Research Methods
It is reasonable to assume that
any academic subject needs a methodology when trying to reach
a conclusion. Thus it must have ways of producing and analysing
data so that theories can be tested, accepted or rejected. In
other words, without a systematic way of producing knowledge,
the findings of a subject may be dismissed as either being guesswork
or just plain common sense made to sound more complicated than
necessary (Haralambos 19952). When producing research papers,
the methodology employed is concerned then with both the research
methods and more general philosophies upon which the collection
and analysis of data are based, and it arguably combines both
a positivist and interpretivist approach. This is the philosophy
of this essay, to identify whether a journal article can neatly
fit into one approach or the other, or if indeed it combines the
believes of both above approaches.
Before any assumptions are made, it is first necessary to identify
the main differences between the two approaches, in order that
we have a foundation for any conclusion that we make. Firstly
positivists, usually employ the use of scientific quantitative
methods, before drawing to any conclusions, and the second approach,
adopts a more humanistic, qualitative manner, when seeking conclusions
from theories5. Those who criticise the research methods of positivists
believe that positivists reject philosophical study, it is a bourgeois
philosophy and it is only based on scientific fact, which is how
a methodology is reached6. Founded by Auguste Comte, and was a
direct result of the need to solve philosophical problems, that
without proof was only based on assumptions and beliefs, ideas
that were only interpretative in nature. Therefore, those ideas
that can not be resolved by experience are based on substance
and causes, are according to positivist writers, inaccurate and
invalid8.
So what is the philosophical bases of the journal article, titled,
“career management practices: an empirical survey and implications”(Baruch
and Peiperl1)? Based on my own interpretation, the writers wanted
to identify different methods of career development within British
companies in order to understand them and establish how they are
used in different situations, and if they are associated with
different organisational characteristics. The foundation for any
assumptions and conclusions made are based on the surmise that
careers are shaped by an organisation, which is based on fact
gained from other studies undertaken. The final outcome is a model,
which is the first empirical model of its kind and therefore the
philosophical basis is one that is concerned with matters of fact.At
hindsight, then it is a positivist article, as it identifies different
methods, attempts to justify why they are used and devises a model
to explain how groups of practices can be understood and applied.
This is both scientific and logical, an alternative writer would
for example, firstly devise the model and attempt to apply it
using meaning and subjective reasoning9. This claim is supported
by how the writers, identify their sources to established a comprehensive
view on which they were to base their findings. For instance,
they firstly considered several sources in order that they may
reach an established list of 17 OCM practices (organisational
career management). To test that this list covered a whole range
OCM practices, they undertook a pilot study. Thus scientific reasoning
supports all assumptions. However, it could be argued that because
some of the views associated within this article are said to be
based on a number of different social sciences, it suggests for
instance, the kind of career management practices could be based
on both theoretical thinking (interpretivist) and empirical evidence
(positivist)7.
A positivist writer,
would also identify objectives before they begin their research,
this is the approach the writers took in this journal article.
There are two proposals, which I can identify.
Firstly the wide range of OCM practices will naturally cluster
into groups, according to their common use and inter-correlation’s
among the practices. Secondly, the groups of practices will be
associated with certain characteristics of organisational such
as size, age, unionism and climate.
According to Comte, scientific study should be confined to collecting
information about phenomena – which can objectively observed
and classified. Then by using statistics, it is possible to classify
the social world in an objective way, by counting sets of observable
facts. From this any correlation’s between the different
facts can be identified, searching for causal connections (Comte
19863), if there is a strong correlation then a positivist will
suspect that one of these phenomena was causing the other to take
place9. For instance in the paper, the writers suggest that perhaps
larger organisations will use more formal and highly structured
OCM practices than smaller ones. Thus it is an inductive methodology,
by creating an applied model, the writers nicely fit into this
category. In addition, they stipulate clearly that they are approaching
the philosophical basis “purely inductively”(Baruch
and Peiperl 20001) by arguing that it is impossible to develop
specific hypothesis, without evidence. In other words this paper
begins with collecting a vast amount of qualitative data, the
data is analysed, theories are developed from analysis, then the
theory is tested against other sets of data to see if it is confirmed
or not.
In order to collect the data, they developed a survey, referring
to the set of OCM practices, asking the HR manager for each company
to state on a scale of 1 to 7 which practices they used the most.
They also asked a series of questions about the demographics of
the firm. The 194 sample itself was identified from the personnel
managers’ yearbook, of which they undertook a two-layered
random sample of 524 companies that employed 500 people or more.
The questionnaire was also pre-tested on a sub-sample of 20 HR
directors, and out of the 524 targeted they received a 37% return.
The research unit of analysis was therefore the organisation,
and positivism is the view that all genuine knowledge is based
on experience, and therefore, can only be advanced by means of
observation or experiment on a tangible object (Haralambos 19952).
The writers clearly were attempting to be empirical in their techniques,
by seeking comprehension on a philosophical idea, as said previously,
positivists are empiricists.
From the returned questionnaires, a frequency distribution of
OCM practices was used to determine which were used most and least
frequently and whether additional practices should have been included.
Then they used factor analysis (varimax rotation) to see whether
the OCM practices clustered together, (this method was also applied
in the former studies successfully, which not only eradicated
any inconsistencies, it allowed for comparison). Finally they
ran a correlation analysis of the resulting factors with the organisational
characteristics, to determine whether there were any strong links
between these and the OCM practice. In each of the above stages
they summarised the information into individual data tables in
order that they may systematically analyse the data.
