ODL LIBRARY MIDDLE MANAGEMENT CAREER DEVELOPMENT

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTERTHREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN FOR THE EMPIRICAL STUDY

INTRODUCTION

There are stages in the research process, namely defining the research problem which includes the research design, problem, literature review, theoretical questions; the stage when information is obtained; and the stage when information is analysed and interpreted (University of South Africa 2000:12). The stages characterise the transition from the problem statement to the gathering of data and are known as conceptualisation and operationalisation. Conceptualisation of this study was reflected in the conceptual framework, which is based on theory derived from a literature study, and the operationalisation took the form of empirical research to test the problem statement. The first phase in the research process was provided in Chapter Two which fostered an understanding of the concepts relating to aspects that facilitate the performance of the role of ODL middle manager and subsequently a successful career path.
Chapter Three focused on the operationalisation of the study which covered the second phase of the research process. The focus of Chapter Two was to determine the theoretical constructs whereas in Chapter Three the aim of the research was to explain a unique situation. This related to what ODL Library middle managers perceived as important factors and strategies and how and why these facilitated middle manager development and success in the ODL Library. This ultimately fostered an understanding of influences that contribute to the appointment of middle managers and an optimal career path after the appointment. The nature of the research needed to be considered as it informed the research design which becomes a plan or blueprint indicating the type of study to be conducted to resolve the research problem and it determined the methodology applicable to the study (Babbie and Mouton 2011:74, 103). The chapter commenced with an overview of this study‟s connection to science and meta-theoretical traditions and subsequently discussed the study‟s research knowledge claim, strategy of inquiry through methods of data collection and data analysis that provided the information relating to the research question.

