SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 2
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
After completing Chapter 2 you should be able to:
1. Explain what is meant by scientific investigation, giving examples of both scientific and
nonscientific investigations.
2. Explain the eight hallmarks of science.
3. Briefly explain why research in the organizational behavior and management areas cannot be
completely scientific.
4. Describe the building blocks of science.
5. Discuss the seven steps of the hypothetico-deductive method, using an example of your own.
6. Appreciate the advantages of knowledge about scientific investigation.
Scientific research focuses on solving problems and pursues a step-by-step
logical, organized, and rigorous method to identify the problems, gather data,
analyze them, and draw valid conclusions therefrom.

Thus, scientific research is not based on hunches, experience, and intuition

(though these may play a part in final decision making), but is purposive
and rigorous. Because of the rigorous way in which it is done, scientific
research enables all those who are interested in researching and knowing
about the same or similar issues to come up with comparable findings
when the data are analyzed.
The term Scientific research applies to both basic and applied research.
Applied research may or may not be generalizable to other organizations,
depending on the extent to which differences exist in such factors as size,
nature of work, characteristics of the employees, and structure of the
organization.
THE HALLMARKS OF SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH
The hallmarks or main distinguishing characteristics of scientific research may be listed as follows:

1. Purposiveness
2. Rigor
3. Testability
4. Replicability
5. Precision and Confidence
6. Objectivity
7. Generalizability
8. Parsimony

Let us consider the case of a manager who is interested in

investigating how employees‘ commitment to the organization can
be increased.
1. PURPOSIVENESS
The manager has started the research with a definite aim or purpose. The focus is on
increasing the commitment of employees to the organization, as this will be beneficial
in many ways. An increase in employee commitment will translate into less turnover,
less absenteeism, and probably increased performance levels, all of which would
definitely benefit the organization. The research thus has a purposive focus.
2. RIGOR
A good theoretical base and a sound methodological design would add rigor to a
purposive study. Rigor connotes carefulness, scrupulousness, and the degree of
exactitude in research investigations. In the case of our example, let us say the manager
of an organization asks 10 to 12 of its employees to indicate what would increase their
level of commitment to it. If, solely on the basis of their responses, the manager reaches
several conclusions on how employee commitment can be increased, the whole
approach to the investigation would be unscientific.
It would lack rigor for the following
reasons:
(1)the conclusions would be incorrectly drawn because they are based on the
responses of just a few employees whose opinions may not be representative of
those of the entire workforce,
(2)the manner of framing and addressing the questions could have introduced bias or
incorrectness in the responses, and
(3)there might be many other important influences on organizational commitment
that this small sample of respondents did not or could not verbalize during the
interviews, and the researcher would have failed to include them. Therefore,
conclusions drawn from an investigation that lacks a good theoretical foundation,
And methodological
as evidenced sophistication,
by reason (3), as evident from (1) and (2) above, would be unscientific.
Rigorous research involves a good theoretical base and a carefully thought-out methodology. These
factors enable the researcher to collect the right kind of information from an appropriate sample with
the minimum degree of bias, and facilitate suitable analysis of the data gathered.
 3. TESTABILITY
If, after talking to a random selection of employees of the organization and study of
the previous research done in the area of organizational commitment, the man- ager
or researcher develops certain hypotheses on how employee commitment can be
enhanced, then these can be tested by applying certain statistical tests to the data
collected for the
For instance, thepurpose.
researcher might hypothesize that those employees who perceive
greater opportunities for participation in decision making would have a higher level
of commitment. This is a hypothesis that can be tested when the data are collected. A
correlation analysis would indicate whether the hypothesis is substantiated or not.

Scientific research thus lends itself to testing logically developed hypotheses to see
whether or not the data support the educated conjectures or hypotheses that are
developed after a careful study of the problem situation. Testability thus becomes
another hallmark of scientific research.
 4.
REPLICABILIT
Let us suppose that the manager/researcher, based on the results of
Y study, concludes that participation in decision making is one of the most
the
important factors that influences the commitment of employees to the
organization. We will place more faith and credence in these findings and
conclusion if similar findings emerge on the basis of data collected by other
organizations employing the same methods. To put it differently, the results
of the tests of hypotheses should be supported again and yet again when the
same type of research is repeated in other similar circumstances.

