the
qualitative research process and to aspects of data analysis.
■ Where you commence your research project using an inductive approach
you will seek to build up a theory that is adequately grounded in your data.

In this section we discussed the difference between using theory at the start of your
research to analyse qualitative data and commencing your research by collecting and
exploring your data without a predetermined theoretical or descriptive framework (Yin
2003).

Using a deductive approach: Yin (2003) suggests that, where you have made use of
existing theory to formulate your research question and objectives, you may also use
the theoretical propositions that helped you do this as a means to devise a framework to
help you to organise and direct your data analysis. There is debate about this approach
as applied to qualitative analysis. Bryman (1988, p.81) sums up the argument against it
as follows:
■ The prior specification of a theory tends to be disfavoured because of the
possibility of introducing a premature closure on the issues to be investigated, as
well as the possibility of the theoretical constructs departing excessively from the
views of participants in a social setting.
■ If this occurs when you use a theoretical framework to design and analyse
your research, you will clearly need to adapt your approach.
■ Even though you may incorporate an inductive approach in your research,
commencing your work from a theoretical perspective may have certain
advantages. lt will link your research into the existing body of knowledge in your
subject area, help you to get started and provide you with an initial analytical
framework.
5
 UU-PHD-802

Using an inductive approach: The alternative to the deductive approach is to start to

collect data and then explore them to see which themes or issues to follow up and
concentrate on (e.g. Glaser and Strauss 1967; Yin 2003). Yin (2003) believes that this
inductive approach may be a difficult strategy to follow and may not lead to success for
someone who is an inexperienced researcher. This is likely to be the case where you
simply go ahead and collect data without examining them to assess which themes are
emerging from the data as you progress. Where you commence your data collection
with this type of approach - related initially to an exploratory purpose you will need to
analyse the data as you collect them and develop a conceptual framework to guide your
subsequent work. This is also referred to as a grounded approach because of the
nature of the theory or explanation that emerges as a result of the research process. In
this approach:
• you do not commence such a study with a clearly defined theoretical framework;

• instead you identify relationships between your data and develop questions and
hypotheses or propositions to test these;
• theory emerges from the process of data collection and analysis.

You will, however, still need to commence this type of approach with a clear research
purpose. To use an inductive approach successfully may involve a lengthy period of
time and prove to be resource intensive. It is also likely that this approach will combine
some elements of a deductive approach as you seek to develop a theoretical position
and then test its applicability through subsequent data collection and analysis.
Consequently, while you may commence with either an inductive or a deductive
approach, in practice your research is likely to combine elements of both.

To devise a theoretical or descriptive framework you need to identify the main variables,
components, themes and issues in your research project and the predicted or presumed
relationships between them (Yin 2003).
A descriptive framework will rely more on your prior experience and what you expect to
occur, although it is of course possible to develop an explanatory framework based on a
mixture of theory and your own expectations. You will use this framework as the means
to start and direct the analysis of your data.

6
UU-PHD-802

Note: Where you commence your research project using a deductive approach you
will seek to use existing theory to shape the approach that you adopt to the qualitative
research process and to aspects of data analysis” but “Where you commence your
research project using a deductive approach you will seek to use existing theory to
shape the approach that you adopt to the quantitative research process and to aspects
of data analysis.

Validity in research

Research is a part of our everyday life. Even for a small purchase decision we are
executing an informal research for price evaluation, products’ alternatives and so on. In
the business world, organizations are executing formal research for decision making,
competition’s evaluation, problem solving, risk assessment, investments’ worth and for
many other reasons. Additionally, one important aspect that researchers must realize
during a research process is the need or purpose for executing a research. Research
is not only collecting information without any purpose and is not the reassessment of
information without any interpretation. The correct usage or purposes of research are
to build and review the existing knowledge, have clear purpose, investigate a problem
or a situation and provide solution, explanations for a new trend or phenomenon and so
on (Greenwood et al., 1993). Nevertheless, the effectiveness of research execution
and the reliable use of research findings require two essential/critical dimensions which
may threat the generalization of research findings. These two elements have been
identified as validity and reliability. Reliability can be defined as the degree of
consistency of the results that have been obtained from research, for example
checking the consistency of results in a class examination by redoing a test, also pre-
testing or pilot testing the employed data collection tool questionnaire. On the other
hand, validity is the extent to which a test measures what it claims to measure. It is
vital for a test to be valid in order for the results to be accurately applied and
interpreted (Golafshani, 2003).

