DISPOSITIVO DE MEDICIÓN DEL NIVEL DE FLUIDO EN EL

Research is the “process of finding solutions to a problem after a thorough study and analysis of situation factors” (Sekaran and Bougie, 2009, p.2). The process of researching is a series of steps designed and followed with the goal of finding answers to the issues that are of concern to the research team. Saunders et al. (2009) symbolised the research process as an onion, and noted that several layers of the onion need to be peeled away before reaching the central point or core of the onion- the data collection and the data analysis.

117

Figure 4.1 defines a generic research process ‘onion’ that supports the researcher to depict the issues underlying the choice of data collection methods. A visual inspection of the diagram shows that the outer layers, consisting of philosophies and approaches, and the middle layers, comprising of strategies, choices and time horizon are guiding the way towards the core of the onion and the research methodology: the techniques and procedures. This section provides justification for using the specific research philosophy, research approaches, research strategies, and data collection methods employed in the current thesis. These selections and decisions culminate in a research design.

Figure 4.1: The Research Process ‘Onion’

Source: Saunders et al. (2009, p.108)

All research activities have underlying philosophical assumptions that guide the researcher. The fundamental assumption that underpins every research is known as research philosophy. Saunders et al. (2009) defined research philosophy as an over-arching term relating to the development of knowledge and the nature of that knowledge. To Hussey and Hussey (1997), research philosophy is the progress of scientific practice based on people’s philosophies and assumptions about the world and the nature of knowledge. Saunders et al.

118

(2009) identified the main research philosophies as positivism, interpretivism, realism, and pragmatism, and noted that the most important determinant of research philosophy is the research question and the possibility to work within positivism and interpretivism is given, as this practical approach includes various perspectives to support data gathering and interpretation.

Positivism is originated in the natural sciences and stresses the belief that social reality is singular and objective and is not affected by the investigation of it. Underpinned by precision, objectivity and rigour, casual relationships are analysed with the help of explanatory theories to understand social phenomena (Collis and Hussey, 2009). Therefore, positivism searches for regularities and relationships among the elements being investigated (Saunders et al., 2009). Resulting from the criticisms of positivism, interpretivism emerged, as it concentrates on exploring social complexity with the purpose to gain interpretive understanding, while positivism is only focusing on measuring and explaining phenomena (Collis and Hussey, 2009). Furthermore, Gill and Johnson (2010) stated that the process of investigating in interpretivism affects the social reality and is subjective as well as multiple. On the other hand, as a research philosophy, realism believes in the existence of external and objective reality that influences people’s social interpretations and behaviour. Realism as a research philosophy focuses on the belief that reality exists in the environment (Johnson and Christensen, 2010). Finally, Pragmatism emphasizes the practical problem experienced by people, the research questions posited, and the consequences of enquiry (Rossman and Wilson, 1985). Pragmatism draws on many ideas including “what works”, using diverse approaches, and valuing both objective and subjective knowledge (Cherryholmes, 1992). It is not committed to any one system of philosophy and reality, rather researchers draw liberally from both quantitative and qualitative assumptions when they engage in research (Creswell, 2009). The pragmatic researcher is sensitive to the social, historical, and political context from which inquiry begins and considers morality, ethics, and issues of social justice to be of paramount importance throughout the research process (Cherryholmes, 1992; Morgan, 2007; Creswell, 2009). While many authors outline positivism and interpretivism as mutually exclusive and extremes, Saunders et al (2009), Collis and Hussey (2009) and Creswell (2009) combine these philosophies into pragmatism, which offers mixed methods research a balance of both the positivist and interpretivist

119

philosophies. Thus, in a mixed method research, the weakness of one philosophy can be offset with the strengths of the other.

Figure 4.2 Assumptions about the Nature of Social Science

Source: Burrell and Morgan (1979, p.3)

Developing a philosophical perspective requires that the researcher makes several core assumptions about the nature of science, which involves a choice between a subjective and an objective approach to research (Burrell and Morgan, 1979). Figure 4.2 (above) depicts the two major philosophical traditions, their respective assumptions, and the terminology associated with them. Subjectivism and objectivism have been described as a continuum’s polar opposites with varying philosophical positions aligned between them. The subjective approach to social science research views entities as social constructs dependent upon the perceptions and actions of actors (human beings) performing activities in the social world (Bryman, 2008). This position holds that social phenomena are created from the perceptions and consequent actions of those social actors concerned with their existence (Bryman, 2008; Saunders et al., 2009). The researchers seek to understand the world in which they live and try to develop subjective meanings of their experiences. In contrast, the objective approach to social science research maintains that entities exist in a real world external to those involved in the research (Saunders et al., 2009). Objectivism assumes that social phenomena confront us with external facts that are beyond our research or influences.

120

Under the objective approach to social science research, organization is a tangible object consisting of rules and regulations (Bryman, 2008).