To the extent that this does happen (i.e., the results are replicated or
repeated), we will gain confidence in the scientific nature of our research. In
other words, our hypotheses would not have been supported merely by
chance, but are reflective of the true state of affairs in the population.
Replicability is thus another hallmark of scientific research.
5. PRECISION AND
CONFIDENCE
In all probability, the sample in question may not reflect the exact characteristics of the
phenomenon we try to study (these difficulties are dis- cussed in greater detail in a
later chapter). Measurement errors and other problems are also bound to introduce an
element of bias or error in our findings. However, we would like to design the research
in a manner that ensures that our findings are as close to reality (i.e., the true state of
affairs in the universe) as possible, so that we can place reliance or confidence in the
results.
Precision
Refers to the closeness of the findings to reality based on a sample. In other words, precision reflects
the degree of accuracy or exactitude of the results on the basis of the sample, to what really exists in the
universe.
For example, if I estimated the number of production days lost during the year due to absenteeism at
between 30 and 40, as against the actual of 35, the precision of my estimation compares more favorably
than if I had indicated that the loss of production days was somewhere between 20 and 50. You may
recall the term confidence interval in statistics, which is what is referred to here as precision.
Confidence
Refers to the probability that our estimations are correct. That is, it is not
merely enough to be precise, but it is also important that we can
confidently claim that 95% of the time our results would be true and
there is only a 5% chance of our being wrong. This is also known as
confidence level.
The narrower the limits within which we can estimate the range of our pre- dictions
(i.e., the more precise our findings) and the greater the confidence we have in our
research results, the more useful and scientific the findings become. In social science
research, a 95% confidence level—which implies that there is only a 5% probability
that the findings may not be correct—is accepted as conventional, and is usually
referred to as a significance level of .05 (p = .05). Thus, precision and confidence are
important aspects of research, which are attained through appropriate scientific
sampling design. The greater the precision and confidence we aim at in our research,
the more scientific is the investigation and the more useful are the results.
6. OBJECTIVITY
The conclusions drawn through the interpretation of the results of data analysis
should be objective; that is, they should be based on the facts of the findings
derived from actual data, and not on our own subjective or emotional values.

For instance, if we had a hypothesis that stated that greater participation in

decision making will increase organizational commitment, and this was not
supported by the results, it makes no sense if the researcher continues to argue
that increased opportunities for employee participation would still help!

Such an argument would be based, not on the factual, data-based research

findings, but on the subjective opinion of the researcher. If this was the
researcher‘s conviction all along, then there was no need to do the research in the
first place!
Much damage can be sustained by organizations that implement non-data- based or
misleading conclusions drawn from research. For example, if the hypothesis relating to
organizational commitment in our previous example was not supported, considerable time
and effort would be wasted in finding ways to create opportunities for employee
participation in decision making. We would only find later that employees still keep
quitting, remain absent, and do not develop any sense of commitment to the organization.
Likewise, if research shows that increased pay is not going to increase the job satisfaction
of employees, then implementing a revised increased pay system will only drag down the
company financially without attaining the desired objective. Such a futile exercise, then, is
based on nonscientific interpretation and implementation of the research results.

The more objective the interpretation of the data, the more scientific the research
investigation becomes. Though managers or researchers might start with some initial
subjective values and beliefs, their interpretation of the data should be stripped of personal
values and bias. If managers attempt to do their own research, they should be particularly
sensitive to this aspect. Objectivity is thus another hallmark of scientific investigation.
 7. GENERALIZABILITY
Generalizability refers to the scope of applicability of the research findings in one
organizational setting to other settings. Obviously, the wider the range of
applicability of the solutions generated by research, the more useful the research is to
the users.
For instance, if a researcher‘s findings that participation in decision making enhances organizational
commitment are found to be true in a variety of manufacturing, industrial, and service organizations,
and not merely in the particular organization studied by the researcher, then the generalizability of the
findings to other organizational settings is enhanced. The more generalizable the research, the greater
its usefulness and value. However, not many research findings can be generalized to all other settings,
situations, or organizations.
For wider generalizability, the research sampling design has to be logically developed and a number of
other details in the data-collection methods need to be meticulously followed. However, a more
elaborate sampling design, which would doubtless increase the generalizability of the results, would
also increase the costs of research. Most applied research is generally confined to research within the
particular organization where the problem arises, and the results, at best, are generalizable only to
other identical situations and settings. Though such limited applicability does not necessarily decrease
its scientific value (subject to proper research), its generalizability is restricted.
8. PARSIMONY
Simplicity in explaining the phenomena or problems that occur, and in
generating solutions for the problems, is always preferred to complex research
frame- works that consider an unmanageable number of factors. For instance, if
two or three specific variables in the work situation are identified, which when
changed would raise the organizational commitment of the employees by 45%,
that would be more useful and valuable to the manager than if it were
recommended that he should change 10 different variables to increase
organizational commitment by 48%.
Such an unmanageable number of variables might well be totally beyond the
manager‘s control to change. Therefore, the achievement of a meaningful and
parsimonious, rather than an elaborate and cumbersome, model for problem
solution becomes a critical issue in research.
The principle of parsimony reflects the notion that
researchers should strive for simple measurement models
that use the minimum number of parameters needed to
explain a given phenomenon (Raykov & Marcoulides,
1999)
Economy in research models is achieved when we can build into our research framework
a lesser number of variables that would explain the variance far more efficiently than a
complex set of variables that would only marginally add to the variance explained.

