Report R5.7 Understanding Research and Theory Development Seminar Leader: Anand Agrawal, ICFAI Business School, Hyderabad prof.anand[at]gmail.com The seminar focused on theory development in research and the various widely held myths concerning the activity of research. The seminar started with a discussion in which the participants had a chance to put forth their ideas on research and research methodology. The discussion focused on the concept of research as understood by doctoral students. This brought out certain popular notions concerning research. The seminar leader then proceeded to list certain commonly held myths about research. Myth 1: Formulating a research problem (or a research question) is always the first step in research. Myth 2: Data collection always starts after finalizing research questions and research design. According to Eisenhardt (2001), the research problem may get changed many times during the process of research. Defining a concrete research problem at the beginning of the research may not always be possible. Mintzberg’s experiments show that the researcher should make sense out of the observable world by ordering the relationships among elements that engage our focus of attention in the real world. According to Jenkins (2000), in case of absence of clarity on the issue, narrative based techniques are used to find research problems and research questions. Many researchers have converted theory testing research into theory building research. Sometimes the identification of research problem begins after data collection. During the process of data collection, some important research questions may arise leading to the adjustments in research design. Myth 3: All deductive research is quantitative and all inductive research is qualitative. Myth 4: Nearly all qualitative data are subjective, while quantitative data are more objective. It is important to recognise that systematic observation and testing can be accomplished using a wide variety of methods. The selection of research approach in a given study should be based on the problem of interest, resources available, the skills and training of the researcher, and the audience for the research. The qualitative approach investigates the why and how of a social phenomenon, whereas quantitative methods focus on what, where, and when. Mintzberg (2000) argues that theories can be assessed without numbers (even judgementally) and numbers can be used to induce theories. According to Yin (1981), case-study research can involve qualitative data only, quantitative data only, or both. The so-called qualitative methodology recognises that the researcher's subjectivity is intimately involved in the research process. The search for objectivity renders the researcher a passive recipient of external information. Myth 5: Researchers should never start with a priori constructs in mind (to avoid bias). According to Eisenhardt (2001) and Mintzberg (2005), while starting research, a priori specification of constructs (or an outline of the theory) can be useful to shape the initial design of research. However, these constructs (and outline) are tentative and no construct is guaranteed a place in the resultant theory. Myth 6: Anomalies should be discarded whenever found during research. Mintzberg (2005) suggests that anomalies provide the opportunities to improve upon the existing theories. Mintzberg (2005) states that falsification should not be an end but the means to the creation of new theories or, at least, the significant adaptation of old ones. Anomalies should be cherished; reflecting on the reasons for the anomalies can provide new insights. Carlile and Christensen (2005) suggest that discovery of an anomaly gives researchers the opportunity to revisit the categorisation scheme--to cut the data in a different way, so that the anomaly and the prior associations of attributes and outcomes can all be explained. Myth 7: Use of complicated research methods and statistical tests will provide rigour to the research. This is a widely held myth especially by many doctoral scholars. Research methods should be simple and straightforward. This helps in formulating theory. Myth 8: Theories are discovered. Theories are not discovered but created. Explanations are conceived, not found. Researchers create (or develop) theories by combining observations from previous literature, data, experience, and common sense. Theory Development An important part of research is theory development. The American Heritage Dictionary defines theory as “a system of assumptions, accepted principles, and procedures devised to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the nature or behaviour of a specified set of phenomenon." Literature suggests that theory development is a continuum--from lists (categories) to typologies (comprehensive lists) leading to impressions of relationships among factors to causations between and pattern among these relationships, and finally to fully explanatory models. According to Carlile and Christensen (2005), theory building occurs in two major stages--the descriptive stage and the normative stage. The essence of the literature survey in theory building is to go beyond deductive research and venture into inductive research. Therefore, even if deductive research is undertaken initially, the research effort must progress towards inductive in the normative theory building stage. The seminar called upon researchers to be aware of their own mental constructs about research, and also to recognise that different mental constructs of research can be relevant in different contexts. A researcher needs to think clearly about how the methods of research contribute to theory development. References Agrawal, A. (2007). Understanding research and theory development. Unpublished manuscript. Carlile, P. R., & Christensen, C. M. (2005). The cycles of theory building in management research. Unpublished manuscript (Version 6). Retrieved November 14, 2007, from http://www.innosight.com/documents/Theory%20Building.pdf Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550. Jenkins, S. R. (2000). Introduction to the special issue: Defining gender, relationships, and power. Sex Roles, 42(7-8), 467-493. Mintzberg, H. (2000). View from the top: Henry Mintzberg on strategy and management. Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 31- 45. Mintzberg, H. (2005). Developing theory: About the development of theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt (Eds.), Great minds in management: The process of theory development (pp. 355-372). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Yin, R. K. (1981). The case study crisis: Some answers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 58-65.
Xavier Institute of Management, Xavier Square, Bhubaneswar 751013, India Research World (ISSN 0974-2379) http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/Home |
