Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Research Paradigm / Philosophy
The research philosophy guides the expansion of knowledge and outlines the character of the knowledge that is to be developed (Saunders et al., 2009:107). It outlines the central assumptions, including the perspective from which the world is viewed, underpinning the rationale for the research methodology used to conduct a study (Saunders et al., 2009:108).
The concept of the research paradigm was described earlier.
Practical considerations often influence the philosophy and paradigm adopted, outlined by the relationship between knowledge and the method by which it is developed to answer the research questions (Saunders et al., 2009:108). Simply, the philosophy and paradigm selected lead the researcher in the selection of tools, instruments, participants and methodology used in the research undertaking (Ponterotto, 2005:128).
Three research philosophies exist within management research (Creswell, 2009:6; Saunders et al., 2009:119):
• Positivism
A positivist philosophy observes that observable phenomena alone can provide tangible data, facts and information on social realities, with a focus on causality and law-like generalisations created from the simplest elements measured. An external, objective and independent process of data collection is followed. Predominantly, the focus remains on highly structured, large samples linked to quantitative research and observations interpreted through statistical analysis.
• Interpretivism
An interpretivist philosophy, in contrast to the positivist view, argues that the world is too complex to simplify through linear or quantitative observations and requires a qualitative approach to its investigation. The focus remains on understanding the details, reality and subjective meanings which are motivating actions behind certain social phenomena or situations. Data collection is socially constructed, subjective and may change through multiple repetitions, with small samples being closely investigated.
• Pragmatism
A third philosophy, pragmatism, evolved as a result of the debate concerning which of the above two approaches should be chosen in a single study. The pragmatic view and the one taken within this research, is that either or both observable phenomena and subjective meanings can provide the required information, dependent upon the research question(s) defined. This is apparent in this study, where the research questions do not tend toward either a positivist nor interpretivist philosophy, but instead require insight from both quantitative and qualitative viewpoints to uncover the basis of a real-world problem. Thus, pragmatism, which integrates different perspectives and advocates a mixed methods approach to research design that includes both quantitative and qualitative methods, was used to answer the research questions.
As stated above, this study has adopted the pragmatic approach as its research philosophy. This entailed consideration of multiple realities, the notion being that using a mixed methods approach would provide a more accurate reflection of the current state of the subject matter (Creswell, 2009:10).
Exploratory and descriptive research
The research has an exploratory and a descriptive nature.
An exploratory study is viewed as a valuable means for clarifying and improving the understanding of a problem. It is a method to determine “what is happening, to seek new insights, to ask questions and to assess phenomena in a new light” (Robson, 2002:59). While a clear outline of the topic was provided by the introduction and literature review, this study is viewed as exploratory because the knowledge base is insufficient to advance clear theoretical propositions for a new conceptual framework. A detailed, exploratory study, across multiple subjects, was required to develop the necessary background and a greater understanding for a full investigation on this topic. Saunders et al. (2009:140) identify two principal methods of conducting exploratory research:
• a review of literature
• interviewing experts on the topic.
This research involved a search of relevant literature, undertaking a survey and conducting interviews with subject-matter experts and those involved in organisational management.
Robson (2002:59) further describes the objective of a descriptive study as “…to portray an accurate profile of persons, events or situations”. A study of this type extends or pre-empts exploratory research. A descriptive approach is required within this study to extend the exploratory research by determining the current state strategic thinking within the South African business environment.
Following this multifaceted approach enables the gathering of new data from different sources, provides an understanding of the current situation, and affords new insights with which to develop a clear framework.
Mixed method approach
The emphasis of the study is empirical in order to collect and analyse new primary data, however, secondary data gathered informs the direction of the study. It was considered appropriate to use both means in gathering data to expand the knowledge of the processes of business and management, as well as to develop universal principles of significance and value to the academic community. These are based on the current phenomena and realities faced by South African organisations at the current time and triangulate several sets of data (Creswell, 2009:14; Saunders et al., 2009:8, Saunders et al., 2009:155).