JUSTIFICATION OF THE RESEARCH PARADIGM AND METHODOLOGY

Science is an enterprise dedicated to “finding out” (Babbie and Mouton 2011:72). This study, which falls within the field of the social sciences, focused on research in LIS since an answer to a research problem within this field was required.
In considering the research methodology discourse for this study, an understanding of the components within the discourse was required. Ngulube (2015:126) alludes to the fact that social science methodologists sometimes use these research methodology-related terms pertaining to the components loosely, contradictorily and inconsistently. They therefore have difficulty in identifying the conceptual differences between epistemology (what constitutes knowledge and ways of knowing), ontology (existence of social reality), paradigm, methodology, research approaches and techniques in research methods.
In order to overcome this challenge in this study, the approach stipulated by Ngulube (2015:128) in a methodology discourse map was applied. It illustrated relationships among major components in the research methodology landscape. In accordance with this map social reality was linked with the related paradigm, namely realism, pluralism and constructivism. Realism pertains to positivism; pluralism to pragmatism; and contructivism to interpretivism. The broad methodological paradigms in social research, namely quantitative, qualitative and mixed method research are linked to these meta-theoretical traditions and referred to by Ngulube (2015:129) as research methodologies; and further links research designs to each of these methodologies. The quantitative methodology includes the survey, experiment and case study design; mixed method methodology includes exploratory, explanatory and embedded designs; and qualitative methodology includes case study, ethnography, phenomenology and grounded theory designs. The map further indicated the data collection techniques/ methods to be employed through the triangulation of data used by all three the methodologies. These involve questionnaires, various types of interviews, observation and artefact analysis. A strong focus is placed on all these components within the research methodology discourse. This map for researching social reality was applied to this study on developing ODL Library middle managers as it provided a clear illustration of the foundations on which social research is framed and allowed the researcher to use research methodology-related terms consistently in accordance with the map which aligns closely with the thinking of leading methodologists.
In this regard, Creswell (2003:4) alludes to the meta-theoretical traditions and states that in a research study the epistemology (theory of knowledge), theoretical perspective (philosophical stance which lies behind the methodology in questions), methodology (strategy that links methods to outcomes) and the methods (techniques and procedures) pertaining to the study should be determined. Creswell (2014:5) further states that researchers who plan a study need to consider the study in terms of the philosophical worldview assumptions, the research design that relate to this worldview and the specific methods or procedures of research that translate the approach to practice as it reflects the meta-theoretical traditions.
Creswell (2014:5-6) states that the four worldviews that are widely accepted and discussed in the literature are postpositivism, constructivism, transformative and pragmatism. These knowledge claims, also known as paradigms, pertain to how the researcher will learn during the inquiry.
• The postpositivist assumption relates to the idea that social sciences emulate the methodology of the natural sciences. The term positivism therefore refers to scientific claims on the basis of empirical evidence (Babbie and Mouton 2011:22). Creswell (2014:7-8) explains the key assumptions of this knowledge claim as knowledge which is conjectural; research which provides the process of making claims and then refining or abandoning them; the collection of information on instruments based on measures completed by participants or recorded by the researcher with a view to provide data, evidence and rational considerations which shape knowledge; research seeks to develop relevant, true statements that can serve to explain the situation of concern or describe the causal relationship of interest; and finally, the assumption is that objectivity is an essential aspect of the enquiry, resulting in an examining of methods and conclusions that address bias, meaning that the researcher must develop methods for bias. The standards of validity and reliability also need to be considered since this is important in both quantitative and qualitative research.
