ANECDOTAS EN LA FINCA ZABALETAS

Discussion at the philosophical level is necessary to shape the research design and connect the choices of methods back to the research question (Blaikie, 2000). Easterby-Smith et al. (2002) pointed out the reasons why the exploration of philosophy is significant in research methodology:

• it helps to refine and specify the research methods to be used; , • it helps to avoid inappropriate methods at an early,stage; and

• it helps to be creative and innovative in either selection or adaptation of methods that were previously outside the researcher’s experience.

Notably, two main assumptions, ontology and epistemology, are commonly discussed at this level.

4.2.2.1 Ontology and epistemology

Ontology is an assumption based on the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence or reality. It could be either an objective reality existing in the real world or a subjective reality created in the mind. These forms of reality constitute the basic aspects of ontology: objectivism and subjectivism. In social science studies, objectivism depicts the position of social entities existing in reality apart from social actors’ stances. On the contrary, subjectivism takes the view that the existence of social phenomena is caused by social actors’ perceptions and consequent actions. In short, the ontological perspective concerns the consideration of whether the phenomenon to be studied is situated under the objective world external to social actors, or socially constructed by the perceptions of the human actors.

Epistemology is an assumption based on the philosophical study of the nature of knowledge. It concerns what constitutes acceptable knowledge. In essence, epistemology is about what and how knowledge of reality can be gained in a field of study (Blaikie, 2007; Chia, 2002; Hatch and Cunliffe, 2006). Similarly to ontology, two-polarised forms constitute the basic views of epistemology: positivism and interpretivism. Positivism regards valid knowledge as observable and measurable facts as being separate from

Chapter 4 - Research design an d m ethodology

feelings. Hence the collection and analysis of data are likely to be akin to the process in the natural sciences in which any effects of subjective bias are minimised. Conversely, interpretivism attempts to deepen understanding of the perceptions held by social actors. Therefore, what is being researched cannot be unaffected by the participation of the researcher.

Basically, the selection of research philosophy is dominated by the choice between two main philosophical positions: positivism and interpretivism. However, thinking of the philosophical position as a continuum is more beneficial than thinking of it as just two extreme positions (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003). Other alternatives are discussed in the following section.

4.2.2.2 Positivism, interpretivism, realism and pragmatism

Positivism and interpretivism are two predominating philosophical positions. The choice made between these polarised positions reflects the way chosen to tackle a phenomenon. Although the dichotomy of research paradigm is widely adopted, only a few researchers would operate within one or other form of these two extremes; choosing between one position and the other, to some extent, may not be practical. Regarding it as a continuum, that can be moved along, provides a number of alternative classifications and alternative paradigms (Morgan and Smircich, 1980). Other positions of philosophy were derived from different views to see the reality, specifically realism and pragmatism. The following section discusses the basic beliefs and pertinent methodology of each philosophical position.

Positivism

The view of positivism in the social sciences was adopted on the basis of the natural sciences. The positivist view believes that an investigation of social phenomena should be precise, objective and rigorous. In respect of this belief, social phenomena can be considered as hard facts with little regard to human behaviour and mind, and thus can be studied in the same way as natural objects (Smith, 1998). In other words, facts are not dependent on belief alone but on belief that can be verified through examination and

Chapter 4 - Research design an d m ethodology

Positivism attempts to explain social phenomena by establishing associated relationships between the variables concerned and linking them to a deductive theory. An explanation of the relationships and the ability to anticipate and control the phenomena are likely to be the result of positivism. Positivism tends to produce quantitative data by using large samples which, in turn, enables social reality to be measured numerically and diminishes researcher dependency. Moreover, this provides the advantages of using statistical techniques to represent and analyse essential features of such a reality, and also enhances the ability of generalisation from a sample to a population (Proctor, 1998; Collis and Hussey, 2003).

Interpretivism

There is an argument concerning the shortcomings of treating social phenomena with the view of positivism. It points out that the objective view of positivism can show only one aspect o f reality. Hughes (1997) argued that social realities are a composition of many constructions of reality, influenced by their context. The interpretivist philosophy believes that social realities are constructed socially and differently by the individuals who participate in them. To varying degrees, interpretivism assumes that reality is subjective and dependent on the individuals’ mind. As a result, the social sciences deal with action and behaviour generated from inside the human mind. Exploring a way to reveal how individuals give meaning to their world is the main purpose of social research.

With regard to the subjective state of individuals, interpretivism stresses the subjective aspects by focusing on the meaning, rather than the measurement, of social phenomena. Van Maanen (1983, p.9) described the methods used under the interpretivist approach as

‘an array o f interpretative techniques which seek to describe, translate and otherwise come to terms with the meaning, not the frequency, o f certain more or less naturally occurring phenomena in the social world’. Because of its dependency on the social

meaning, interpretivism tends to produce rich and subjective qualitative data by using small samples located naturally in a specific context (Proctor, 1998).

