1. What are the basic research design issues? Describe them in some detail. Basic research design issues are primarily a function of the purpose of the study (whether it is exploratory, descriptive, or hypothesistesting), and relate to such aspects as the type of study to be done (causal or correlational), the setting in which it will be done (natural or contrived), how much researcher control will have to be exercised (very little in the case of field studies, to very much in the case of experimental designs), how many times data will have to be collected (one shot versus longitudinal), and the unit of analysis – i.e. the level at which data will be aggregated. For most correlational studies, the field setting with minimal researcher influence will be the choice. Most field studies are generally cross-sectional, though some could be longitudinal. Longitudinal studies, though better for understanding the dynamics of the situation fully, also consume more time and resources. Thus, the costs of a study also determine some of the design choices. The unit of analysis depends on whether the research question focuses on individuals, dyads, groups, or entire systems. 2. Why is it important to consider basic research design issues before conducting the study and even as early as at the time of formulating the research question? The research design ensures that the purpose for which a study is conducted is effectively addressed. Some studies are focused on finding results which will be highly reliable, whereas others might be interested in “getting some idea” of what is going on, rather than wanting to know the “absolute truth”. If the rigor needed can be achieved at only high cost (e.g. more manipulation and control, conducting the study over an extended period of time with a big sample, etc), and if this cost is considered too much, then the goals of research might have to be revised or even completely changed. Thus, thinking through the research design issues at the early stages helps in averting several problematic issues later. 3. Is a field study totally out of the question if one is trying to establish
cause and effect relationships? Generally lab and field experiments, rather than field studies, are useful for establishing greater internal validity, or faith in cause and effect relationships. However, when longitudinal data are collected from field studies, or when particular types of statistical analyses are done on crosssectional data gathered from field studies, it is sometimes possible to establish the existence of causal relationships. More specifically, crosslagged correlation analysis (not discussed in the book) using data collected at more than one point in time, can indicate causal relationships. Even using cross-sectional data (i.e. with data collected at one time only) statistical techniques, such as path analysis, can identify cause and effect relationships. However, in such cases, the data and the theory will have to lend themselves to certain assumptions which are not always easily met. 4. “An exploratory study is just as useful as a predictive study”. Discuss this statement. Without exploratory studies, new areas of knowledge cannot be developed. Every theory we now have must at one time have started as an exploratory research study. Exploratory research lays the groundwork for understanding new phenomena, and developing new measures to test these. The exploratory studies of today blossom into the predictive studies of tomorrow, and in that sense both types of study are useful and essential to generate knowledge, understanding, and prediction of business phenomena. 5. Why is the unit of analysis an integral part of the research design? The unit of analysis is an important issue to be considered to find the right answers to the research questions posed. The unit of analysis also determines the sample size. For example, if one is interested in researching the factors that influence the stock market in three different European countries, it is the behavior of stock markets in those three countries that are of central interest to the study, and not the individual stock market within each country. At the time of data analysis, the data gathered from each of the stock markets within each country will
somehow have to be meaningfully aggregated, and only those three data points, which will form the three samples, have to be taken into consideration. Thus, the unit of analysis is a function of the research question posed, and is an integral part of the research design. As will be seen later, research design decisions relating to sampling also depend on the unit of analysis. Let us say a researcher decides to have a sample size of 30 for a study. Sampling 30 individuals in an organization when the unit of analysis is individuals, is not as problematic as sampling 30 organizations when the unit of analysis is organizations, or sampling 30 countries when the unit of analysis is countries. Thus, the unit of analysis influences other decisions such as the sampling design, the sample size, data collection methods, etc. 6. Discuss the inter-relationships among: non-contrived setting, purpose of the study, type of investigation, researcher interference, and time horizon of the study. A non-contrived setting simply indicates that the research is conducted where the flow of events normally takes place – i.e. in the natural system. Such research could be either field studies or field experiments. The purpose of the field study could be for exploration and understanding of phenomena, for describing phenomena, or for hypothesis-testing. The field study is a correlational study, and not usually initiated to explore cause and effect relationships. Researcher interference in field studies is minimal. Field studies could be either cross- sectional or longitudinal. Field experiments, on the other hand, are undertaken to establish cause and effect relationships, are longitudinal in nature, and researcher interference in field experiments is much more than in field studies, since the independent variable will have to be manipulated. These are mostly hypothesis-testing studies, though they could be exploratory in nature, as well. 7. Because literature survey is a time-consuming exercise, a good, indepth interview should suffice to develop a theoretical framework. Discuss this statement. Literature survey is an important though time-consuming exercise and