Karl Popper (interpretivist) in his book “logic of scientific
discovery” (Popper 19594) talks about reversing the process
of inductivity and tests it against the evidence rather than developing
a theory as a result of examining data, this is also a major difference
between the two approaches. As interpretivist would start with
a hypothesis or statement that is to be tested, so on the bases
of hypothesis, it is possible to deduce predictions about future,
an example of this is Newton’s law of gravity. It’s
fair to say that sometimes positivist approaches are just not
appropriate. However, in this case, by identifying that the use
of statistical tools in trying to apprehend a meaning has it’s
limitations. As there is not grounded theory of OCM practice,
so they set themselves the task of identifying one.
By believing that substance is more important than significance,
the writers evaluated and interpreted a meaning for the individual
clusters, they then sought a reason that might explain the pattern
of relationship amongst them. Interpretivists however, see the
world in terms of meanings, arguing that people do not react automatically
to stimuli as positivists claim. Instead they interpret the meaning
of stimuli before responding to it, for example, motorists’
response to a red light is not an automatic response as they firstly
attach a meaning to it10. It’s also impossible to arrive
at conclusions, without some degree of influencing findings and
research however, so interpretivists are concerned with the situation,
not the disposition.
The writers tried to construct a hierarchical model that might
suggest which practices were used in a kind of sequence of sophistication
from least to most; however, they were convinced with evaluation
that no such linear hierarchy existed. So they developed a descriptive
model, which comprises of two dimensions, the level of sophistication
of the OCM practices and the level of involvement on the part
of the organisation necessary to put them to use. They found that
a larger number of organisations’ activities centred on
one or two of the OCM clusters. By applying their model to two
companies, HSBC and Unilever, they are also once more stepping
into the positivist approach.
Arguably, the approach is not that far from deductive7, as it
does consider other elements before it uses a scientific approach,
but the substance and causes are established as a result of the
scientific reasoning, which is why it’s essentially a positivist
paper. It argues that most of the other research is based on unchecked
experience, which is also why it’s a positivist approach,
as it aims was to remove all speculative attempts and provide
the reader with more solid evidence. Those who use scientific
methods believe it is highly desirably and are critical of those
who study subjective and unobservable statistics. This is why
it is often called objectivism and the main criticisms are that
it assumes humans and social systems are objective and predictable,
which is very rarely the case, according to interpretivists7.
So at one end of the scale sits empiricism with extreme logical
consequences, as it aims to bring knowledge and “no amount
of speculation can be deemed as knowledge”(Haralambos 19952).
Then on the opposite end, sits those who believe that it is not
possible to objectively measure and classify the world, as there
is “no objective reality beyond the subjective meaning”,
which is why the term phenomenology is often attributed to interpretivism
(Haralambos 19952). It is fair to say therefore, that there are
two types of knowledge: matters of fact, how things are though
observation and experiment, and knowledge of logic and mathematics
– not about the world at all. I maintain that interpretative
and qualitative approaches should be used to supplement positivist
methodology, as suggested initially, a view also held by Popper
(Popper 19594) who believes that research should be scientific,
but deductive as opposed to inductive. The two approaches work
well together, as positivism is useful for elaborating whether
and how strongly phenomena may be connected to each other, and
interpretivists are more concerned with why. Although the journal
article in this instance takes largely a positivist stance, there
are some trace elements of interpretivism associated with the
research undertaken, therefore, I conclude that no viable empirical
research can neatly fit into a positivist or interpretivist view
of the world.
All of our sample essays were written by students and then submitted to us to display and help others. Thanks to all the students who have submitted their work to us.
See a list of other free English essays:
Free English Essays
Free English Literature Essays
![English Essays Phone Number](http://www.englishessays.org.uk/images/phonenumber.png)
Custom Essays
Use our custom writing services to excel in your studies and graduate with a 1st Class degree.
More about Custom Essays
Essay Marking Service
Improve your grades - let our qualified experts advise you on how to improve the overall quality of your own essay.
More about our Essay Marking Service
£5000 No Plagiarism Guarantee!
Detect plagiarism in our work and get paid £5000 and a free paper!
Learn about our Guarantees!
Our Press Articles
The Times, The Observer, BBC, ITN News, Sky News, The Independent. Read our press articles
Most Popular Pages:
Custom English Dissertations, How to Write an English Essay, Press articles about our service, Custom English Essays
How to write English essays?
Academic
English essay, Admissions essay, Cause and Effect essay, Conclusion essay, Comparison and Contrast essay, Definition essay, Descriptive essay, Expository essay, Evaluation essay, Narrative essay, Non literary essay, Literary analysis essay, Persuasive essay, 5 Paragraph essay, Photo essay, Scholarship essay
FREE English Literature essays
Free English literature essays written by students for students. English
literature essays
FREE English essays
Read some of the English essays we received from students. English
essays
English Literature in the UK
Colleges and universities that offer English Literature degrees. English Literature in the UK
Free Plagiarism Scanner!
Free scanning software to check for and detect plagiarism. Free
Plagiarism Detection Tool
Our Affiliate Program!
Sell our custom essays and get 15% commission! Affiliate
Program For Essay Resellers
Want to earn £5000 per month!
We are always looking for good research writers! Become
our research writer
Customer testimonials
We've helped many students achieve
better grades. Read our customer testimonials.