 | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Training Seminars (Current) XIMB FPM Leaflet Seminar Reports 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 | | Research World, Vol. 1, 2004 Research Training Seminars at XIMB: 2003-2004 [Foreword] Bringing Forth a Research World
http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.1 D. P. Dash, XIMB, Bhubaneswar (dpdash[at]ximb.ac.in) Guide: Hawking, S. 1988. A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes, Bantam, New York. [Chapter 11: Conclusion]. [N.B. Writing and sharing the reports will be a regular feature of these seminars. Writing and reading the reports create an opportunity to reflect on the discussions again. Precise recording of the discussions is not the aim. Therefore, the reporters should feel free to produce a version that maximises reflections and helps take the discussion forward. DP] This was the first Research Training Seminar held at XIMB as a part of the FPM curriculum. The participants were quite eager to see the way it is going to start and the direction it is going to take. The facilitator Dr. D. P. Dash welcomed the participants and requested for a self-introduction by the participants. The first question was to describe the structure of the seminar. The answer was: There is no clear structure or steps to follow. But, to aid the process of discussion, we may use the guide text (which was circulated earlier). So it started! What is Research? Before getting into the text, a view emerged to discuss our individual notions on research. Is it the same as searching again for something we have already lost, or is it about trying to know the unknown? An attempt to answer this started with a suggestion: At a basic level, research is about generalizing some conclusions through the analysis of a large number of observations. Still, there are many things, which cannot be observed so easily because they change with place and time. For example, the qualities observed in a leader. It is difficult to list the qualities that are essential to ascertain if someone is a leader. Also many observations about leadership qualities are contradictory. Another question arose: Suppose we investigated (researched!) for something (may be a conclusion or generalization) and found it to be absent. Can we consider it as a work of research because we concluded that it is not there! Is there a last word on what to consider as research and what not to? It seemed, even this can be taken as research under certain conditions (e.g., in a sponsored project). Whether there can be a ‘last word’ or not has to be answered through this seminar series. Another question came up: Is research work the same as preparing a PhD thesis? You tried to prove something but at the end could not. Can you submit it as a PhD thesis? Again the answer seemed to be relative, e.g., relative to the design of PhD programmes. Yet another question emerged: What is more useful: the research or the researcher? Has there been a research on what is research? It turned out that such questions connect with a large area of discussion, involving knowledge production, methodology, demarcation, accumulation, inquiry systems, etc. At this stage, the discussion turned to the guide text. The Hawking chapter suggests that people have notions about the structure of the universe (their individual ‘world pictures’). One such world picture involves the idea that the world is flat and it rests on the back of a giant tortoise, which is itself on the back of another tortoise, etc., all the way down. Another such world picture is that of the theory of super-strings. He also describes how such world pictures have gradually changed. At any stage, there are several world pictures within the reckoning. This led us to discuss what is truth. Truth becomes more complex if we are dealing with changing realities. For example, it would be difficult to ascertain the height of Mt. Everest if it is a changing (moving) mountain, which, some say, it is! The other sentences about truth that came up are: Is truth worth seeking? How true is this sentence: ‘Truth is what it is.’ The last paragraph of the conclusion contained Hawking’s view on the task of philosophers in analysing the world picture. He describes that philosophy has been ‘reduced’ to the task of analysing only the languages used, as the other branches of knowledge have become too specialised for it to handle. He says: ‘What a comedown in the tradition of philosophy!’ Of course, it may be an ascent in the tradition of philosophy, rather than a comedown. What looks like an ascent can also be a comedown from another perspective. There can also be a perspective in which the ideas of down or up, false or true, etc., may have no fixed meaning. This was reflected in the discussion on modernism and post-modernism. This generated some lively discussion on truth, power, and research. The idea emerged that research may not be one fixed type of activity. Different types of activity may still be distinguishable as research, depending upon some common expectations and traditions concerning research. One common expectation from research is that it should not restrict participation and it should create an opportunity for the participants to revise their viewpoints through the contribution of each other. This leads to the view that, in everyday life, we go about the chores of living (including acting, observing, thinking, deciding, communicating, problem-solving, etc.) until we hit a dead-end, become curious, or simply get tired. That is when we long for sharing our stories with others and benefit from others’ stories too. It is this kind of sharing and benefiting that research ought to promote. A framework was suggested to identify some common traditions of research. The framework speaks of five basic elements typically involved in research (DP would like to thank Prof. Gerard de Zeeuw for this understanding of research): Starting Material (Input): This is what constitutes the basic material upon which research operates. For example, inputs may be observations, experiences (in the form of reports, stories, etc.), perceptions, etc. Different research approaches may start with different inputs. Relationships (Comparison): The inputs are then compared among themselves, especially from the point of view of clarifying whether some inputs are related to each other. Different kinds of relationship are considered, although the relationship commonly used is this: whether the inputs ‘belong together’ in some sense. (For example, some auditory perceptions, i.e., sounds, may belong together in the sense that they constitute a fine melody or raga.) Structuring Device (Criterion): There is also a choice in deciding what structuring device or criteria should be adopted in deciding the type of relatedness to be searched for. To illustrate: Some experiences may be related by being the experiences of the same person in visiting different places or they may be related by being the experiences of different persons visiting the same place. Rules of Communication (Language): Research also involves some transfer of results. This requires rules of communication. These rules or conventions render the results of the structuring (see above) communicable to the relevant publics (see below). The vocabulary of variables, with the rules of linear algebra, is a common choice in research, although it need not be. Other choices can involve other vocabularies and rules. Examples of other rules: fuzzy set theory and calculus of indication (see the online article: Virtual Logic – The Calculus of Indication, by Louis H. Kauffman, available at: http://www.imprint.co.uk/C&HK/vol5/v5-1_kauffman.htm), etc. Relevant Users (Public): It is sometimes assumed that research results are meant for everyone, present or future. However, this may not happen easily; different publics may get different meanings/values from the same research. Besides, episodes of research are organised with the purpose of benefiting specific users (e.g., sponsors). Various user segments are becoming aware of their role in the research process. For researchers, this opens up the question: Whom should this research serve and how? This opens up choices. Depending upon the choices made in the above five areas, we arrive at different approaches to research. In other words, given a specific approach to research (e.g., positivism, constructivism, realism, etc.), it should be possible to indicate the choices that produce the specific approach. [Reported by Pradeep Kumar Ojha and DP Dash] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.2 Biju Dominic, Mudra, Mumbai (b.dominic[at]mudra.com) Guides: (i) Heath, R. and Howard-Spink, J. 2000. And Now For Something Completely Different: Current Thinking About the Brain Means we Need to Change the Way Brands are Researched. Market Research Society Conferences. (Source: The World Advertising Resource