has to be done for several reasons. Even an in-depth interview may not surface some important factors that may be relevant for finding answers to the problems. In other words, certain critical factors may be overlooked both by the interviewee and the researcher, in which case no solution to the problem will emerge even after the research findings are implemented. A literature review will sensitize and make the researcher aware of all the important factors that have been found to be related to the problem in past studies. It will also help the researcher eliminate trivial factors or variables from the investigation, thus ensuring parsimony and increasing effectiveness. Secondly, a good documentation of the previous work done in the area not only lends credibility to the results found, but also adds to the scientific quality of the research by increasing replicability, generalizability, and parsimony. Finally, good literature surveys, and a theoretical framework formulated on the basis of past studies, contribute to the growth of scientific knowledge, rather than research becoming a futile exercise in reinventing the wheel. 8.Good models are complex. What’s more, a good model should include both moderating and mediating variables. Discuss this statement. There is no relationship between the quality of a model and the complexity of a model. Recall that parsimony is one of the hallmarks of scientific research: Simplicity in explaining the phenomena or problems that occur, and in generating solutions for the problems, is always preferred to complex research frameworks that consider an unmanageable number of factors. A good theoretical framework identifies and defines the important variables in the situation that are relevant to the problem. Moderating and mediating variables may or may not be important to the problem. A good model does not necessarily include moderating and mediating variables. 9. Academic researchers usually develop more complex and elaborate models than applied researchers. Discuss this statement.
No. The complexity of a model is not related to type of research in terms of basic versus applied research. Again, parsimony is one of the hallmarks of scientific research. The term scientific research applies to both basic and applied research. 10. In an applied research context you do not need to explain the relationships between the variables in your conceptual model. Discuss this statement. A theoretical framework is the foundation of hypothetico- deductive research as it is the basis of the hypotheses that you will develop. A theoretical framework represents your beliefs on how certain phenomena (or variables or concepts) are related to each other (a model) and an explanation on why you believe that these variables are associated to each other (a theory). Both the model and the theory flow logically from the documentation of previous research in the problem area. Integrating your logical beliefs with published research, taking into consideration the boundaries and constraints governing the situation, is pivotal in developing a scientific basis for investigating the research problem. A good theoretical base thus adds rigor to a purposive study. Rigor connotes carefulness, scrupulousness, and the degree of exactitude in research investigations. Rigor is one of the hallmarks of scientific research which pertains to both basic and applied research. 11. There is an advantage to stating the hypothesis both in the null and the alternate; it adds clarity to our thinking about what we are testing. Explain. The null hypothesis is set so that the alternate hypothesis becomes testable. When the observed Z value is greater than or equal to the critical Z value for a given confidence level (usually 95 percent), then we know that we ought to accept the alternate hypothesis. If, however, the critical Z
value is more than the observed Z value for a given level of confidence, we would be inclined not to reject the null but to reject the alternate. Setting up the null thus helps us to understand that though the null hypothesis itself is not testable, it helps to decide whether we should accept or reject the alternate. 12. How would you describe the research process? The research process includes a series of steps in identifying the variables to be studied and the method for conducting the study. The problem statement is a critical aspect. Though it is generated by having a good feel for where the gap between a desired state and the actual state exists in the system, the problem statement can be repeatedly honed(sharpen) and made more precise at various stages in the research process. The theoretical framework and hypotheses are important parts of the research process since these focus on finding the answers to the research question. Good research design helps in finding reliable answers to the problem that is investigated. 13. What are the basic aspects of a research design? Purpose of the study Type of investigation Researcher interference Study setting Unit of analysis Time horizon 14. Explain the preliminary data collection methods. Preliminary data can be obtained through interviews and/or through literature search. These processes help to define the problem statement precisely and to formulate the theoretical framework. Interviews conducted at various levels are aimed at obtaining background information on the system that is investigated, the structure and processes that operate in the system, the perceptions,
attitudes, and behaviors of the people in the institution, and other related matters. The literature search will be based on the factors that seem pertinent to the problem that is investigated. After locating all the references in the area, the work relevant to the problem at hand will be studied and a literature review written up. 15. Why is it important to gather information on the background of the organization? The background information of the company is likely to offer the researcher several clues on when the problems that are currently experienced by the company could have started and how they could have originated. One can also assess how the other companies operating in similar types of environment in the industry might be different and in what way. Since multiple factors can influence the problem, the possibility that some of the background features of the company are influencing the situational problem cannot be ruled out. Additionally, the background factors offer the researcher a good idea of how the philosophy and culture of the company are shaped, and to what extent they can be changed, if necessary. Collecting background information also helps to focus on critical issues and raise appropriate questions during the interview process. Examples of this are provided in the book. 16. Should a researcher always find information on structural and job characteristics from those interviewed? Give reasons for your answer with examples. It is almost always advisable for the researcher to gather some information on the structure and job characteristics even though it may appear that the problem may not be related to either of these factors. For example, the problem of not meeting the production deadlines may be directly related to the delayed deliveries of the raw materials by the suppliers. In such a case, the tendency might be to focus the data collection mainly as it relates to suppliers. However, interviewing the employees and ascertaining their reactions to their job, work-flow interdependencies, structure, and the like, might offer the solution that