Realism

Realism is a philosophical position which recognises the positivist stance and the interpretivist stance together, offering a more sensible alternative than merely relying on

C hapter 4 - Research desisn and m ethodology

any single polarised position. The realist perspective takes the view that social structures are the cause and effect of behaviour; behaviour of social actors may be affected by all relevant external structures and internal subjective meanings (Proctor, 1998). Saunders et

al. (2009) argued that, for the realist stance, there is a reality existing independently of the

mind, but it is interpreted through social conditioning. In this way, adopting the realist stance implies that the researcher should be aware of finding a balance between the roles of the interpretivist approach and the importance o f social and organisation structure. This idea underpins the ability to understand the collected data which, then, is helpful in developing basic aspects of the quantitative research.

Pragmatism

Debate on adoption of either a positivist or an interpretivist view to investigating a social phenomenon is unavoidable. However there is an argument regarding the appropriateness of adopting only one position. It argues that from a practical point of view the research question is the most important determinant for thinking about what philosophical position should be adopted (Saunders et a l, 2009). A few particular questions might be raised from the research, and each question may require a different philosophical position to answer it. In other words, ‘what works best’ is the fundamental belief of pragmatism (Denscombe, 2007).

Denscombe (2007) concluded that, under the pragmatic view, what is acceptable knowledge could be judged by how well it is applicable to practical problems. He added that knowledge is inevitably a product of specific time and place. Hence, absolute knowledge is presumably non-existent. This idea leads a researcher to focus on the value system of his/her study and conduct it in a way that can bring positive consequences (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003). Creswell (2008) added that pragmatism does not commit itself to any single system of philosophy, but relies on a range of choices suitable for its purposes. Hence, pragmatism is a philosophical position appealing intuitively because of its purposefulness.

C hapter 4 - R esearch d e s im an d methodolopw

4.2.2.S Justification for the research philosophy

Although positivism provides a confirmation of associated relationships between predefined variables, it might be deemed as a superficial view of the phenomena which lacks examination of human behaviours in an in-depth way. At some level, it is impossible to treat social phenomena separately from examining the perceptions of social actors. According to Crossan (2003), the exploration and examination of human behaviours such as feelings, perceptions and attitudes are beyond the scope of positivism. In contrast, interpretivism requires an interactive process between the researcher and what is researched. In other words, the researcher is part of the research environment. Findings from this interaction can establish comprehensibility for the extant phenomena, rather than generalisability (Collis and Hussey, 2003). However, the main weakness of the interpretivist approach is generally the proximity of the researcher to the investigation (Parahoo, 1997). Pragmatism is possibly a good alternative if there is ambivalence in making a decision about philosophical adoption of either positivism or interpretivism (Saunders et a l, 2009).

The appropriateness of either positivist or interpretivist approach for KM research is still in debate. This might owe to the nature of knowledge that comprises both explicit and tacit elements. Kane et a l (2006) argued that although much of literature acknowledged the importance of tacit elements of knowledge, researchers tended to accentuate their focus on the informational aspects of knowledge (explicit elements). Thus, a positivist view is likely to be premised on the belief that these explicit elements are an objective reality being capable of measurement and the observed data can be quantifiable. However, overtime there has been a growing awareness of the social-related aspects (tacit elements) since knowledge is socially constructed in a specific context. Thus, the need of an interpretivist view is recognised for better understanding the social and behavioural issues underlying knowledge management (Grossman and McCarthy, 2005).

As this research aims to investigate critically the relationships between the KM process, KM enablers, KM system and innovation from one point of view the researcher believes that the relationships being investigated to some extent can be quantitatively measured and the analysis results can be derived from the sample to the population. However, from another viewpoint, the quantitative results alone cannot adequately provide meaningful

Chapter 4 - Research d e s im an d m ethodology

insights encompassing the social or organisational elements of managing knowledge. With this regard, a pragmatist view was suitably adopted for this research. The research questions have been set out by having regard to two philosophical aspects of positivism and interpretivism and each research question requires a different philosophy, strategy and method to be employed. The question RQl is a type of question aiming to understand phenomena by establishing associated relationships between variables; the positivist view seems to be appropriate and the quantitative approach with statistical testing is used in order to get a clearer view of the relationship and test/confirm the hypothesis (Collis and Hussey, 2003). On the other hand, the question RQ2 concerns the actual practices behind the relationship which,are subjective aspects rather than measurable aspects; therefore, the qualitative approach is likely to be appropriate.