Parsimony can be introduced with a good understanding of the problem and the
important factors that influence it. Such a good conceptual theoretical model can be
realized through unstructured and structured interviews with the concerned people, and a
thorough literature review of the previous research work in the particular problem area.

In sum, scientific research encompasses the eight criteria just discussed. These are
discussed in more detail later in this book. At this point, a question that might be asked is
why a scientific approach is necessary for investigations when systematic research by
simply collecting and analyzing data would produce results that can be applied to solve
the problem. The reason for following a scientific method is that the results will be less
prone to errors and more confidence can be placed in the findings because of the greater
rigor in application of the design details. This also increases the replicability and
generalizability of the findings.
 SOME OBSTACLES TO CONDUCTING
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
IN THE MANAGEMENT AREA
In the management and behavioral areas, it is not always possible to conduct
investigations that are 100% scientific, in the sense that, unlike in the physical
sciences, the results obtained will not be exact and error-free. This is primarily
because of difficulties likely to be encountered in the measurement and
collection of data in the subjective areas of feelings, emotions, attitudes, and
perceptions.
These problems occur whenever we attempt to quantify human behavior. Difficulties might also be
encountered in obtaining a representative sample, restricting the generalizability of the findings. Thus,
it is not always possible to meet all the hallmarks of science in full. Comparability, consistency, and
wide generalizability are often difficult to obtain in research. Still, to the extent that the research is
designed to ensure purposiveness, rigor, and the maximum possible testability, replicability,
generalizability, objectivity, parsimony, and precision and confidence, we would have endeavored to
engage in scientific investigation.
 THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF
SCIENCE IN RESEARCH
One of the primary methods of scientific investigation is the hypothetico-deductive method. The
deductive and inductive processes in research are described below.

Deduction and Induction

Deduction is the process by which we arrive at a reasoned conclusion by logical
generalization of a known fact.
For example, we know that all high performers are highly proficient in their jobs. If John
is a high performer, we then conclude that he is highly proficient in his job.
Induction, on the other hand, is a process where we observe certain phenomena and on
this basis arrive at conclusions.
In other words, in induction we logically establish a general proposition based on
observed facts. For instance, we see that the production processes are the prime features
of factories or manufacturing plants.
 The building blocks of science.

determining aspects of the research design, collecting data, analyzing the data, and interpreting the results.
 A sales manager might observe that customers are perhaps not as pleased as they used to be. The manager
may not be certain that this is really the case but may experience anxiety and some uneasiness that
customer satisfaction is on the decline.
This process of observation or sensing of the phenomena around us is what gets
most of the research—whether applied or basic—started. The next step for the
manager is to determine whether there is a real problem, and if so, how serious it is.

This problem identification calls for some preliminary data gathering. The manager might
talk casually to a few customers to find out how they feel about the products and customer
service. During the course of these conversations the manager might find that the
customers like the products but are upset because many of the items they need are
frequently out of stock, and they perceive the salespersons as not being helpful. From
discussions with some of the salespersons, the manager might discover that the factory
does not supply the goods on time and promises new delivery dates that it fails on
occasions to keep. Salespersons might also indicate that they try to please and retain the
customers by communicating the delivery dates given to them by the factory.
From the theoretical framework, which is a meaningful integration of all the information gathered,
several hypotheses can be generated and tested to determine if the data support them.