The philosophical assumptions about social science research is therefore based on a researcher’s position on a subjective-objective continuum, which depends upon four assumptions about the nature of social science: ontology (reality) ontology (reality), epistemology (knowledge), human nature (pre-determined or not), and methodology (Burrell and Morgan, 1979). Saunders et al. (2009) defined ontology as a branch of metaphysics which deals with the nature of being and explains assumptions about reality. Thus, ontology deals with the nature of social reality and is concerned with the researchers’ underlying assumptions about how the world functions. Its central question is whether social entities can, or should, be considered social constructions built-up from the perception and action of social actors. Reality may come from the external world or from internal consciousness, and it may exist independently of the researcher or it may reside in the mind of the individual (Burrell and Morgan, 1979). The researcher’s view of reality is the cornerstone to all other assumptions. Reality is perceived as objective and external to the researcher by the positivist approach and subjective and internal to the researcher by the interpretivist approach. Both the subjective and objective ontological way of thinking about research philosophy influenced the process of this study, as the thesis tries to ascertain the perceptions of Nigerian corporate managers on the factors that drive dividend decision, and also to examine the impact of dividend announcements on share prices. Accordingly, the ontological position of this study does not perceive the Nigerian society as existing independently of the individuals or external to the individuals. In other words, the researcher believes in an external world independent of the mind as well as that lodged in the mind.

Epistemology can be defined as a philosophy of knowledge (Bryman, 2008). It is concerned with the nature of knowledge in terms of what form it can take and how it can be acquired and transferred (Hopper and Powell, 1985). From the perspective of subjective-objective dimension, Burrell and Morgan (1979) categorised epistemology into two aspects: positivism and anti-positivism.10 Positivism is “an epistemological position that advocates

10 _{Saunders et al. (2007) and Bryman (2008) classified epistemology into positivism and interpretivism.}

121

the application of the methods of the natural sciences to the study of social reality and beyond” (Bryman, 2008, p.13). Positivism applies the models and methods of research from the natural sciences to study human nature; it searches for regularities and relationships among the elements being investigated (Saunders et al., 2009). As a result, the researcher would use an extremely structured methodology to facilitate replication (Gill and Johnson, 2010). Thus, positivists believe that the researcher should be independent and distant from the research in order to give objective and measurable results. In contrast, anti-positivism is based on the analysis of the ‘frame of reference’ from the inside not from outside the researcher and those being researched. It is the product of the subjective analysis of individuals (Burrell and Morgan, 1979). Therefore, anti-positivists believe that the researcher should be immersed in the phenomena under investigation in order to obtain a thorough understanding. This thesis adopts both ‘positivism’ and ‘anti-positivism’ as its epistemological perspectives which is seen to be consistent with the research nature and its objectives. Specifically, the way in which knowledge can be attained about the dividend phenomena in the Nigerian context can come from both studying events, which by definition exists independently of the researcher or external to the perceptions of individuals, and also by considering the perceptions of individuals involved in particular activities. In the current thesis, knowledge is acquired in the first instance by searching for causal relationships between dividend announcements and share prices and secondly by considering the perspectives of the individuals who are involved in the administration of dividend policy in Nigeria.

The study of human nature focuses on whether individuals have a free will to do anything or whether their actions are constrained by rules (Burrell and Morgan, 1979). Thus, the assumptions about human nature relates to whether humans can control their environment (voluntarism) or whether they are controlled by their environment (determinism). This thesis adopts a middle point between the voluntarism-deterministic approach to human nature given the fact that a multitude of factors, such as external and socio-economic factors, may affect the dividend policy decisions of companies. The argument here does not mean that dividend policy is in the hands of external actors, rather, the dividend policy of

predicated upon the view that strategy is required that respects the differences between people and the objects of the natural sciences and therefore requires the social scientist to grasp the subjective meaning of social action” (Bryman, 2008: 16).

122

Nigeria listed companies is assumed to depend on the free-will of the Board of Directors. Thus, the dividend policy of Nigerian listed companies suggests that the current research question is not at either extreme of the voluntarism-determinism continuum but lies in between the two ends of the spectrum. Burrell and Morgan (1979) recommended this stance about human nature when they suggested that social science researchers may “adopt an intermediate standpoint which allows for the influence of both situational factors and voluntary factors in accounting for the activities of human beings” (Burrell and Morgan, 1979, p.6).

The assumptions which the researcher holds regarding ontology, epistemology and human nature lead to different methodologies for undertaking research (Burrell and Morgan, 1979; Hopper and Powell, 1985; Chua, 1986). Research methodology refers to the philosophical framework and the fundamental assumptions of research (van Manen, 1990). Saunders et al. (2009) noted that methodology is concerned with the process of doing research based on the philosophical and theoretical underpinnings of the researcher and as such, it has both ontological and epistemological dimensions. Because the philosophical framework one uses influences the procedures of research, methodology can be seen as a framework that relates to the entire process of research (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2007). Ryan et al. (2002) defined research methodology as the process of doing research based on the assumptions about ontology, epistemology and the view of human nature. They also noted that the selection of the most appropriate research methodology depends on the nature of the phenomenon being researched. The authors stated that:

“…the assumptions which the researcher holds regarding the nature of the phenomenon’s reality (ontology), will affect the way in which knowledge can be gained about the phenomenon (epistemology), and in turn affects the process through which research can be conducted (methodology). Consequently, the selection of an appropriate research methodology cannot be done in isolation of a consideration of the ontological and epistemological assumptions which underpin the research”.

(Ryan et al., 2002, p.35).

The next section discusses the research designs in used in carryings out the research in this thesis. It identifies three research designs: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. In the course of this discussion, the section explains why the research in the current thesis was

123

conducted within a pragmatic paradigm, which necessitated the use of mixed methods research design consisting of both qualitative and quantitative approaches to investigate the dividend policy and stock market reaction to dividend announcements in Nigeria.