• Constructivism pertains to the phenomenological (interpretivism) paradigm. Whereas positivism emphasises similarities between the object of natural and social science, the phenomenological tradition emphasises the differences between them. In this tradition, the researcher “identifies the essence” of human experiences pertaining to the phenomenon. The aim of human sciences pertains to the understanding of people (Babbie and Mouton 2011:28). Constructivism or socially constructed knowledge pertains to knowledge claimed through assumptions. Assumptions pertain to an understanding of the world in which they work and live (Creswell 2003:8; 2014:8). Constructivism is therefore a knowledge claim based on understanding; multiple participant meanings; social and historical construction and theory generation (Creswell 2003:6; 2014:8).
• Transformative worldview feels that the postpositivist assumption imposes structural laws and theories that do not fit marginalised individuals and that the constructivist stance does not advocate for an action agenda to help marginalised people. This worldview pertains to advocacy, also known as participatory knowledge claims. Researchers in favour of the participatory paradigm believe that inquiry should be intertwined with a political agenda. Participatory paradigm is practical and collaborative and an inquiry completed with others rather than on others (Creswell 2003:9-10; 2014:9).
• Pragmatism knowledge claim arises mostly from actions, situations and consequences rather than conditions as in postpositivism. Researchers then use all methods to understand the problem (Creswell 2003:11). In this regard, Creswell (2014:11) explains that pragmatism is not committed to one philosophical system and reality; individual researchers have a freedom of choice of methods, techniques and procedures; the world is not seen as an absolute unity; truth is what works at the time; researchers look to the „what‟ and „how‟ to research based on intended consequences; pragmatism opens the door to multiple methods, different worldviews and assumptions as well as different forms of data collection.
Babbie and Mouton (2011:48) state that when the researcher then understands how the learning will take place, the researcher moves from the meta-scientific level to the world of actual social inquiry and begins to reflect how social scientists practice. The thoughts expressed by meta-theorists often appear in a new form. The strategy of inquiry, which informs the procedures and specific methods of data collection and subsequent analysis, then needs to be studied to determine the relationship between meta-theories and methodological approaches used in the world of social inquiry. There are broad methodological paradigms in social research, namely quantitative, qualitative and participatory action (mixed method) approaches. Each of these approaches is linked to the meta-theoretical traditions. The quantitative approach is linked to positivism, qualitative approach to phenomenology or interpretivism and participatory action approaches to the critical paradigm.
Against this background, this study fell within the paradigm of positivism, which reflected a philosophy in which the problems are examined with a view to get true statements that can serve to describe and explain the situation. The broad methodology with which this study aligns pertains to the quantitative approach. Babbie and Mouton (2011:48) allude to the fact that this paradigm includes an emphasis on certain matters, namely the quantification of constructs, which means that numbers are assigned to the perceived qualities of things; a related topic concerns the role of variables describing and analysing human behavior; and the statistical control. This approach differs from the qualitative approach and mixed method approach in terms of the intent of the research, how literature is used, how to focus on the intention of the investigation, how to collect and analyse data, the role of the researcher and how data is validated. Imenda (2014:190) states that methodological considerations are guided by the approach followed during the literature review, nature of the data that was collected, analyses and interpretation and that these issues all touch on the broader research paradigm. The study‟s inductive approach to reasoning led to the development of a conceptual framework and subsequently a form of conceptual model. In terms of the study‟s intent to find out the perceived importance of factors and strategies that advance the ODL middle manager‟s appointment and optimal career path and the emphasis placed by the paradigm, the quantitative methodology could firstly provide answers to the primary intention of the study, but it would not provide a full understanding of the problem.