Center, http://www.warc.com/) (ii) Roxburgh, C. 2003. Hidden Flaws in Strategy (Parts 1 and 2). Businessworld, 19 may 2003. (iii) Plessis, E. du and Hollis, N. 2002. Low Investment Processing: Is It HIP Enough? Admap, Issue 430. (Source: The World Advertising Resource Center, http://www.warc.com/) The seminar was structured in two parts. The first part focused on the human/emotional aspects of market research and the second part dealt with the relationship between cognitive neuroscience and marketing. Part 1 This part involved a critical reflection on some common market research practices. It questioned the meaningfulness and relevance of the kind of data collected through interviews, surveys, and focus group techniques. By using some of the results of cognitive neuroscience, it was argued that some of the common ways of doing market research might need to be replaced with new approaches. The seminar started with the observation that about 80% of new products fail and about 50% of adverting expenses are wasted. It was argued that poor market research is one of the possible reasons. Market research is usually done by asking questions to respondents and then analysing their responses in a systematic way, usually employing various statistical techniques. However, this involves many assumptions and expectations about the relationship between what the respondents say and what they really think, believe, or practise. In reality, respondents are only human, hence emotional beings. They are subject to cognitive characteristics of the human brain, personal influences of the researcher, immediate priorities, various social compulsions, etc. Examples of the research done to develop advertisement campaigns for Pepsodent, Axe, and Rexona were discussed. Fundamental Questions in Market Research Why research? Most people do not like to change and adjust to new situations. About 80% of the all the market research is done to reinforce the existing conclusions. Research reports are also used for reassuring others (and avoiding questions!). However, a marketing professional needs to use the results of market research in order to develop marketing strategies, which come with a degree of guarantee for success. What to research? Most market research tries to find out facts or points of view. Both are difficult to capture for many reasons. First, what people say is not necessarily what they do. Second, even if we get a reliable picture of facts or points of view, these may not really be the relevant ones. How to research? There are many issues related to the practical aspects of conducting market research. When a piece of research is conducted by getting field assistants to fill up questionnaires, the quality of the responses is not very high because of the low involvement of the researcher. Many researcher-respondent interactions can be characterised by the ‘sin of suggestibility’: a particular question or statement can trigger a particular thought in the mind of the respondent producing a particular response, not necessarily representing how the respondent normally thinks. Using sophisticated statistical analyses on data so generated does not help one arrive at high-quality conclusions. The following two research approaches were discussed from the point of view of how well they address the above issues: 1. Embedded Research: In this, the researcher is embedded within the reality that is being subject to research (similar to the embedded journalists during the Iraq war). 2. ZMET (Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique): In this, the researcher avoids verbal responses and allows the respondents to speak through images. In one example, the researcher gave a set of photographic cameras to a group of people to take one picture each of their own community-life that they think is representative of their culture. Some common patterns were found in those pictures that captured some aspects of their culture. Given the criticisms of the survey approach in market research and the arguments in favour of the case study approach discussed in the seminar, there was some discussion comparing the two. One question was about choosing the right case that would produce the correct picture of the whole population. The answer was not very clear. It seemed that getting the correct picture of a population through a survey technique is equally problematic. Therefore, the real answer may lie in using experience and insight in unravelling the important facets of a complex reality and retaining an open mind about revising the result with accumulated experience. Part 2 This part dealt with neurology (science of brain) and cognitive psychology (science of mind). It seems, a number of ideas in marketing and market research are based on very old thinking in the cognitive sciences. However, with new thinking developing in these areas, there is a need to review the fundamental ideas in marketing (e.g., USP, positioning, etc.). A rethinking can start with the following principles. Heuristics Principle: The brain is not as rational as it is made out to be by classical economics. Most decisions are really arrived at by using heuristic devices, of which we may not always be aware. (A reference was made to the work of Daniel Kahnemann, who got the 2002 Nobel Prize in Economics “for having integrated insights from psychological research into economic science, especially concerning human judgment and decision-making under uncertainty”: http://www.nobel.se/economics/laureates/2002/index.html) Reciprocation Principle: We try to repay whatever another person has provided to us. Contrast Principle: If two things are presented one after another and the second one is different from the first, we tend to see it more differently than it actually is. Social Proof Principle: In arriving at a judgement, we often follow the multitude. We try to find out what the others think in order to determine what or how we need to think. The current thinking in neuroscience supports the following positions, which provide a very different basis to develop marketing thinking (and market research) for the future: Position 1: Decisions are based on emotions, as well as rational thinking Position 2: Decisions depend on types of memory Position 3: Memory is of two types, explicit (short term) and implicit (long term) Position 4: Our memory stores things in the form of images, through engrams, i.e., distributed network of neurons Position 5: Memory is never a direct reproduction of stored perceptions; it is always a reconstruction, based on the type of cue presented to the brain In discussing these, a contrast was drawn between fundamental research (as conducted by university professors) and applied research (as conducted by marketing professionals). There was a suggestion to appreciate the similarities between these two. A researcher, no matter what the context of research is, usually has to step out of the normal flow of life to pursue research. At some stage, the researcher steps back into normal life. For research to be a meaningful human practice, some value addition must take place at this stage. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy, Pradeep K Ojha, and DP Dash] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.3 Ananta Giri, MIDS, Chennai (aumkrishna[at]yahoo.com) Guides: (i) Giri, A. Creative Social Research: Rethinking Theories and Methods.(ii) Giri, A. Social Science Research in India: The Calling of Home and the World. This seminar covered a broad range of topics, but the focus was on exploring creativity in social research. One way to describe the seminar may be in terms of the following two questions: What is creative social research? Why do we need social research to be creative? [The examples and metaphors used in the seminar were mostly drawn from anthropology, cultural studies, sociology, and related subjects, given the seminar facilitator's background in these areas.] What is Creative Social Research? Typically, various human (or social) practices are taken to be fields of creative action, e.g., doing agriculture, teaching, doing sports, making shoes, and cooking. Similarly, doing research can also be taken to be a field of creative action. Like in the other creative practices, the goals and methods of research can also undergo changes when the internal and/or external circumstances change. Generally, arriving at a theory is taken to be a goal in research. This goal is going through some rethinking. Apart from being considered as mere predictive rules, theories are also being considered as torch lights that illuminate how we conduct our lives and our encounters with reality. Similarly, the methods of research are also going through some rethinking. Apart from being considered as formal techniques to collect and analyse objective data, methods are also being considered as episodes of encounter and engagement with different forms of life, so as to trigger a process of reflection