Transcript Slide 1

Reflections and Critical thinking
Lecture 8
C22
Johan Brink, IIE
30 November 2011
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Agenda
•
•
•
•
Review of qualitative methods
Mixed methods
Reflections and critical thinking
Ethics
• Chapter:
– 5 Ethics
– 24 Qualitative & Quantitative
– 25 Mixed methods
www.handels.gu.se
Review of qualitative…
Methods
Semi and unstructured interviews
Ethnography
Focus groups
Historical cases, documents
Few deep Cases
Authentic
Close to the phenomena
www.handels.gu.se
Qualitative Analysis
Grounded theory
• Reveal the underlying ‘hidden’
truth
• Deconstructs and fragments
– Coding themes –interpreted by the
researcher
‘All credibility, all good
conscience, all evidence
of truth come only from
the senses’
- Nietzsche
Narrative & historical
•Holistic
•The original source ‘shine’ through
– References
– Details –thick descriptions
– Describe the research access/presence
•Presented to illustrate and explain the phenomena
– Coherent /
– Contrasting
•Selected – interpreted by the researcher
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Interpretations
Interpretation
What do I see?
Primary interpretations
Misunderstandings
Unclear ties
Biased data
Incomprehensible
Secondary interpretations
Theory pre-understanding
• Language
• Labels
• Assumptions
• What we look for..
www.handels.gu.se
Reflective
• Why do I as a researcher see the
things I see?
• Why do I as a researcher interpret as
I do?
• Theoretical pre-knowledge!
• Time and place dependent discourses
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Inductive logic
5. Revision
of theory
1. Empirics
2.
Interpretations/analysis
4. Findings
3.
Theoretical
comparison
/synthesis
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
… and quantitative
Methods (empirics)
Structured interviews
Questionnaires
Structured observation
Content analysis of text and images
+ other data & Information
Hypothesis testing & statistical tools
Operationalization & constructs
Sample & populations
Reliability & Validity
www.handels.gu.se
Deductive logic
6.
Revision
of
theory
1.
Theory
5. Hypothesis
confirmed/rejected
4.
Findings
2. Hypothesis
3. Data collection
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Qualitative and quantitative methods
• There is a difference in how quantitative
researchers usually writes and talks about their
research processes.
• Do quantitative researchers really capture the
reality?
• Do qualitative researchers really get a true contact
with the social reality just by ‘being there’? How
intrusive is the semi-structured interview?
www.handels.gu.se
Distinctions between qualitative and
quantitative
Behavior and meaning
Quantitative often focus on behaviors – what they do
Qualitative often focus on meaning – what they think
But in reality both paradigms can and do capture a bit of
both!
Testing vs. Generating theories
Both qualitative and quantitative can be designed to test
theories!
Both qualitative and quantitative can be designed to
generate theories!
www.handels.gu.se
Distinctions between qualitative and
quantitative
Usage of numbers
For qualitative:
Frequency of themes and constructs,
Facts, Statistics & numbers in cases and
narratives
For quantitative:
Operationalisation and definitions –
define the numbers!
Generalization to population but to
‘universal’ theories ?
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Mixing methods
Epistemological version – no!
Incompatible due to differences in
• Epistemological paradigms (Positivistic
or Interpretative)
• Ontological paradigms ( Objectivism –
constructionism)
Pragmatic/Technical version – ok!
Mutually supportive, although requiring
different skills
• Methodological triangulation
• Facilitation, program – sequence
– Providing hypothesis
– Design quantitative research
– Select cases
– Fill in the gaps & nuances
– Content and process
• Complementarity - parallel
www.handels.gu.se
Mediating the clash: Critical realism
• An entity can exist independently of
our knowledge of it – its ‘real’ –
However, the social world is always
mediated and thus subjective
• ‘The social world is reproduced and
transformed in daily life’ – There are
mechanisms that are real, but these
mechanism are directly accessible –
but only through their effects
www.handels.gu.se
Reflections: Critical thinking 101
A critical thinker
• What is the real, underlying, problem?
• Which definitions are there?
• Which assumptions are there?
• Is there information lacking?
• Who benefits?
• Which relationships are there/ patterns?
• Are there inconsistencies & conflicting logics?
• What would happen if something is changed?
(contra factual reasoning)
• Self awareness –is this my perspective?!
• Multiple perspectives!
www.handels.gu.se
Reflections: Theories
Theory
As explaining the meaning, the true ‘nature’
As explaining the correspondence –
frequencies , relationships, cause & effects
As providing usability - applications
Theories
Grand theories & Mid level
Conflicting
Incommensurability between theories
Between Epistemological paradigms
Model
Theoretical
Empirical
Accuracy
Simplicity
Generalizability
www.handels.gu.se
Reflections: Conclusions in projects
• Normative
– Suggestions based on?
– Example: Our organization has grown
considerably. How should we be
organized?
• Future
– Based on what?
– Example: Buying behavior has changed
in our industry. Will and if so how,
will innovation behavior change?
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Reflections: Conclusions in projects
Situation is … we have observed, figured out…
If we do as theories says ..if they applies here.. We
would…
If we do as other examples/data/benchmarks says…
We would recommend…
The research project often boils down to an
accurate description of current situation… and
looking for ‘solutions’ proposed by others…
But have you then…
…generated new (theoretical) understanding?
…tested existing theories?
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Reflections: Evidence-Based Management
In search of excellence:
Lessons from best run
companies
The myth of Excellence:
Why great companies
Never try to be the best
at everything
Managing by Measuring:
How to improve your
organization’s
performance through
effective benchmarking
Managing with passion:
Making the most of your
job and your life
The quest for authentic
power: Getting past past
manipulation, control,
and self-limiting beliefs
What would Machiavelli
do? The ends justify the
Meanness
Build to last: :Successful
habits of visionary
companies
Corporate failure by
design: Why
organizations are built to
fail
Normative theories and advices…
•What assumptions does the idea or practice make about
people and organizations? What would have to be true
about people and organizations for the idea or practice
to be effective?
•Which of these assumptions seems reasonable and
correct to you and your colleagues? Which seems wrong
and suspect?
•Could this idea or practice still succeed if the
assumptions turned out to be wrong?
•How might you and your colleagues quickly and
inexpensively gather some data to test the
reasonableness of the underlying assumptions?
•What other ideas or management practices can you
think of that would address the same problem or issue
and be more consistent with what you believe to be true
about people and organizations?
www.handels.gu.se
Research Ethics
Implications for the subjects
• Will this cause any harm?
– What is harm? For whom?
• Power and intrusive?
– Invasion of privacy?
• Experiments and interfering?
– Does the goal justify the means?
• Covert strategies, deception & observations
Confidentially agreements and anonymity
Openness of findings
Access to reinterpret the empirics
Trustworthiness?
Conflicts of interests
Independence
Financiers?
www.handels.gu.se
Research Proposal presentations
•
•
–
–
•
•
Hand in draft 9th January
Present 11th January 9.15 -17.00
B24 & B44: If you plan to write in a pair: Split into different rooms!
No presentation on the 12th January!
Hand in final version 15th January, 24.00
Task 3, 60% of the final grade!
• You should write a 2-4 page description of the project, followed by a 2-4 page analysis.
• Explain the relationship between key aspects of research design, research methods, and data analysis from the
perspective of different research strategies.
• Identify researchable questions and estimate or delineate data needs depending on the purpose, models and
frameworks of an empirical investigation
• Explain how you plan to gather qualitative evidence, including how to conduct interviews and/or gather
quantitative data
• Relate to the book, and how you can use common techniques to acquire and analyse data.
• Describe your scientific paradigms and explain how these affect research strategies.
• What will you do when the planned research strategy ‘all goes wrong’? what problems might arise, and how
can you solve them?
www.handels.gu.se
Research Proposal presentations
•
•
•
•
•
Present 11th January 9.15 -17.00 – no presentations on the 12th January
Each group of max 3 students from Master in Management and max 3 students from IIM
Parallel sessions & 2 hour /student group (6 students, 15 min each)
Reply to a ‘Doodle’ which time that suites you
There will be 1 assigned student + one from faculty to comment on your proposal – however read
and participate in the discussions
• You will be graded on the final proposal
– A clear discussion and presentation might help us understand better!
– A clear discussion and presentation result in better comments – improvements!
Management
Student 1
Student 2
comment on 2
comment on 3
IIM
Student 1
Student 2
comment on 2
comment on 3
Student 3
Student 3
comment on 1
comment on 1
www.handels.gu.se
Take home exam
• Small take home exam
• 20% final grade
• Handout Monday 9th January, 8.00 –
on GUL
• Handin 15th January, 24.00
• Use the Bryman & Bell textbook or
similar textbooks
• Reexam – in February
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Example of question (Max 2 pages)
• Working as a management consultant in the food industry you are hired by a company,
FOODInc. FOODInc is a major manufacturer with 5 different departments of various sizes. In
total there are 400 employees in operations, 200 in Sales and Marketing, 200 in Distribution &
Sourcing, 100 in Research and Development, and 100 in Finance, IT and Administrative support.
FOODInc has for several years been running a budget deficit and is at last required to take
actions to reduce their over spending. A first step has been a successful project which has
increased the efficiency of the manufacturing operations facilities and reduced procurement
costs. The turn has now come to reduce the staff which, as always, is a controversial issue. This is
why they have hired you, with profound knowledge in business research methods. Your task is to
provide the management team and the local union with solid evidences and scientifically based
arguments of where to do the reductions.
• Describe and motivate how you would perform such a study in order to identify on which
occupational and departmental positions you can advice the company to lower its staff levels.
• Which difficulties are likely to occur from a research perspective in your suggested study (e.g.
effecting validity and reliability)? What can you do to mitigate them?
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se
Example of question (Max 1 page).
• You are working for SmallBook, a small publisher of children’s books. The company has
during the last couple of years won many awards for their high quality books. However the
book sales are down from last year and the CEO turns to you to figure out why. The CEO
thinks the main reason could be found in the exposure of SmallBooks books in bookshops
which he thinks is sloppy. The managers in the bookshops claim that despite the awards
SmallBooks have won, parents are not demanding these books. In addition, books are
increasingly sold through other distribution channels such as Supermarkets and over the Web.
The Bookshops are not to blame for your lack of sales!
• Apparently the relationship between awards for good book and sales of good books does not
work in your case. How could you, with the help of quantitative research methods, investigate
why the relationship between awards and book sales does not work for SmallBooks?
2015-07-17
www.handels.gu.se