deadlines can be met even with delayed raw material supplies by changing the workflow patterns, or other structural aspects. It is for such reasons that some time should be spent on finding the job and structurerelated information. There is also another way of looking at this. Human beings operating in organizations face a multitude of factors surrounding them, many of which, directly or indirectly, influence their operating effectiveness. The structural factors such as policies and procedures, reward systems and job factors do play a critical part in how outcomes for the organization are achieved. Because of this, it certainly helps to get a feel for these factors. Of course, there is no need to spend a great deal of time on these unless there is some indication that there could be problems in these areas. As an example, it is possible that the age of the machinery could be blamed for low production, and sophisticated machinery might be installed without any appreciable difference in the results. Further investigation might throw light on the fact that the current incentive system does not encourage high levels of production, and this fact, rather than the type of machinery used, is the problem. Not finding this before investing heavily on new equipment would be a costly mistake! 17. How would you go about doing a literature survey in the area of business ethics? I would first obtain all the references and abstracts relating to the area of business ethics through on-line systems, then organize the studies based on the particular aspects they address, and finally, write up a review of the available literature. 18. What is the purpose of the literature survey? Basically to make sure that none of the important variables are left out in the study and to generate a parsimonious set of factors which would help to explain or predict the phenomenon under investigation. 19. Why is appropriate citation important? What are the consequences of not giving credit to the source from which materials are extracted? Most published articles are copyrighted. There are rules as to how
much can be quoted from the original text without obtaining the journal’s and the author’s permission. If permission is not obtained for quotes exceeding the authorized limit, the individual quoting the material is liable to be sued for plagiarism and can even be expelled from the professional society to which he or she belongs. 20. “The problem definition stage is perhaps more critical in the research process than the problem solution stage”. Discuss this statement. Finding the right solution to an incorrectly identified problem helps no one because the original concerns will still continue to exist. Hence, pinpointing where exactly the gap lies, for which a solution is needed, is critical. 21. Why should one get hung up on problem definition if one already knows the broad problem area to be studied? Since a problem statement is a clear, precise, and concise statement of the issue to be researched, it offers a focus and direction to the research. In other words, it sets out the exact purpose of the research and clearly states the question to which we are trying to find an answer. The broad problem area, however, due to its vagueness and wide scope of the issues that could be involved, leaves the focus of the research undetermined, and hence offers no sense of purpose or direction to the research. To put it differently, a broad problem area does not highlight the specific problem that exists. Unless the precise problem is identified, a solution to it cannot be found. This is akin to an individual going to a doctor saying he is losing weight (broad problem). Unless the physician can locate the reason for this weight loss (define the problem), the situation cannot be rectified. 22. Offer a clearly focused problem statement in the broad area of corporate culture. What constitutes corporate culture? Or, How does corporate culture influence employee performance? 23. After studying and extracting information from all the relevant
work done previously, how does the researcher know which references, articles, and information should be given prominence in the literature survey? The mass of information extracted from the various published research and technical and other reports, will indicate to the researcher the key variables that need to be considered in the particular situation where the problem has been identified. The choice of the variables for inclusion in the study will be a function of the frequency with which they are repeatedly found to be significant in the various research studies, the relevance of the variables to the current research context, and considerations of parsimony. Having decided on the key variables for inclusion in the study, the researcher can then integrate the information found in the studies that discuss these variables. Other studies which had equally relevant variables but which had to be excluded from the current research for certain valid reasons should also be briefly discussed. The reasons for their exclusion should be explicitly stated in the literature survey section. 24. One hears the word research being mentioned by several groups such as research organizations, college and university professors, doctoral students, graduate assistants working for faculty, graduate and undergraduate students doing their term papers, research departments in industries, newspaper reporters, journalists, lawyers, doctors, and several other professionals and nonprofessionals. How would you rank the aforementioned groups of people in terms of the extent to which they might be doing “scientific” investigations? Why? To the extent that any of the above groups conforms to the hallmarks of science, they would be doing scientific investigation. It is quite possible that poor research is done by research agencies, and excellent research is conducted by a graduate assistant. The ultimate test is the rigor of the research which would lend itself to testability, replicability, accuracy and precision, generalizability, objectivity, and parsimony.
