Research Methods in Management Studies
By Appointment Only
To be advised
You can contact staff by:
- Calling +64 7 838 4466 select option 1, then enter the extension.
Extensions starting with 4, 5, 9 or 3 can also be direct dialled:
- For extensions starting with 4: dial +64 7 838 extension.
- For extensions starting with 5: dial +64 7 858 extension.
- For extensions starting with 9: dial +64 7 837 extension.
- For extensions starting with 3: dial +64 7 2620 + the last 3 digits of the extension e.g. 3123 = +64 7 262 0123.
This paper aims to introduce students to the assumptions underlying and differences between available methodologies for performing research in the social sciences. The focus is on interpretive and positivist methods. The paper attempts to give students the conceptual and methodological resources needed to think and converse as researchers and scientists in organisations and to develop a certain level of competence in at least one research methodology. This is accomplished through the generation of a research proposal in a field of interest to the student and critiques of methodological approaches found in the academic literature. The student will be required to submit a report on their research findings at the end of the term which will include all the cycles of the research process - generation of a research idea, literature review, choosing an appropriate methodology, >Sub-objectives of the paper include:
1.To acquaint students with the methodologies of research in management studies: both positivism and interpretivism;
2.To educate students in the theory-centred elements of research methodology, providing them with an appreciation of how theories are developed and/or tested;
3.To familiarise students with a broad repertoire of research methodologies and methods relevant to organisations, society and process;
4.To apply different methods in a real research project, and
5.To develop the ability to critically evaluate management articles.
The formal part of the course consists of in-class learning, seminars, and discussion. However, the emphasis is put on in class discussion and sharing of ideas and experiences. Students are expected to have read the recommended readings. For domain-specific knowledge, students are encouraged to contact their department. In this course, the lecturers will give advice primarily on methodological issues.
The paper outline identifies the lecturer who will take the lead for each section but expect a range of participants to be involved.
It is expected students will always be ready to participate and provide both questions and ideas.
Students who successfully complete the course should be able to:
Understand how to design a research project and be able to discuss general frameworks for and approaches to research.Linked to the following assessments:
Be able to perform a comprehensive literature review of a chosen area of researchLinked to the following assessments:
Be more able to critically read and evaluate research articles; more specifically, they should be able to critically analyze the comparative strengths and weaknesses of different research strategies for a given research questionLinked to the following assessments:
Be able to understand the research process and the literature, tools and techniques associated with each phase of the process from library research through objective specification, topic analysis, hypothesis formulation, selection of the research strategies and design, data collection, and analysis, to the preparation of publishable research reports.Linked to the following assessments:
Have a familiarity with important issues and papers, past and current, in their fields.Linked to the following assessments:
Ethics and Referencing
Understand proper research ethics and referencing.Linked to the following assessments:
The internal assessment/exam ratio (as stated in the University Calendar) is 100:0. There is no final exam. The final exam makes up 0% of the overall mark.
The internal assessment/exam ratio (as stated in the University Calendar) is 100:0 or 0:0, whichever is more favourable for the student. The final exam makes up either 0% or 0% of the overall mark.
Error: Assessment components must add up to 100%
At least one Assessment Component needs to be entered
|Component Description||Due Date||Time||Percentage of overall mark||Submission Method||Compulsory|
|1. Preliminary Research Topic||
12 Mar 2019
No set time
|2. Annotated Bibliography||
26 Mar 2019
30 Apr 2019
|4. Take Home Test: Case Study in Management Research||
30 May 2019
|5. Management Research Project||
21 Jun 2019
Required and Recommended Readings*
Reading list :
Saunders, Mark; Lewis, Philip and Thornhill, Adrian (2016) Research Methods for Business Students, 7ed, ISBN: 978-1-292-01665-8, Pearson Education Limited
Introduction, Paradigms, Design
Alvarado, F., (1996) "Concerning Postmodernity and Organizations in the Third World: Opening a Debate and Suggestions for a Research Agenda", Organization Science, 7, 6, 667-681.
Burrell, G., and G. Morgan, (1979) Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis, Heineman, London.