and self-transcendence, for both the researchers and the co-participants. There can be two ways to talk about creative social research. (i) It can be talked about definitionally, i.e., by defining some characteristics of creative social research; (ii) it can also be talked about ethnographically, i.e., by pointing out concrete instances of creative social research. The seminar tended to use both the approaches. It was proposed that rethinking theories and methods would be facilitated by first rethinking our notions of self and society. In the social sciences, it is not uncommon to see individuals being treated as role-occupants and society as founded on some presupposition. These can lead to a partial view of things. What is worse, in the practice of social research, such narrow views tend to get unnecessarily valorised to the detriment of any possible alternative views. It is possible to embrace much richer conceptions of self and society and develop a more creative research practice on its basis. Dr. Giri presented self as a participant and society as a form of play--or a festival of multiple presuppositions. On this view, self emerges through participation in two sets of practices--practices of self-cultivation and practices of learning, in constant dialogue with each other. This participation produces many different forms of living and relationships. To explore these relationships, a set of thoughtful insights from some contributors were presented and discussed during this part of the seminar. Insights from Various Contributors Touraine (in his book Can We Live Together?: Equality and Difference) argues that our notion of the individual may be social or non-social, highlighting the social-individual's critical and creative relationship with the rules of social life as distinguished from mere following of the rules. Wilfred (in his work on liberation theology) presents us with a historical understanding of human practices. This is in sharp contrast with the universalistic notions of modernity (e.g., truth, method, and determinism) that tend to restrain creative practice. Van Staveren reminds us of the multiple commitments of humans acting as economic agents--commitment to freedom, justice, and care. These have been embedded in the institutions of market, state, and family, respectively. Researchers often treat these as separate domains although they inter-penetrate to a degree. This calls for a pluralization of what we are studying. Giri's own attempt at pluralizing in the area of historiography produces three autonomous but inter-penetrative domains of historical enterprise--vision, reason, and power. Although the common historiography privileges the enterprise of power, a more creative treatment of the subject will not ignore the other two enterprises inter-woven with it. Harvey (in Spaces of Hope) encourages us to recognise the contingencies of our actions and ourselves. Our presence, perspectives, and possibilities are not entirely determined by any law-like generalisations. There is nothing inevitable about how we think and act. We emerge through concrete and diverse practices. Pani (in his writings on the Gandhian economic methods) emphasises the need to include the subjective dimension of the inquirer in any research endeavour. This urges us not to treat the results of research as conclusive or final, but subject to refinement as the researcher improves own subjectivity through self-development. Dash presents a formulation of action research in which the task of research is seen as bringing forth and improving local configurations that prove to be a form of support within some living contexts. Gasper pleads for a type of interdisciplinarity based on an ecological view of knowledge disciplines. This would recognise multiple roles, niches, and activities, which generate complex systemic results that transcend the original participating elements. Discussion At this stage, an open discussion happened, with contributions from many participants. The following questions were asked: Why should we be creative? Is it possible to be creative? Are we looking at creative outputs (through mundane steps) or creative processes? Is there some recognition to be gained through creativity? Isn't research always creative? The discussion on these questions indicated that creative research would always be marginalized at the periphery, until it builds up sufficient strength so as to dislodge the more established results and assume centrality (thus creating a new periphery!). Working on the periphery may also be a personal choice of a researcher. Examples of researchers who have laid down their lives in the pursuit of creative research were mentioned. An argument was presented to help us appreciate the challenges before intellectual workers working at the level of storing, structuring, and prioritising social learning in any domain (e.g., journal editors). It seems that the concern for reducing the cost of the social learning process might sometimes conflict with the concern for allowing researchers to be creative in their research. Why Do We Need Social Research to be Creative? Social research has to engage with established human practices and institutions. But, established practices and institutions are not always stable or invariant. They are subject to transformation. For example, the institution of family is slowly transforming to accept single-gender families (as in the Netherlands, for example). Therefore, if we continue to use established and familiar elements in our research process, we are likely to miss out the essence of the changes taking place in the relevant domains. For research results to be relevant to a changing and transforming reality, the resources and rules inside research need to be adapted accordingly to engage with that reality. In this part of the seminar too, a number of contributors were mentioned (e.g., Wallerstein--making social sciences matter, Flyvbjerg--phronetic research, Mohanty--multi-valued logic, Bhaskar—dialectical universalism, and Gandhi--sharing space and time with others). The main message seemed to be the following: Practising creative social research requires practices on different fronts, involves sharing space and time with the others--in conversation and play, and involves the picture of an emergent self, emerging out of the journey of life. The facilitator characterised Indian social research in terms of a parochial fixation (parochialism of location and language). What is required instead, is the systematic development of a comparative global perspective. Indian social researchers' role in the public sphere is nearly indistinguishable from that of journalists. It is desirable that social researchers should contribute to the development of a rich public discourse on issues that significantly affect public life today. Discussion There was a discussion on the nature of academic institutions in India (and elsewhere). It was argued that these institutions are likely to stifle creative research. They are also likely to repress any view that goes against the views of the established order. It was also pointed out that such repression could come from sources other than the state. The message, as aptly expressed by Prof. Chittaranjan Dash, was this: To be creative, you have to be courageous. In addition to courage, personal investment as well as a will to keep research relatively free from any form of incorporation may also be important. [Reported by Pradeep K Ojha and DP Dash] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.4 B. M. Kitching, QUT, Australia (randbkitching[at]bigpond.com) Issues Covered: To do research or not to do research--from the very beginning a research career involves making decisions, making choices; Is research for me? What are the qualities that characterize a researcher? Which research area shall I choose? Where should I go to study? Who should I choose as a supervisor? Now I have a research area, what about research questions? Will I test a theory? Will I extend theory? Will I fill in a gap? Will I work within a paradigm or seek to develop new paradigms? The vexed question of methods! Quantitative or qualitative? Experimental design or political analysis? Having chosen a path, how do I deal with blocks and barriers? With a PhD successfully achieved, what next? Continuing the journey towards the unknown region. Summary Dr. Beverley M. Kitching started with a brief introduction of the courses held at her university and emphasized that they have to maintain quality with very limited resources. The discussion started with a question, which an individual planning to go for research faces, i.e., ‘whether to do research or not to do research’. She said that most individuals are not clear about their goals when they join their graduate course; they have the limited goal of attaining their graduate degree and start earning at the earliest. She said that she focuses on