7
 UU-PHD-802

Characteristics of External, Internal, and Construct Validity

As per Calder et al., (1982) external validity refers to the degree to which the research
results of an empirical study can be generalized to other subjects, conditions,
environments and times. One major characteristic of external validity is that it can be
divided in two categories known as population validity and ecological validity. The
population validity reflects the degree of how representative is the selected sample of
the population as well as how widely the research findings may apply. The more
representative the sample is, the more confident the researcher is in generalizing the
results from the sample to the population. On the other hand, ecological validity is
presented as the degree to which the results generalize across different settings like
the effect of testing, interaction and many others (Onwuegbuzie & Johnson, 2006).

Internal validity is characterized by the researcher’s concern whether there is causality

among variables. Many confounding factors like bias may interfere with internal validity
therefore the researcher’s effort is to minimize the effect of these factors in order to
increase the internal validity of his/her work (Onwuegbuzie, 2000).

Finally, construct validity is a feature of different planned measurements that are

describing how the measurement positions in a scientific concept. Construct validity is
characterized by the degree of relevance in relation to the study’s results (Bagozzi et
al., 1991).

Formulating research design/Creating your research design

When you complete your research process your research will be assessed on
whether it answered the research questions and whether it was consistent. For this
reason you need to ensure these will be achieved at the beginning by designing
your research. This design should chart your path through the layers of the ‘research
onion’. It is highly unlikely that any research will include all the theories in figure 2.1
but all research should probably cover at least one theory or method from each layer.
Putting some thought into your design will also give you more insight into the issues
you are dealing with and this in turn will strengthen your research.

8
UU-PHD-802

Choosing either quantitative, qualitative or multiple methods

As already mentioned in previous doctoral module PHD-801, the type of data you
collect is a decisive factor on what kind of outcome you can achieve.

Figure 2.3 Methodological choice

Source: © Mark Saunders, Philip Lewis and Adrian Thornhill 2011

First method is quantitative and it involves numeric data. It is usually related to the
positivist philosophical perspective and follows a deductive approach. The qualitative
method involves non-numeric data such as words. It is related to the interpretive
philosophy and the inductive approach. The third multiple, or mixed, methods
combine the two. All three methods are widely used in business. Figure
2.3 (above) illustrates these choices.

9
UU-PHD-802

References
Arghode, V. (2012). Qualitative and Quantitative Research: Paradigmatic Differences.
Global Education Journal, 2012(4).

Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in
organizational research. Administrative science quarterly, 421-458.

Bryman, A. (2012) ‘Social Research Methods’, 4th ed., Oxford Unity Press: Oxford.
Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and quality in social research. New York: Routledge.
Cassel, C. and Lee, B. (2011) ‘Challenges and Controversies in Management
Research’, Routledge: New York.

Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1982). The concept of external validity.
Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 240-244.

Glaser B.G, Strauss A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine, New York.

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The

qualitative report, 8(4), 597-606.

Greener, S. (2009). ‘Business Research Methods’, bookboon.com.

Greenwood, D. J., Whyte, W. F., & Harkavy, I. (1993). Participatory action research as
a process and as a goal. Human Relations, 46(2), 175-192.
Jean Lee, S. K. (1992). Quantitative versus qualitative research methods—Two
approaches to organisation studies. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 9(1),
87- 94.
Lipscomb, M. (2012). Abductive reasoning and qualitative research. Nursing
Philosophy, 13(4), 244-256.
Morgan, G., & Smircich, L. (1980). The case for qualitative research. Academy of
management review, 5(4), 491-500.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research.
Research in the Schools, 13(1), 48-63.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2000). Expanding the Framework of Internal and External Validity

in Quantitative Research.

Poggenpoel, M., Myburgh, C. P. H., & Van der Linde, C. H. (2001). Qualitative
research strategies as prerequisite for quantitative strategies. Education, 122(2).

Saunders M., Lewis P., Thornhill A. (2012). ‘Research Methods for Business
Students’, 6th ed., Pearson: Harlow.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Designing case studies. Qualitative Research Methods, 5, 359- 386.
10