Meredith, J.R. (1995) "What Is Empirical Research?" Decision Line, March, 10-11.
Moore, N. (2000). Develop the Research Objectives. How to Do Research, London: Facet Publishing. ix-xv, 3-9.
Frankfort-Nachmias, C. and D. Nachmias. (1996). Ethics in Social Science Research, In Research Methods in the Social Sciences, Ch4. St. Martin’s Press, NY.
Parsons, L.C. and M.S. Harris. (2002). Relevance, Writing Style, and Synthesis: Key Elements in a Focused Review of the Literature. Orthopedic Nursing, 21(5). 65.
Rowley, J. and F. Slack. (2004). Conducting a Literature Review. Management Research News, 27(6), 31-39.
Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356-367.
Webster, J. and Watson, R.T. (2002). Analysing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2). xiii-xxiii.
Orlikowski, W.J. and J.J. Baroudi, "Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions", Information Systems Research, 2, 1, March 1991.
Deetz, S. (1996)"Describing Differences in Approaches to Organization Science: Rethinking Burrell and Morgan and Their Legacy", Organization Science, 7, 2, 191-207.
Doolin, B. "Field Research in Information Systems". Working paper. U of Waikato.
Robey, D. (1994) Diversity in Research on Information Systems. Decision Line. 6-7.
Pope, J.A. (1995) "Improving Survey Response Rates", Decision Line, March, 3-4.
Pinsonneault, A. and K. Kraemer, "Survey Research Methodology in Management Information Systems: An Assessment", Journal of Management Information Systems, Fall 1993, Vol. 10 No. 2., pp 75-105.
Validity and Reliability
Cook, T.D., and D.T. Campbell, "The Design and Conduct of Quasi-Experiments and True Experiments in Field Settings", in Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, M Dunnette, ed. Wiley&Sones, NY. pp 223-246. 1983.
Dröge, C. (1996) "How Valid are Measurements?" Decision Line, Sept/Oct, 10-12.
Straub, D.W. and C.L. Carlson, (1989) "Validating Instruments in MIS Research", MIS Quarterly, 147-165.
Eisenhardt, K.M., (1989) "Building Theories from Case Study Research", Academy of Management Review. 14, pp 532-550.
Doolin, B., "Case Research in Information Systems: An Alternative Perspective", Research Report Series, 1994-8, Department of Management Systems, University of Waikato
Benbasat, I., D.K. Goldstein, & M. Mead, "The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems", MIS Quarterly, September 1987, p 369-386.
Walsham, G. (1995). “Interpretive case studies in IS research: Nature and method,” European Journal of Information Systems, 4(2), 74-81.
Checkland, P. (1991) "From Framework Through Experience to Learning:The Essential Natureof Action Research", Information Systems Research, 397-403.
Elden, M. and R.F. Chisholm, (1993) "Emerging Varieties of Action Research: Introduction to the Special Issue", Human Relations, 46, 2, 121-142.
Chisholm, R.F. and M. Elden, (1993) "Features of Emerging Action Research",Human Relations, 46, 2, 275-298.
Robertson, J. (2000)“The Three Rs of Action Research: reciprocity, reflexivity and reflection-on-reality,” Education Action Research, 8, 2. 307-326.
Strauss, A. and J. Corbin. (1994). Grounded Theory Methodology. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln, Sage.
Hannabuss, S. (1996). Research Interviews. New Library World, 97-107.
Alvesson, M. (2002). Postmodernism and Social Research. Buckingham,UK; Open University Press. 1-17.
Van Dijk, T.A. (1998). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. In The Sociolinguistics Reader, Vol 2, Ch 14, Gender and Discourse. J. Cheshire and P. Trudge, Arnold, London. 367-393.
Lacity, M. C. and Janson, M.A. (1994). Understanding Qualitative Data: A Framework of Text Analysis Methods. Journal of MIS, 11(2), 137-155.
This is a 500 level course, and the 30 points represents approximately 300 learning hours on the part of the students. This course runs over 13 weeks, students are expected to put in at least 25 hours per week of learning effort over the duration of the course.
Linkages to Other Papers*
Restricted papers: MNGT501