Creswell (2009:3) maintains that a mixed method approach is beneficial when multiple theoretical perspectives, sources of data, or methodologies are used, as it results in data corroboration and could lead to thicker, richer data, or uncover contradictions. Creswell (2009:3) also recognises that all methods have limitations and that by triangulating data sources, biases intrinsic in any particular method could be neutralised by the biases of other methods employed. Making use of this approach provided a fuller picture and the deeper understanding required to validate all findings.
The mixed methods sequential explanatory design undertaken consisted of two distinct phases (Ivankova, Creswell and Stick., 2006:5; Creswell, 2009:211):
The first encompassed quantitative data collection and analysis to provide generalised insight into the research problem (Ivankova et al., 2006:5). Creswell (2009:4) identifies quantitative research as « a means for testing objective theories by examining the relationship among variables. These variables, in turn, can be measured, typically on instruments, so that numbered data can be analysed using statistical procedures. » Quantitative research focuses on identifying the characteristics of observed phenomena, or on exploring the correlations between variables among a number of phenomena (Leedy and Ormrod, 2010:135).
The second, qualitative, phase consisted of data collection and analysis, in order to corroborate, expand and elaborate on the first phase’s statistical results by exploring participants’ views in much greater depth and detail (Ivankova et al., 2006:5). Qualitative research is an avenue for exploring and interpreting the meanings that specific individuals or groups assign to certain social or human phenomena. It involves a direct encounter, where the researcher is the research instrument, and is concerned with the way in which people construct, interpret and give meaning to certain phenomena (Creswell, 2009:4; Leedy and Ormrod, 2010:135). Creswell (2009:4) identifies the process of research as involving various emerging questions and procedures, collecting data from participants within their natural setting, developing general themes from particular data using data analysis and interpreting the meaning of the data. Qualitative research enables one to gain new insights, develop fresh concepts and discover problems which exist within the phenomena. It also allows for testing the validity of assumptions, theories and generalisations (Leedy and Ormrod, 2010:136). This form of inquiry supports a focus on arriving at meaning as well as on understanding the importance of rendering the complexity of a situation as precisely as possible (Creswell, 2009:4).
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Background
1.3 Problem Statement
1.4 Purpose Statement
1.5 Research Objectives
1.6 Research Methodology
1.7 Delimitations
1.8 Assumptions
1.9 Definition of Key Terms
1.10 Academic Value and Contribution of the Proposed Study
1.11 Chapter Layout
Chapter 2 Defining the Principles of Strategy
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The Concept of Strategy
2.3 Complexity and Uncertainty in the Changing Business Environment
2.4 Crafting Strategy Using a Strategy-Making Approach
2.5 Diverse Views Culminating in the Key First Principles of Strategy
2.6 Conclusion
Chapter 3 Comparative Approaches to Strategy-making
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Comparing the Approaches to Strategy-Making
3.3 Comparative Analysis Focused on First Principles
3.4 Conclusion
Chapter 4 Mechanisms for Crafting a Creative and Adaptive Strategy
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Creative and Adaptive Strategy
4.3 Mechanisms for Crafting Strategy
4.4 Conclusion
Chapter 5 Research Design and Methodology
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Research Paradigm / Philosophy
5.3 Research Design
5.4 Sampling
5.5 Data Collection
5.6 Data Analysis
5.7 Assessing and Demonstrating the Quality and Rigour of the Research Design
5.8 Research Ethics
5.9 Conclusion
Chapter 6 Research Findings
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Quantitative Findings: Descriptive Statistics
6.3 Quantitative Findings: Factor / Cross Tabulation Analysis
6.4 Quantitative Findings: Inferential Statistics
6.5 Qualitative Findings: Interview Analysis
6.6 Conclusion
Chapter 7 Conclusion
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Overview of the Empirical Research Findings
7.3 Integrated Discussion of Findings per Research Objective
7.4 Summation
7.5 Limitations of this Study
7.6 Future Research
7.7 Recommendations
7.8 Final Conclusive Remarks
References