identifying the right candidate for research and higher studies through various exercises and teaching styles and tries molding their interest towards research/entrepreneurship. She provides information to them about research work and generates interest. A student has a free choice to make the decision for joining research or not. She emphasizes that a research candidate should make the decision on his or her own. She focused on the characteristics of a researcher. According to her the different qualities that characterize a researcher (or entrepreneur) are: Imagination, Clear vision, Originality, Creativity, Independence of taking decisions, Strong analytical skills, Effective communication skills, Hard work, Dedication, and Lateral vision (Imagination and vision of broad category of thinking). She said that an individual to reflect on whether he/she is capable of pursuing research career could use these characteristics. She further said that carrying out research is going through a path of strange, exciting, challenging edges, where one can fall off at any time. A researcher should be have some clarity about the research area to be taken, the place to carry the research work, selecting for the right supervisor, practicalities and constraints to be faced in terms of time, money and future career. After going through the first step, the researcher has to find out the research questions. He has to choose the theoretical framework for designing the research work and start reviewing the literature. The research work might involve testing a theory, extending a theory, or filling in a gap in the literature. One has to decide whether to stick to a particular paradigm or seek to develop new one. In this context, the facilitator shared her own experience of research while pursuing her PhD. She discussed the pitfalls and ‘pratfalls’ (i.e., the self-created difficulties) to be faced. The researcher should then select a model and find out whether a hypothesis is needed to test the model. She further viewed that multidisciplinary approach should be taken in research where a researcher has not to stick to his/her narrow research area but should also look out of the box to have an idea of the other areas. She shared that, during her research she had to delve into different subjects, such as philosophy of science, political science, sociology of science, history, anthropology economics and Chinese literature, to carry out her research on the topic ‘Science Policy in the Peoples Republic of China: The Role of a Scientist’. The next issue for a researcher is to select the method that should be used in the research. The vexed question of whether to use quantitative, qualitative, experimental design, or political analysis is of great importance. The important points to take care at this stage are to know the best method providing the data, to test the various research questions, add any new work found, and have a sound knowledge of the topic. In this context, she discussed a model for multidisciplinary research. She said that one should not stick to one’s paradigm forever, but should get out sometimes and explore (overcoming various pitfall and pratfalls) other areas, and aim to produce new paradigms. Example: Mathematics, physics, and biology were combined to produce a new field known as mathematical ecology. Then a researcher needs to overcome various blocks and barriers, after choosing a path. In a research career, there may be various blocks and barriers. Some people who suffer from dyslexia are very intelligent and are good entrepreneurs; but their condition may cause some problem in a particular area of their work. Moreover, moving to a new place for getting ideas, family hurdles, and personal problems are some other factors that hinder a researcher’s job. The researcher should have a positive attitude to overcome these barriers and move forward. The next step for the researcher is to decide what he/she has to do after the completion of PhD. She said that the various options that are available are to go for postdoctoral fellowship, a job in a university or research institute, or into private consulting, etc. The facilitator said that completion of PhD is not the stop for research work but it is actually a starting point in search of new ideas. Research never stops. She gave her own example of continuing her research journey from science policy to Sino/Australian relations to Female entrepreneurship. She suggested that research is a never-ending process; therefore she and other researchers have to continuously move towards unknown regions. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy, with inputs from Amar KJR Nayak and DP Dash] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.5 Tripti Singh, FPM Scholar, XLRI, Jamshedpur (xltripti[at]yahoo.co.in) The seminar focused mainly on practical guidelines for research students. One of the areas addressed was the relationship between a research student and the supervisor concerned. As a supervisor and research student work together closely for a number of years, it is necessary to develop mutual respect and trust. Various practical tips on supervisor-researcher relationship were given from the experience of the seminar leader, like asking for prior appointments, regular interactions on research areas, etc. The research student should respond to feedback and criticism from, and also learn how to handle unprofessional behaviour from supervisors and others. Some issues regarding the recording of data were discussed next. It was stated that the purpose of recording data is to process later. A handout was circulated containing some tips on how to collect data using questionnaires. After going through the tips of data keeping, participants discussed the ways they employ to record data. The points which came out of the discussion gave practical insights into how this process can be better managed. The next point was how to manage time effectively and efficiently. Various aspects of research, such as development of new theory, models, tools, techniques and procedures, further studies on existing theories, originality in exploring the unknown and unanticipated, originality in use of data, etc., were discussed. Flagging (weakening of research interest in course of time) is a problem for most research students. Often, researchers lack a sense of direction, get discouraged while aiming for perfection, and lose interest. They are often in a dilemma whether to continue the research work or not. The seminar leader said that a person should be self-motivated to carry the research work forward as research mainly involves self-study. The student should decide the topic (area) of the research within a year of joining, start the literature review and try to develop a framework for research work for next 2/3 years. Students should keep their supervisors regularly updated about the work they do as well as keep a track of research in their area of interest. The seminar leader also elaborated on the policies followed at XLRI, Jamshedpur, for the FPM curriculum, core courses required for an FPM student, and some interesting experiences while pursuing her FPM course. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy, u503002[at]ximb.ac.in (with inputs from DP Dash and Jacob V)] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.6 Tripti Singh, FPM Scholar, XLRI, Jamshedpur (xltripti[at]yahoo.co.in) Guide: R. J. Sternberg, APS Observer Newsletter (September 1993), American Psychological Society. The seminar focused on how to write a research paper and a discussion on a project done by the facilitator. The seminar started with a discussion on Sternberg’s material on tips for better writing. It was felt that less amounts of quotations, jargons, etc., were more desirable in a research paper. It was also suggested that some catchy ideas need to be proposed at starting of the paper to attract reader’s attention. One of the participants suggested that the researcher should have a clear idea about target readers. He/she should accordingly focus on segments like international journals, national journals, and other publications that reach the target audience. The question of writing a paper through survey research approach was also discussed. The facilitator started her discussion on relationship between theory and method, that is, how theory can be translated into measurable components in research. Also, it was suggested in the seminar that the researcher should be clear about what he/she wants to know from the work pursued and choice of right theory to be used. Discussions were made on building and testing variables, indicators and values to be measured, and the levels of measurement to be used. A brief description was made on exploratory and descriptive research survey methods. The method of data collection is to be finalised whether it is through interview schedules, telephone interviews, Internet search, or other resources. The survey design and population and sample to be used have to be finalised. The next step is to identify the instrument, describe the validity and reliability of the instrument, and induce sample items. Different models have to be developed at where the above methods can be used and confirmed to collect the information. After that, results and analysis part is to be carried out. The facilitator carried out the above discussion by citing examples from her own paper “Developing a scale to measure spiritual competence." As soon as she started the discussion on spiritual competence, a lot of questions arose about definition of spiritual competence and surprisingly, different persons had different answers for it. One of the participants in context of definition of spiritual competence argued that it is like "soul," which is difficult to define. The facilitator also discussed about the different methods used for data collection, the survey method and instrument used, and sample items. After that she discussed the testing of above procedures at various stages of her research work and the ways in which she had analysed the results. The procedures for sending a paper for publication in a journal, the manuals used for different types of journal, etc., were also discussed. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy, u503002[at]ximb.ac.in (with inputs from DP Dash and Jacob V)] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.7 S. Saberwal, Ex-JNU, Delhi (saberwal33[at]bol.net.in) Guide: Saberwal, S. (2000). On Reality: Its Perception and Construction. In Mukherji, P. N. (Ed.). Methodology in Social Research: Dilemmas and Perspectives (Essays in Honour of Ramkrishna Mukherjee), Sage, New Delhi. pp. 126-152. Issues Covered: One way to think of 'getting educated' is to think of it as learning how to achieve a reliable sense of orientation to 'reality'. We need this sense of orientation for several kinds of reasons. What is this 'reality'? There is a continuity between our everyday sense of reality and what is done, academically, in 'science'. The two levels of orientation -- everyday and scientific -- are in some ways similar, in others different. It is clear that the move into the scientific mode of understanding took a big leap at some point in recent European history – within a particular social context. Orderly social life rests on an agreement between participants in an activity over how it should proceed. Clearly, human affairs are soaked in pervasive conflicts. There is a domain where disagreements can get resolved dialogically. When the various participants in a situation -- the various subjects -- agree on their understanding of the situation, on 'what things are like', we may speak of 'intersubjective agreement'. However, it has been possible to push the search for agreement between actors and observers -- this intersubjective agreement -- beyond the limits of a specific culture. For the possibility of achieving this, a commitment to openness, to transparency, is essential. And a scientific tradition is successful insofar as it works out a shared style of doing things, a style which can be expected to generate intersubjective agreement repeatedly. Academia and the sciences cannot be free from disagreements; but when competent academics disagree on something, they're anxious to pin down the exact nature and source of the disagreement. So the agreements and agreements in the sciences are attained through contestation and critical appraisal. The ideal is to try to transcend the particular cultural contexts, except that defined by the particular academic tradition. For a creative scientific community to be possible, the community must be autonomous. Summary There is a need for getting educated -- to understand reality from the perception -- to know the phenotypic experience of life and genotypic characteristics underlying those. Accordingly, we can distinguish between two levels of orientation: everyday and scientific. Scientific understanding took a big leap in the recent European history. Perception of reality is needed to cope with that reality more adequately, to influence that reality in directions chosen. In various natural and social sciences, perception of reality is needed to be able to describe and appraise it accurately. Various natural and social sciences describe the outside society. Reality has various levels. For example, one level is to see, hear, touch, etc. The level is unconscious or pre-conscious reality (unframed mind). Reality involves facts, values, and preferences. Part of the study is to develop a sense to distinguish between facts and preferences or wishful thinking. There is continuity between our everyday sense of reality classifying into phenotype and genotype experiences (words derived from anthropology). Phenotypic experience of life -- based on physical attributes like the shape and size of skull, nose, etc., (which can be said as being formed in one individual’s life) can be compared with genotypic characteristics of life (differentiating on the basis of gene pools). Orderly social practice rests on tacit agreement between different participants in an activity, which can range from agreeing on a matter to uncontrollable disagreements resulting in conflicts. Human affairs are soaked in pervasive conflicts but the discussion in this seminar concentrated on agreements, that is the intersubjective agreements that rest commonly on certain shared cultural assumptions, for example, the Brahminical notion of a person getting polluted by someone's touch. Such agreements are culture-specific. However, over the centuries, it has been possible to push the limits of some of these agreements beyond the specific cultures. Emergence of such supra-cultural intersubjective agreements has been a huge step in cultural history. That is the origin of what we recognize as the scientific tradition. It functions by repeatedly generating intersubjective agreements over some well-specified range of topics. Moving into the scientific mode of understanding took a big leap in Europe during renaissance, reformation, etc. The beginning of this break can be located as early as the 13th/14th century. In a functioning society, everyday social practice rests on tacit agreement between different persons. We have arguments over India-Pakistan partition, Ramayana, Mahabharata, etc. Prof. Saberwal cited a very interesting example in this context. After a summit of the ASEAN nations, two authors gave two different versions of the decision taken at the summit. The editor, on detailed investigation, found out that the two authors had based their accounts on different sources, which were in different languages. The editor allowed the publication of both the accounts, indicating the difference in the information sources used. This characterises the scientific approach; it involves a commitment to openness, transparency, and an interest in examining the steps used in arriving at a conclusion. The importance of quantification in scientific work was discussed next. Quantification adds precision to our statements and thus it can facilitate agreement; but quantifiability is not a measure of significance. Again a very humorous example was cited: that of umbrellology -- study of umbrellas! Someone made an in-depth study of various kinds of umbrellas available, their colours, usages, and their pedigree. The study produced some interesting statistical facts and figures. But these were of no significance to anyone. Among pre-modern societies, China was one of the most advanced, having invented gunpowder, compass, printing, and steel manufacturing. It is now known that 11th century China produced more and better steel than 18th century England. Chinese science was arrested because the technical workers were not part of open social groups; they were part of the Confucian bureaucracy. There was much intervention of the state machinery in their life and work. Every autonomous body was viewed with suspicion. However, breakthrough in sustainable and cumulative scientific work happened in Europe. Europe provided a differentiated society with a variety of institutions – hence the possibility of autonomous peer groups developing their thoughts in a self-regulated manner. For example, during the World Wars, the scientists belonging to the warring nations communicated through neutral countries like Switzerland as they all belonged to a peer group and exchange of ideas for them was of utmost importance in spite of the fact that their respective countries were at war. Consequently, a lot of sustainable, cumulative scientific work happened in Europe. One of the questions raised in the seminar was whether beliefs and attitudes are involved in the social sciences. The answer that emerged was that people define their situation and act according to that definition. For example, a cat passing before a car is taken as an unlucky sign in some parts of India. For a social scientist, these are social facts requiring scientific inquiry. There was another question on the reality of science. One answer was the theory that prevails is accepted by a large majority of the relevant scientific community. At the same time, all scientific truth is provisional and revisable. It is not a characterisation of reality that is true and final for all time to come. Another question was about religion. Every religion tries to give an internally consistent account of reality. How is science different from this? It was discussed that faith is essential in religion while, in science, the right to question is the crux. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy, with inputs from DP Dash] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.8 S. Saberwal, Ex-JNU, Delhi (saberwal33[at]bol.net.in) Guide: Saberwal, S. (1995). Wages of Segmentation: Comparative Historical Studies on Europe and India, Orient Longman, Hyderabad, India. [Chapter 9: Ideas, Institutions, and Experience, pp. 162-185.] Issues Covered: What happens in a society is a function of the ideas and institutions prevailing in the society. Ideas go into shaping institutions, institutions provide the contexts for experience, and experience can be the basis for fresh ideas. 1. IDEAS [These change over time; so there is a variability to the validity of ideas, and of particular complexes of ideas; stability of ideas; availability: that'd determine their social significance; orientation to alien ideas: degrees of openness or closure; cumulative consequences]. 2. IDEAS AND INSTITUTIONS [The link between ideas and practice is a variable; ideas can be spread by institutions in two different ways; given familiarity with a body of ideas, received along varied channels, one may take their validity for granted; ideas in institutions define the meaning of experience]. 3. FROM EXPERIENCE TO IDEAS [Feedback loops: cybernetics; reviewing experience; to learn from experience takes skills: skills which, themselves, can be learnt; learning from experience is central to the process of constituting and reconstituting societies; complex societies, in turn, need shared skills for such learning from experience]. Summary [Before the seminar started, some topics from the previous seminar were recapitulated, e.g., the distinction between phenotypic and genotypic descriptions. In this context, another distinction was discussed: etic and emic (as in phonetic and phonemic). In the study of language, the etic level refers to the level of sounds, whereas the emic level refers to the level of meanings. This kind of distinction is fundamental to any area of scientific inquiry.] The seminar dealt with the question of how a society hangs together. The answer involved a model consisting of a cyclical relationship among ideas, institutions, and experiences. Ideas go into shaping institutions; institutions provide the contexts for experience, which then becomes the basis for fresh ideas. What happens in a society is a function of the ideas and institutions prevailing in the society. If we compare European and Indian history, both may have ideas and institutions that appear to be more or less similar, but there may still be vast differences between these societies. Ideas change over time. The development of ideas occurs in the environment of other ideas, institutions, and experiences. Example: Democracy in Europe spread ideas concerning individual, equality, etc. But, if it is transplanted in another cultural tradition, it may not be accepted easily. It is not the transplanted idea will fail, but the outcome will depend on the quality of fit with the host tradition and the quality of effort to adapt the various elements to make them fit together. Fundamental ideas are deeply layered, which control other phenomena. Relatively large number of beliefs and practices are justified and defended with reference to deeply layered ideas that become non-negotiable due to clash of values. Example: the ideas of purity and pollution in the Brahminical tradition in India. Availability of ideas differs from society to society, which may be more accessible or more restrictive. In India's segmented society, the distribution of ideas and of knowledge has been heavily segmented. The orientation to alien ideas depends upon degrees of openness or closure. The links between ideas and practice is a variable, a function partly due to cultural pressure towards consistency between them; for example, the Brahminical tradition allows multiple forms of practice. It may be said that there is no necessary relationship between what ideas one carried and how one acted. But the idea generated is only the initial stage, its persistent availability, presentation, and advocacy makes it enter consciousness and practice to make a difference in the society. Institutions play this role. Institutions can spread ideas in two different ways. One way is ideas go into institutions, as into the caste order. The other way is institutions are created deliberately to spread certain ideas, e.g., RSS. Depending on the familiarity with a body of ideas, received along different channels, one may take it for granted. Ideas are also generated from experiences. It may also be said that generally ideas change due to experiences. But changing ideas have different aspects that may be good or bad. However, learning from experiences is considered important in the scientific tradition. Such learning is also central to the constitution of society. Some skills are involved in learning from experience. These include the skills of recognising patterns in experience, differences between patterns, interpreting the differences to search for general formulations that become general rules/laws, etc. Learning from experiences provides guidance to steer the future course of society. Complex societies need shared skills to perpetuate this kind of learning. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy, with inputs from DP Dash] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.9 S. Saberwal, Ex-JNU, Delhi (saberwal33[at]bol.net.in) Issues Covered: Reflections on creativity; creativity can be seen to vary in intensity and social scale; What is creativity? Finding novel, non-routine 'solutions' to 'problems'; two general strategies: Operational (partitioning or segmenting the problem) and Orientational (exploration; free variation; openness towards what is different); on this last count, 'openness towards what is different', complex societies and civilizations have varied greatly over time and space; variation with in the long-term historical orientations of pre-modern Europe and India. Creativity involves some kind of problem solving, but it is perhaps not like solving geometry problems. It has to involve an element of novelty--beyond the familiar. The seminar posed the question: Can we plan to be creative? Although, creativity is usually considered an individual attribute, there can be creativity at different levels. We might consider the phenomenon of creativity on two dimensions: Intensity (ranging from zero to infinity) and Social Scale (ranging from individual to civilization/culture). In management, we typically train manager for medium intensity creativity at the individual, organizational, or community levels-- thus operating with medium levels along the two dimensions. Two general kinds of strategies of promoting creativity were discussed: Operational and Orientational. Operational Strategy: Creative outcomes can be attempted by partitioning or segmenting the problematic task. Example: Writing (one can start with a broad outline and then fill out the details). At larger social scales, such partitioning is achieved through skill-based or institutional differentiation. Orientational Strategy: Another way of promoting creativity is at the orientation level, which would involve going beyond the familiar aspects and trying to generate new ideas. The orientation involves judgement about when to stay with the familiar and when to shoot off in a different direction. At the heart of being creative is the idea of going off the beaten track, e.g., an American college drop-out deciding to set up a software company (Bill Gates, 20th century), an Italian explorer deciding to go to China to understand Chinese society (Marco Polo, 13th century). Societies differ with respect to the level of openness they promote among their members. A great variety can be noticed in this kind of openness across time and space. The institution of the church in ancient and pre-modern Europe showed a great degree of openness to learning (especially Islamic learning, Greek learning). By the 13th century, Europe had developed a variety of autonomous institutions (free from king and Pope) – the most prominent among them was the university (University of Paris, around 1225 AD). This kind of social openness produced a resilient culture that was assimilating new elements, ethnic groups, etc., while expanding the range of its influence – something that can be termed as ‘expansive resilience’. On the other hand in India, the institution of caste order resulted in a different kind of resilience through ideas/values, social networks, etc., that can be termed as ‘defensive resilience’. The seminar triggered a lot of interaction on questions such as the role of technology (e.g., Internet) and individual-level choices and initiatives in increasing the possibility of creative outcomes. The message for a researcher seems to be the following: thrive on thinking the impossible, learn to exercise judgement, and learn to revise you ideas/actions. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy <u503002[at]ximb.ac.in>, with inputs from DP Dash] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.10 D. P. S. Bhawuk, U. of Hawai'i, USA (bhawuk[at]cba.hawaii.edu) Issues covered: As cross-cultural researchers, we are all scientists, and therefore, buy into the value system of rational science, which was discussed in the first section of the paper. But we are also a part of some culture, and so we share a worldview from that culture, often implicitly. Increasingly, the scientific worldview is being adopted in the western countries, but there is still a lot of resistance in other cultures to a total acceptance of the scientific worldview. No systematic research has been done on how people use both scientific worldview in some domains, and their own cultural worldviews in other domains. Summary Like other human activities research too is influenced profoundly by the worldviews formed by cultural orientations of its practitioners. These influences affect the choice of research problems, the formulation of conceptual models and methodology. It was suggested that western cultures value analysis of a problem by breaking it down into its component parts where as Asians tended to be more holistic in their analysis. Scientists adhere to a worldview shaped by the culture of science that has evolved over time and has in turn been influenced by a number of factors. They value certainty, objectivity and impersonality highly. Precision, accuracy and reliability are characteristics of scientific inquiry. Tenets of logic are considered as one of the basic building blocks of science. For example something cannot be true and false at the same time. These fundamentals are rarely questioned in the scientific realm. In contrast, the Indian worldview does not follow the basic tenets of western logic. It seems to embrace positions that can be interpreted as contradictory from a scientific worldview. For example, something can both be true and false at the same time or good can be worse than bad. Attempts have been made to facilitate an interaction between science and Indian worldview. One interesting example is the scientific study of the effects of transcendental meditation. However, even in this case scientists have put forth ‘secular’ explanations for the phenomenon. Thus though science draws from other worldviews, it ultimately reduces it to its own and does not really resolve the conflict between the two worldviews. In examining the practices of scientists, one finds that they are driven not only by the all-important worldview of science, but also by the influences of other cultural worldviews. They often turn to these other cultures when science fails to give an adequate explanation. Such use of multiple paradigms cannot be resolved if one were to subscribe to a rationalist, logical pattern of thought. The seminar leader suggested that a multi-paradigmatic approach might make scientists more aware of their approaches to research. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy, u503002[at]ximb.ac.in (with inputs from DP Dash and Jacob V)] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.11 R. Modjeski, Scientist, Washington DC, USA (richard.modjeski[at]verizon.net) The seminar started with the screening of movie Matrix II. Dr. Modjeski drew our attention to the fact that today technology has reached to such an extent, where it is difficult to discover something new. He pointed out that technology, as portrayed in the movie could be viewed in the light of ISD process. Instructional Systems Development can be called a training model for learners. Education broadens a person’s knowledge when compared to training that makes a person narrow minded about a specific subject. Dr. Modjeski gave a brief idea about Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives highlights into cognitive domain, affective domain and psychomotor domain self learning. Cognitive domain represents mental skills (Knowledge), affective domain deals with feelings, values, motivations (Attitudes) and psychomotor domain deals with physical skills. In lay terms these domains can be labeled as knowledge, attitudes and skills. Cognitive domain is divided into six parts and is arranged from lesser to more complex levels. Each of these is a precondition for those that follow. The six categories are knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The five main categories listed under affective domain are receiving phenomena, response to phenomena, valuing a particular object, organizing values to develop a value system, and internalizing the value system. The psychomotor domain represents physical skills and is mainly listed under perception, set (readiness to act), guided response, mechanisms (response as habit), complex overt response, adaptation and origination to fit a pattern. A model for Instructional Systems Development (ISD) model that emphasizes analysis, design, development and evaluation of the system was presented. The strength of this model lies in three stages (Define, Develop and Evaluate). The basic design, which was discussed for the ISD model, was: The seminar leader focused on dependencies needed for the ISD model. The first part is analysis of the problem. It was urged that the analysis should not be undertaken if the problem in hand is not identified as a training problem. Needs, goals and constraint analysis should be done after it is identified as a training problem. Entry Population Analysis (EPA) is carried out to find the number of people intended for the training. Evaluation and Implementation plans are carried out as per the requirement of the population. Once the task analysis is carried out, it is converted to an objective hierarchy as per the needs of the group. Then the instructional requirements for the objectives are developed keeping in mind cost, availability and other factors. Then the objectives are classified as per the instructional problem they represent. A micro design is developed and initial contents are captured for each lesson. The lesson is then developed fully and media/materials are produced. After this, the course is evaluated as per Implementation and Evaluation Plan. It may be said that ISD process is just an adaptation of systems engineering to problems of development, implementation and evaluation of instructional and learning environments. It is often pointed out that the practice of design is tied more firmly to the needs of the user than the practice of research. However, many scholars have affirmed the legitimacy of the process of design as authentic research. Some have found the opposite to be true; namely, that all research has some elements of design in them. In their view research and design are inseparably tied. [Reported by Srikant Panigrahy, u503002[at]ximb.ac.in (with inputs from DP Dash and Jacob V)] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.12 Udai Pareek, IIHMR, Jaipur and U. of North Carolina, USA (udai[at]iihmr.org) Dr. Udai Pareek is one of the respected figures in the area of HRD. He has been in the forefront of the HRD movement in India, and has conceptualised,designed and implemented HRD systems for many organisations across the country. A behavioural scientist, he has remained primarily an academician and researcher. Thus his thoughts and reflections on issues that arise with prevalent research in the HRD area were not only interesting but very thought provoking as well. Although the talk was about 'research in HRD', it has relevance for anyone interested in doing research in an applied field, in which qualitative data makes more sense. The seminar was mostly freewheeling with Dr. Pareek presenting his thoughts and viewpoints to the group, in a fairly unstructured manner. He focused on three major areas: a) the HR profession is facing a lot of challenge and is under threat; b) the problems with present day HR research; and c) what HR research should be like to become more meaningful and relevant. I have briefly summarized the discussion in each of these areas below: HR UNDER THREAT The roles played by HR managers in organisations are changing very rapidly. Organisations are gradually moving to a model in which more and more of the tasks that have traditionally been considered as belonging to the HR function are either being outsourced or are being moved on to the line managers. For example, recruitment and training are being outsourced, while performance management and subordinate development are becoming line manager responsibilities. Thus the very role of an HR manager in an organisation is in a state of flux. The HR area and the HR manager have to shift focus. From playing a largely administrative role, one must move to managing organisational change and to the design and development of organisational systems. To be able to do this, two skills are paramount -- a strong theoretical base and a strong research base. It is in this context that the kind of research that is being done in the HR area needs to be discussed. HR RESEARCH * Most research is irrelevant or unnecessary. It is done only to meet a recent, for example, to get a doctoral degree, or because one has to meet a required number of papers one has to publish. Thus research is rarely done to extend existing knowledge in a field. * Research has become ritualistic. A certain process has been mapped and all research done follows the same process. Thus creativity gets lost. * There is not enough in-depth understanding and internalising of the data. Thus the insight that comes from just being with the data and studying it is lost. * High dependence on computerized statistical programmes has made 2 things happen: (a) an obsession to collect more and more of quantitative data, (b) a loss of the qualitative nature of the data, which means a loss of a lot of he nuances present in the data, which come to the fore only by looking at the data in all its richness and detail. HR RESEARCH NEEDS * A lot more creativity. The approach to research and the process followed must move away from standard, laid-down processes. It should be based on theory and should lead to more insights into the theory. A suggested approach is to do some initial research and develop a tentative heory. Then one can test it on others and develop the theory. * Research should look outside the pattern. An interesting idea was that real research happens when a researcher looks outside the pattern. In research today, a researcher collects a lot of quantitative data, puts it through a computerized statistical package and looks for patterns. However, this merely summarizes and reproduces the data. One needs to look for the more subtle nuances that get lost in the statistical analysis. * More qualitative data need to be collected and studied. The insights that come from 'outside the pattern' happen with qualitative data rather than quantitative data. * A need to focus on secondary sources of data. When a researcher focuses on primary sources of data, there is the danger of getting 'socially desirable' responses. Therefore, look at secondary sources as well. * Research needs mindfulness and not mindlessness. Related to the comment that research is done in a ritualistic manner without any creativity, mindfulness in research is important. In her book on social psychology, Mindfulness, Langer notes, "stressing process over outcome, allows free rein to intuition and creativity, and opens us to new information and perspectives." * Research needs a multi-functional approach. There should be less of 'inbreeding'; one must get people from other areas. This would enlarge the field and bring in fresh ideas and different perspectives. In the process, both the research and the theory would get enriched. Research would become more holistic, as there would be greater linkages to other organisational processes. READINGS SUGGESTED Webb, Eugene J. 1966. Unobtrusive Measures: Non-reactive Research in the Social Sciences. Rand McNally and Co., Chicago. Langer, Ellen G. 1990. Mindfulness, Perseus Publishing, New York. McClelland, D. C. and Winter, D. G. 1970. 'Achievement motive and entrepreneurship' in G. M. Meier (ed.). Leading Issues in Economic Development, Oxford University Press, New York. [Reported by Snigdha Pattnaik <snigdha[at]ximb.ac.in>, 5 January 2004. Acknowledgements: I am very grateful to Prof. M.N. Tripathy and Prof. Amar Nayak for sharing their notes with me, and Prof. M.G. Jomon for his comments.] http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/R1.13 Tejeshwar Singh, Sage India, Delhi (passed away on 15 Dec 2007) Academic publishing in India is quite new, in comparison to the West, where a lot of books and journals are produced every year. Before independence, there were only three publishers who used to publish in India: Macmillan, Longman, and Oxford University Press. There were also other players who were publishing books but these were mainly related to the freedom struggle of India. After fifty years of independence, academic publishing in India has not come up to global standards. The quantity of scholarly publishing in the West is far higher than that of India. India produces only around 20 standard scholarly journals, whereas USA produces around 150 every year. The process of refereeing and quality evaluation are also much more stringent in the West. Normally, a publisher of books would send manuscripts to independent and competent evaluators who review the material and suggest necessary changes. In India, this is not yet a common practice. Indian readers must demand certain minumum standards to be followed, in order to improve the quality of academic publications in this country. Mr Singh said that Sage Publications is the only publishing house in the private sector, which is seriously publishing scholarly journals and books. He said that there are two types of publishers. The first type invests its own money to publish if it finds material of required quality. The second type of publishers regardless of any quality, publish at the authors’ cost. The latter type of publications are found to be rising in India. The most important role played by publishers is dissemination (i.e., helping authors reach a wide audience). Given that academic readership is limited and spread over a large territory, a publisher's task is to select the right market segment -- only then can it make some profit. This is especially true of scholarly journals. The different steps, which go into the publishing of a journal are editing, proof-reading, type-setting, printing, and distribution. This requires a lot of financial resources and human resources. Not all publishers can handle this. Mr. Singh discussed the various processes Sage undertakes to publish a book. First, Sage looks for good quality manuscripts from authors. Deciding to publish something is essentially decision-making under uncertainty. Naturally, it is influenced by certain value-based commitments of the company, apart from the usual commercial considerations. Independent evaluations of the book are sought from experts. If there are some modifications to be made, then the author is requested accordingly. After the necessary changes, a reevaluation is made before publication. The discount factor has become a growing concern for most publishers now. Distribution channels ask for around 40% discount; various libraries also bargain for around 25% discount. Naturally, this leads to a hike in price, which becomes a major concern for both publishers and consumers. There was some discussion about the buying behaviour with respect to books. There are important differences between how people buy a book and how they buy, say, a car. It is a pity that, sometimes, academic libraries are judged by the number of books they have, irrespective of the quality of those books. Another practical difficulty for publishers lies in the process of securing orders for books. Generally, a sample copy of the book is given to an institution to give a feedback within fifteen days, but it takes around sixty days to get a feedback. Many also ask for a sample copy and in return, just order two to three copies for the library. For a publishing unit, each book is like a new product, or in fact, a new project. The minimal aim is to recover the investments in a book and maximise profit during its useful life-cycle. There are various subsidies offered by different parties when the book is introduced in the market for the first time. But this works for a shorter period, as it becomes difficult in the later editions (or reprints) to maintain the same subsidised price. So, although subsidies are available on certain types of books, many publishers are reluctant to take up such books that are not viable themselves. There was also a discussion on the peer review process and plagiarism. Participants gave their own views on these points. Mr. Singh also threw some light on e-books as well as different modes of business such as direct marketing. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Return to the FPM website | | FPM Cell Xavier Institute of Management Xavier Square, Bhubaneswar 751013, INDIA email: dean[at]ximb.ac.in |