Concepts are then operationally defined so that they can be

measured.
A research design is set up to decide on, among other issues, how to
collect further data, analyze and interpret them, and finally, to provide an
answer to the problem. The process of drawing from logical analysis an
inference that purports to be conclusive is called deduction.
 THE HYPOTHETICO-
DEDUCTIVE
The Seven-Step Process in theMETHOD
Hypothetico-Deductive Method

1. Observation
2. Preliminary information gathering
3. Theory formulation
4. Hypothesizing
5. Further scientific data collection
6. Data analysis
7. Deduction
Observation
Observation is the first stage, in which one senses that certain changes are occur-
ring, or that some new behaviors, attitudes, and feelings are surfacing in one‘s
environment (i.e., the workplace). When the observed phenomena are seen to have
potentially important consequences, one would proceed to the next step.
Preliminary Information Gathering
Preliminary information gathering involves the seeking of information in depth, of
what is observed. This could be done by talking informally to several people in the
work setting or to clients, or to other relevant sources, thereby gathering information
on what is happening and why.
Theory Formulation
Theory formulation, the next step, is an attempt to integrate all the information in a
logical manner, so that the factors responsible for the problem can be conceptualized
and tested. The theoretical framework formulated is often guided by experience and
intuition.
Hypothesizing
Hypothesizing is the next logical step after theory formulation. From the
theorized network of associations among the variables, certain testable
hypotheses or educated conjectures can be generated.
For instance, at this point, one might hypothesize that if a sufficient number
of items are stocked on shelves, customer dissatisfaction will be considerably
reduced. This is a hypothesis that can be tested to determine if the statement
would be supported.
Hypothesis testing is called deductive research. Sometimes, hypotheses that were not
originally formulated do get generated through the process of induction. That is, after the
data are obtained, some creative insights occur, and based on these, new hypotheses could
get generated to be tested later. Generally, in research, hypotheses testing through
deductive research and hypotheses generation through induction are both common.
Further Scientific Data Collection
After the development of the hypotheses, data with respect to each variable in
the hypotheses need to be obtained. In other words, further scientific data col-
lection is needed to test the hypotheses that are generated in the study. For
instance, to test the hypothesis that stocking sufficient items will reduce
customer dissatisfaction, one needs to measure the current level of customer
satisfaction and collect further data on customer satisfaction levels whenever
sufficient number of items are stocked and made readily available to the
customers. Data on every variable in the theoretical framework from which
hypotheses are generated should also be collected.
Data Analysis
In the data analysis step, the data gathered are statistically analyzed to see if the
hypotheses that were generated have been supported. For instance, to see if stock
levels influence customer satisfaction, one might want to do a correlational analysis
and determine the relationship between the two factors. Similarly, other hypotheses
could be tested through appropriate statistical analysis.
Deduction
is the process of arriving at conclusions by interpreting the meaning of
the results of the data analysis. For instance, if it was found from the data
analysis that increasing the stocks was positively correlated to (increased)
customer satisfaction (say, .5), then one can deduce that if customer
satisfaction is to be increased, the shelves have to be better stocked.
Another inference from this data analysis is that stocking of shelves
accounts for (or explains) 25% of the variance in customer satisfaction
(.52). Based on these deductions, the researcher would make
recommendations on how the ―customer dissatisfaction‖ problem could be
solved.
 Two Examples of the Application of the
Hypothetico-Deductive Method in
Organizations
xample 2.2 THE CIO DILEMMA
Observation
The Chief Information Officer (CIO) of a firm observes that the newly installed Management Information
System (MIS) is not being used by middle managers as much as was originally expected. The managers
often approach the CIO or some other computer expert for help, or worse still, make decisions without
facts.
―There is surely a problem here, the CIO exclaims.

nformation Gathering through Informal Interviews

Talking to some of the middle-level managers, the CIO finds that many of them have very little idea
as to what MIS is all about, what kinds of information it could provide, and how to access it and
utilize the information.
 Obtaining More Information through Literature Survey
The CIO immediately uses the Internet to explore further information on the lack of use of MIS in
organizations. The search indicates that many middle-level managers especially the old-timers are not
familiar with operating personal computers and experience computer anxiety. Lack of knowledge about
what MIS offers is also found to be another main reason why some managers do not use it.

Formulating a Theory
Based on all this information, the CIO develops a theory incorporating all the relevant factors
contributing to the lack of access to the MIS by managers in the organization.