Research organizations and research departments in industries engage themselves in both basic and applied research and usually have the resources required to conduct scientific investigations using rigorous data collection methods, sampling designs, and data analysis. Most professors in colleges and universities are well trained to conduct scientific investigations, though their resources may not, in most cases, be as plentiful as that made available in research organizations and research departments. Because of restricted resources, professors may have to compromise somewhat on methodological rigor (e.g. use a small sample) which might restrict the generalizability of their findings. However, their research might otherwise be scientific. Applied researchers doing action-oriented research, are somewhat restricted in even disseminating information about their findings due to the localized nature of their inquiry which may not pass many of the criteria of the hallmarks of science. Doctoral dissertations conducted under able guidance and supervision quite frequently make valuable contributions to the body of existing knowledge. Much of this research is later published as journal articles, and some get published as books because of their contributions to knowledge. Students’ term papers are meant to be exercises in skill development for integrating materials and communicating ideas in written form. Exceptional research papers, when refined and published, could qualify for being termed as scientific investigations. Newspaper reporters and journalists may obtain extensive primary and secondary data but their investigations are confined to a narrow range of current incidents, events, or individuals, which are of passing interest with little generalizability to other times, events or individuals. Hence, they cannot ordinarily be termed scientific investigations. Some newspaper articles, however – as for instance, economic and environmental investigations – provide data, analysis of data, and valid conclusions drawn there from, which might later be used as secondary data by other researchers. These would be categorized as more scientific in contrast to articles or editorials in the paper. Academic journals usually publish articles that are scientific and
some of the practitioner-oriented articles are probably somewhat less scientific than the academic articles in terms of rigor and generalizability. To the extent that lawyers, doctors, professionals and nonprofessionals present their findings that have wide testability, replicability, generalizability, accuracy and precision, objectivity, and parsimony, they will be scientific. However, if these investigations are confined to single cases, incidents, or individuals, they cannot be called scientific investigations despite the fact that they may be found useful. 25. Explain the processes of deduction and induction, giving an example of each. The hypothetico-deductive method of research helps the researcher to deduce or infer from the results of data analysis and hence is the deductive process. For example, if as a result of analysis of data collected, one infers that the problem of turnover can be minimized by three important factors: (i) flexible work hours; (ii) recognition of superior performance of workers through suitable merit pay raises; and (iii) enriching certain types of jobs, this is the deductive approach. Induction is a process of drawing inferences from observed phenomena, which may subsequently be put to the test through hypothetico-deductive method of research. For instance, if a manager observes that people residing at distances beyond 50 miles from the workplace remain absent more frequently than those he knows to reside close by, and infers thereby that distance is a factor in absenteeism, this is an inductive process. 26. If research in the management area cannot be 100 percent scientific, why bother to do it at all? Comment on this statement. Research in the management area dealing with human behavior cannot be 100 percent scientific. However, such research is necessary and useful for detecting problems and coming up with solutions to ensure that problems do not get out of control. Management research makes a valuable contribution inasmuch that it can help organizations function smoothly and effectively and help managers and individuals at all levels in organizations experience and enjoy a better quality of life.