RESEARCH DESIGNS

The research design was further considered in terms of the study‟s broader research paradigm and its framework. The study‟s connection with the paradigm of positivism reflected a philosophy in which the problems are examined with a view to get true statements that can serve to describe and explain the situation. This together with its conceptual framework, which reflected an inductive approach to reasoning, guided the research design.
The following discussion on the research design of this study provided further details on the choice of research:
In accordance with the research methodology discourse map developed by Ngulube (2015), quantitative research designs are based around the case study, experiment and survey. This is also the view of leading methodologists like Babbie (1990:33) and Yin (2003:1). Rowley (2002:17) and Yin (2009:9) explain when to use each of these designs by stating that the decision is influenced by type of research question posed, extent of control the investigator has over the behavioral event and focus on contemporary versus historical event. In terms of the type of questions asked in case study research, the type of control required in this research study and its focus on a contemporary event, the design strategy of this study was the case study. Rowley (2002:17) states that case study research can be used for exploratory, descriptive and explanatory research. The purpose of this research study could therefore be accommodated through this design. This research design was subsequently viewed as a blueprint for this study, which deals with the questions to study, the relevancy and collection of the data and analysis thereof according to Yin (2009:26).

Case study research design

This was a positivist case study which triangulates data collection methods. This approach to research arose from the need to distinguish between types of mixed methods studies highlighted by scholars such as Tashakkori and Teddlie (1998) and Tashakkori and Creswell (2007). The intention in this study was to collect quantitative data and qualitative data but to keep the data separate with no intention to mix the data as is the case in a mixed method methodology. The study focused closely on mixed methods as a collection technique of two types of data rather than a methodology. In accordance with the purpose of the study and its related research question the intention was to triangulate research methods. Both quantitative and qualitative data would be collected by means of a survey, interviews and institutional documents but the sets of data were kept apart.
In this regard, Yin (2009:19) alludes to an important fact that applied to this case study and which subsequently confirmed the correctness of the choice of design of this study, namely that case study research can include or even be limited to quantitative evidence. It is further stated that case study research is not just a form of qualitative research as it goes beyond being a type of qualitative research by using both quantitative and qualitative evidence. This argument is supported by Schwandt (2000:206), Johnson, Onwuegbuzie and Turner (2007:117) and Imenda (2014:190) who state that quantitative/qualitative data are useful since all research is interpretive in some way. Gibbert and Ruigrok (2010:712) state the data may consist of qualitative research techniques such as interviews and document analysis as well as quantitative data. This means that different research for different understandings is required and that researchers need to use a multiplicity of methods suitable for different understandings.
This aligns with the thinking of Rowley (2002:16) who states that a case study contributes towards one of the most challenging aspects of research in the workplace, namely to lift the investigation from describing „what‟ happens to a research level which becomes more worthwhile. Taking up the challenge to find out more about the phenomenon added to the quantitative description. Qualitative data contributed to the completeness of quantitative data as it used evidence from additional sources. This led to the decision to approach this research as a case study which first collected quantitative data pertaining to „what‟ happens in the workplace in terms of the perceived importance of factors and strategies that contribute towards ODL Library middle manager career success and to collect qualitative data thereafter on „how and why‟ development factors and strategies contributed to an optimised career path. Rowley (2002:16) alludes to the fact that „how‟ and „why‟ questions are the types of questions that relate to case study research as they provide certain answers. These questions are particularly applicable to this study in terms of its purpose to explain. Yin (2009:9) state that „how and why‟ questions are more explanatory and likely to lead to the use of case studies. In this regard, Leedy and Ormrod (2005:108) allude to the fact that a case study has the potential to answer in-depth questions. Rowley (2002:17) explains that in comparison to survey research, the number of units studied in a case study is less than that in a survey, yet the extent of detail available benefits the study as it is greater.
The type of case study applicable to this study was a single case study in terms of the explanations for using a single case study provided by various scholars. Babbie and Mouton (2011:640) explain that case study research can be an intensive investigation of a single unit which could be individual people, families, communities, social groups, organisations and institutions, events and countries. Rowley (2002:21) states that a single case study is akin to a single experiment. Dul and Hak (2008:4) state that a single case study is a case study in which data from one instance is enough to achieve the research objective. In this study, the research focused on a single unit, namely the career paths of ODL Library middle managers and it involved all the middle managers of one ODL Library. The study was therefore viewed as a single case study of the career path of ODL Library middle managers, both as a unit of analysis and a research method, to draw data from multiple data sources through triangulation of data. Data was drawn from one instance to achieve the research objective. It also adhered to the following criteria or rationales stipulated by Rowley (2002:21) and Yin (2009:47-49) applicable when doing a single case study:
• The research represents an extreme or unique case. In the case of this study, this case was considered special since the theory with regard to ODL Library middle management development was not yet established.
• The case is a representative or typical case. In this case study, it represented a typical case on development factors and strategies which related to the middle managers in an established ODL Library.
• It is a revelatory case (case that was previously inaccessible). The fact that this case was inaccessible could be ascribed to the fact that the ODL Library‟s institution only became a comprehensive ODL institution approximately a decade ago; research in this field was thus not justified.
Yin (2009:50) states that if a case study examines only the global nature of an organisation or programme, a holistic design is used. This case study was subsequently considered to be a holistic, single case study as it focused on the global case of the ODL Library‟s middle manager career path which included different layers of managers within its organisational structure. In accordance with the criteria for the type of case designs reported and explained by Rowley (2002:21-22), this was a Type 1 holistic, single unit of analysis. Holistic studies examine the case as one unit. It focuses on broad issues which provide a „helicopter view of the case‟. It may identify a number of sub-units (such as roles), each of which is explored individually. Results are then drawn together to provide the overall picture. This case study drew from the perceptions of managers in the ODL Library‟s middle management structure.
Against this background, the research design pertained to a holistic, single case study which triangulated data sources.