Hypothesizing
From such a theory, the CIO generates various hypotheses for testing, one among them being:
Knowledge of the usefulness of MIS would help managers to put it to greater use.
Data Collection
The CIO then develops a short questionnaire on the various factors theorized to influence the use of
the MIS by managers, such as the extent of knowledge of what MIS is, what kinds of information
MIS provides, how to gain access to the information, and the level of comfort felt by managers in
using computers in general, and finally, how often managers have used the MIS in the preceding 3
months.
Data Analysis
The CIO then analyzes the data obtained through the questionnaire to see what factors prevent the
managers from using the system.

Deduction
Based on the results, the manager deduces or concludes that managers do not use MIS owing to
certain factors. These deductions help the CIO to take necessary action to rectify the situation, which
might include, among other things, organizing seminars for training managers on the use of
computers, and MIS and its usefulness.
 THE UNINTENDED
Example 2.3
CONSEQUENCES OF BUDGET CUTS
Observatio
nThe Vice President in charge of Finance senses that the budgetary process is not working as well as
it should. Managers seem to be overcautious, pad their bud- gets excessively, and all in all, seem to
be acting defensively. In essence, the VP observes various phenomena and senses a problem.

Information Gathering through Informal Interviews

The VP chats with a few of the managers and their staff. He finds that there is much anxiety among
the managers that the budgets for all departments are likely to be slashed. There is also a
perception that the new information system that is planned for installation will take away from the
managers much of their original power and control. A general notion that the managers who have
bigger bud- gets will be evaluated more favorably also seems to prevail.
Gathering More Information through Literature Survey
Amused by these findings, the VP reads materials on the subject and finds that many factors, including
the ones identified through the interviews, are instrumental in thwarting the idea of effective budgeting.

Formulating Theory about What Is Happening

Piecing together the information obtained from the interviews and the literature, the VP develops a
theory of possible factors that may be influencing ineffective budgeting practices. That is, a
theoretical framework of the factors that could account for padding of budgets is developed.

Hypothesizing
From the theory, the VP conjectures the relationships among the factors, and one of the hypotheses
is that fear of budget cuts influences excessive padding of the budget.
Data Collection
In this phase, the VP collects data from the other managers anonymously through a questionnaire, on
various factors such as the extent of anxiety regarding perceived budget cuts, concern regarding the
installation of the proposed information systems, and the like.

Data Analysis
The VP then has the data analyzed to see if there are indeed significant correlations between each of the
different factors and slack in the budget (i.e., the hypotheses are tested).

Deduction
If significant correlations are in fact found, the VP would deduce (or conclude) that misperceptions
about budget cuts and the proposed information system did indeed have an influence on the
managers padding their budgets. To solve the problem, the VP may then clarify the real situation to
the managers, allay their fears, and educate them on how they would all benefit by proposing realistic
budgets.
OTHER TYPES OF
RESEARCH
Case Studies
Case studies involve in-depth, contextual analyses of similar situations in other
organizations, where the nature and definition of the problem happen to be the same as
experienced in the current situation. As in the hypothetico-deductive studies,
hypotheses can be developed in case studies as well. However, if a particular
hypothesis has not been substantiated in even a single other case study, no support
can be established for the alternate hypothesis developed.
Case study, as a problem-solving technique, is not often undertaken in organizations
because such studies dealing with problems similar to the one experienced by a
particular organization of a particular size and in a particular type of setting are
difficult to come by. Moreover, authentic case studies are difficult to find because
many companies prefer to guard them as proprietary data.
Action Research
Action research is sometimes undertaken by consultants who want to initiate change
processes in organizations. In other words, action research methodology is most
appropriate while effecting planned changes. Here, the researcher begins with a
problem that is already identified, and gathers relevant data to provide a tentative
problem solution. This solution is then implemented, with the knowledge that
there may be unintended consequences following such implementation. The
effects are then evaluated, defined, and diagnosed, and the research continues on an
ongoing basis until the problem is fully resolved.
Example The vice president of CDS Co. wants to introduce a new system of
bookkeeping that is likely to meet with some resistance from the Accounting
Department. Based on the past experience in the organization, the VP would like to
seek a solution to the problem of employee resistance.
There are several other methods of obtaining data for research purposes, such as
through focus groups, panels, observational studies, projective techniques, and
interactive media, as we shall see in Chapter 10.
-End-