27. Why should a manager know about research when the job entails managing people, products, events, environments and the like? The manager, while managing people, products, events, and environments, will invariably face problems, big and small, and will have to seek ways to find long lasting, effective solutions. This can be achieved only through knowledge of research even if consultants are engaged to solve problems. 28. For what specific purpose is Basic research important? Basic research is important for generating and building upon the existing knowledge in the areas of interest. It offers the foundation for applied research by which one can circumvent reinventing the wheel. 29. When is Applied research, as distinct from Basic research, useful? Applied research is useful in solving specific problems in particular situations where early action might be needed to solve problems in organizations. 30. Why is it important to be adept in handling the managerresearcher relationship? The manager who knows how to relate to researchers facilitates the problem solving process and benefits the research team as well as the organization. One who is not adept at this will frustrate and be frustrated during the research process and thereafter. Being capable of handling the manager-researcher relationship is thus a big advantage and some of the nuances of handling research teams are: (i) knowing how much and what information to give to the team; (ii)
meaningful and purposeful interactions with the team members;
(iii) stating from the outset what records of the company will and will not be accessible to the team members and expressing the core values of the system.
31. Explain, giving reasons, which is more important – Applied or Basic research? Both are equally important. Without basic research, applied research cannot work as well, and if the results of basic research are not applied, such research would be futile. Whereas basic research is the foundation of knowledge, applied research is its practical application and helps to provide the additional information base for theory building and further generation of knowledge. 32. Give two specific instances where an external research team would be useful and two other scenarios where an internal research team would be deployed, with adequate explanations as to why each scenario is justified for an external or internal team. The answers will vary. For the external team, the suggestions could be: a. to help non-tech companies to build up sophisticated technology in their environment; (only those with specialized knowledge of technology can help non-tech companies). b. to evaluate the successful and deficient operations of the company; (to avoid bias of internal team members). For the internal team, it could be: a. to figure out how the companies affected by the September 11th disaster can rebuild themselves; (internal team would be more knowledgeable about the company and could rebuild faster). b. to solve the problem of consistent losses of a small division of a large company (only a small pocket of a large company is involved and the situation can be rectified by the internal team). 33.Explain with examples what do you mean by: a. Dependent variables The variable of primary interest to the researcher.It is not manipulated by the researcher.Research may have more than one
dependent
variables.
b. Confounding variables A variable that is associated with the problem and with a possible cause of the problem is a potential CONFOUNDING VARIABLE. A confounding variable may either strengthen or weaken the apparent relationship between the problem and a possible cause.
c. Intervening variables It is one that surfaces between the time the independent variables start operating to influence the dependent variable and the time their impact is felt on it. It helps to conceptualize and explain the influence of the independent variable on the dependent variable.
d. Moderating variables It is one that has a strong contingent effect on the independent variable – dependent variable relationship. It’s presence modifies the original relationship between the independent and the dependent variables. It moderates the relationship between the independent and the dependent variables.
e. Independent variables It influences the dependent variable. It is manipulated by the researcher in experimental research. Also known as treatment variable in experimental research. Research may have more than one independent variable. f. Case Studies It is intricately designed and reveals a comprehensive and complete presentation of facts, as they occur, in a single entity. This could be an individual, an organisation or an entire country g. h. i. j. k.
Exploratory Research Ex-post facto studies Hallmarks of scientific research Null hypotheses Alternate hypotheses
l. Explanatory research m. Quasi Research designs n. True research designs o. Theoretical framework A conceptual model of how one makes logical sense of the relationship among several factors that have been identified as important to the problem. Elaborates the relationship between the variables, explains the theory underlying these relations, and describes the nature and direction of relationship.A foundation on which entire research work is based. Logically developed, described through the process of interview, observation and literature survey, experience and intuition.
Theoretical Framework Schematic Communication among cockpit members
Coordination between ground control and cockpit
Air –safety violations
Decentralization Training of cockpit crew
Independent variables
p. Internal validity of an experiment
Dependable variable
Internal validity tries to examine whether the observed effect on a dependent variable is actually caused by the treatments (independent variables) in question. Factors affecting Internal Validity History Maturation Testing ( effect of pre test on post test ) Instrumentation ( change in the observed criteria at the pre & post test ) Selection bias Statistical regression Mortality
q. External validity of an experiment External validity refers to the generalization of the results of an experiment. The concern is whether the result of an experiment can be generalized beyond the experimental situations. Factors affecting External Validity Interaction of treatment & selection Higher the internal validity, lesser will be the external validity r. Control group and experimental group s. Randomization and matching