VALIDITY, RELIABILITY AND GENERALISATION IN CASE STUDY RESEARCH

Case study research should focus on specific aspects (Becker, Dawson, Devine, Hannum, Hill, Leydens, Matuskevich, Traver and Palmquist 2005:1). According to Rowley (2002:20) validity, reliability and generalisation form the basis on which the research will be regarded as a piece of knowledge to be assimilated in the knowledge base of the field of study. The following overview of these concepts first provides a description of what they mean, followed by an explanation of how this study‟s validity, reliability and generali sation could be tested.
An examination of research validity reveals that it relates to the extent to which the findings of the empirical study are considered to be credible. Ngulube (2005:132) explains that it needs to be considered whether the research has measured the phenomenon in a way that reflects its characteristics. Babbie and Mouton (2011:648) allude to the fact that because ultimate validity of a measure can never be proven, researchers agree on the relative validity that reflects the accuracy in terms of certain criteria. Criteria pertaining to relative validity, provided by Babbie and Mouton (2011:122-123), are face validity (reasonable measure of some variable); content validity (how much the measure covers a range of meanings included within the concept); criterion validity (also called predictive or concurrent validity linked to scores predicting a criterion measure; and the correlation of results with other results); construct validity (based on logical relations among variables; whether items measure concepts). In terms of these criteria, validity refers to the extent to which the empirical measure adequately reflects the real meaning of the concept under construction. The focus is thus on the extent to which a study adheres to best practice and interpretive rigour (Babbie and Mouton 2011:122).
Reliability is best described by Rowley (2002:20) and Yin (2009:45) when they explain that reliability relates to the trustworthiness of results collected from two similar studies. It demonstrates that the data collected for a specific study are the same if repeated. However, this does not mean a replication of results of one case study to another. It is accentuated that with a case study, the same case should be researched again with a view to establish the reliability of the results in the first study and to minimise errors and bias. Reliability can also be achieved through evidence of the documentation of procedures and record keeping which is later used by another investigator.
Generalisation is described by Creswell (2014:201) as the extent of applying results to new settings, people or samples. Generalisation in case studies is not statistical generalisation, but analytical generalisation in which previously developed theory is used to compare the empirical results of the case study. In analytical generalisation each case is viewed as an experiment. Yin (2009:43) states that in analytical generalisation the investigator strives to generalise a set of results to some broader theory (Rowley 2002:25). The set of results in this study could be generalised to the broad aspect of middle manager development.
Another thought about generalisation in case study research was raised in a question by Rowley (2002:25), namely whether generalisation is necessary, since it was derived from a positivist approach in which generalisation on the basis of samples is the norm. The question is explained by the statement that the case study should just be accepted as insights as it stands for readers to make the interpretation in terms of their own experience.
In this study, the validity and reliability were mainly considered in terms of the quality of its research design which was based on four logical tests and related tactics. The use of this approach is considered valuable and is therefore summarised by many authors of social science textbooks, including leaders in this field such as Rowley (2002:21) and Yin (2009:41). These tests, together with the related case study tactic and the research phase during which the tactic occurs, are depicted in Table 7. In the part below Table 7, the selected tactics which were used in this study to establish its validity, reliability and generalisation are explained.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
DEDICATION
DECLARATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDICES
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.0 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
1.3 KEY CONCEPTS
1.5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
1.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
1.7 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS
1.8 OUTLINE OF THE THESIS CHAPTERS
1.9 REFERENCING STYLE USED IN THE THESIS
1.10 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER TWO: ODL LIBRARY MIDDLE MANAGEMENT CAREER DEVELOPMENT
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 ROLE OF THE LITERATURE STUDY
2.2 DEVELOPING ODL LIBRARY MIDDLE MANAGEMENT
2.3 USE OF THEORY IN LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH
2.4 ODL LIBRARY FOUNDATIONS
2.5 ROLE OF ORGANISATIONAL THEORY IN THE HIGHER EDUCATION ODL PRACTICE
2.6 IMPACT OF ODL ON THE ACADEMIC LIBRARY
2.7 PARADIGM SHIFT IN MANAGEMENT AND RELATED LIBRARY SCIENCE
2.8 LIBRARY STUDIES ON MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES AND FACTORS
2.9 SYNTHESIS AND EVALUATION OF THEORY
2.10 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN FOR THE EMPIRICAL STUDY
3.0 INTRODUCTION
3.1 JUSTIFICATION OF THE RESEARCH PARADIGM AND METHODOLOGY
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGNS
3.3 VALIDITY, RELIABILITY AND GENERALISATION IN CASE STUDY RESEARCH
3.4 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESEARCH SITE
3.5 RESEARCH POPULATION
3.6 SOURCES OF EVIDENCE
3.7 DATA ANALYSIS STRATEGY AND PRESENTATIONS OF RESULTS
3.8 EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.9 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS AND FINDINGS
4.0 INTRODUCTION
4.1 QUANTITATIVE DATA: QUESTIONNAIRE
4.2 QUALITATIVE DATA: INTERVIEWS
4.3 QUALITATIVE DATA: INSTITUTIONAL DOCUMENTS
4.4 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER FIVE: ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
5.0 INTRODUCTION
5.1 PRESENTATION OF THE ANALYSIS
5.2 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
5.3 SYNTHESIS
5.4 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER SIX: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS
6.0 INTRODUCTION
6.1 SUMMARY OF THE CONTENTS
6.2 SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS
6.3 CONCLUSIONS
6.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
6.5 FUTURE VALUE OF THE STUDY
REFERENCES
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT