This is interpretive in nature as it seeks to establish new knowledge through an in-depth exploration of ERP adoption in retail small family businesses in the UK (Creswell, 2009; Bhattacherjee, 2012). The interpretive nature of this research can be supported by the historical move of the Information Systems field, which ERP systems belong to, from the positivist position to the interpretive point of view which ensures that the system (ERP) is studied within a particular context (UK’s retail SFBs) (Hirschheim, and Klein, 2012). This study moves the ERP studies in FBs from the positivist assumptions that family involvement means lower tendencies of success or that ERP adoption is beneficial to FBs, to establishing
85
interpretive meanings through qualitative methods such as observations and perticipant interviews to understand ERP adoption in the UK’s retail SFB context (Linden et al., 2007). The section below offers explanation of the different philosophical world views and there appropriateness for this study.
4.4.1. INTERPRETIVISM
This research being interpretive means the researcher have had to go beyond existing ERP and SFB knowledge to interprete the dynamic patterns of ERP adoption in UK’s retail SFBs when the family is inolved in business (Hirschheim and Klein, 2012). Thinking of the ERP system and the family as systems that may have a relationship within SFBs support the interpretive philosophical stand of this research as systems thinking supports going beyond predetermined patterns to interprete the deeper meanings of the relationship between family involvement and ERP adoption in UK’s retail SFBs through evidences based on human interaction (creswell, 2009; Checkland, 1999). Also, being an Information Systems field, the interpretivist world view has been recently adopted as a good way to go about such research especially within a particular context (Linden et al., 2007).
As opposed to the belief in a single truth in positivism or the Leibniz inquiry system, interpretivism believes in the complex nature of human behaviour and the fact that there can be more than one truth (Linden et al., 2007; Bhattacherjee, 2012). Rather than quantifying the truth, as the name suggests, interpretivism interprets the meaning of such partterns based on the qualitative evidence gathered within the context (Bhattacherjee, 2012). This study can be said to be interpretive in nature as it seeks a deep exploration of retail small family businesses in the UK to understand ERP adoption within this context.
An interpretive researcher aims to gather a detailed knowledge of the phenomenon under review to reach meaningful conclusions towards contributing to knowledge (Crotty, 1998). It thus prioritises human/social interaction in gaining this knowledge (Cresswell, 2009). Due to the conviction that there is not one truth, interpretive research is often used in establishing new theory about a phenomenon or extending knowledge beyond what is generally known based on new evidence. (Lincoln and Guba, 2000). For example, this study, through the interpretation of evidences from the observation of retail SFBs in the UK and the interview of family managers as well as ERP experts extended the existing ERP knowledge in Family Business. However, due to its subjective nature in exploring an area of interest to seek an
86
exhaustive knowledge, its credibility and generalisability has often been questioned (Bhattacherjee, 2012).
Yin (2011), for example, posits that to ensure credibility in interpretive research, evidence needs to be collected from different sources to establish that the findings are not coincidental but reflect the truth at the time of data collection. To ensure the credibility of this interpretive study, different qualitatitive approaches, such as semi-structured interviews of ERP experts, family managers and observation of retail SFBs were used in the exploration of UK retail SFBs to understand the influence of family involvement on ERP adoption. Also, efforts such as experience check of experts, historical checks of businesses among others were made to ensure the ERP experts and SFB cases were fit for purpose.
4.4.2. POSITIVISM/POST-POSITIVISM
As this study goes beyond the quantification of truth and investigates family involvement in business, and requires a deep insight into the phenomenon being investigated, i.e. ERP adoption in the UK’s retail SFBs; as a result, it may be said that the view point for this research is not positivist but interpretive. Also, considering that Smith’s (2016) positivist study of ERP in FBs did not deeply explore the impact of family involvement, this study adopts the interpretive approach for a deeper insight into ERP adoption in the UK’s retail SFBs (Lincoln and Guba, 2000).
Creswell (2009) suggests that positivism applies more to deductive than inductive reasoning. There is a belief that a positivist seeks to find the truth, while a post-positivist (classical positivism) aims to find what is right about reality (Philips, 2000). Also, positivism is about cause and effect, i.e. positivists are of the belief that there is always a cause, which leads to an effect (Creswell, 2009). This assumption resulted in the need for the quantification of truth. Bryman (2001) suggests that positivism studies always start with a theory that is to be further tested for affirmation or possible modification. A positivist/post-positivist believes the truth should be independent of the researcher (Creswell, 2009). This further buttresses Creswell’s (2009) suggestion that positivism/post-positivism is more inclined towards deductive, rather than inductive, reasoning. Positivism has often been criticised for the need to quantify the truth about human activities as it is hard to put a value on human behaviour (Bhattacherjee, 2012).
87
The next section discusses pragmatism as the third philosophical world view that attempts to balance both positivism and interpretivism (Creswell, 2009).
4.4.3. PRAGMATISM
Pragmatism does not share the positivist versus interpretivist debate (Creswell, 2009). Rather, pragrmatists believe that what works best to find the truth is more important than favouring one approach over another (Creswell, 2005, 2009; Bhattacherjee, 2012). Proponents of a mixed methodology approach are usually of this philosophical point of view. While this view of the world is good in its approach to research, this study is not pragmatic in nature as it seeks to establish knowledge of ERP in SFBs (interpretive) but not the generalisability of such knowledge (positivist). Exploring knowledge of ERP adoption in SFBs and seeking generalisation would have suggested a pragmatic approach to this research (Bhattacherjee, 2012). As much as it would be beneficial for further studies to seek to generalise the findings of this research, the scope of this study is limited to seeking an understanding of the adoption of ERP within the UK’s retail SFBs.
Based on the discussions and considerations of the three philosophical world views for social research, the interpretive approach is appropriate for this study as it seeks to explore the ERP system through a sufficiently deep investigation of the UK’s retail SFB to establish meaningful conclusions to extend existing knowledge in the field. It is important to discuss the different research methods available to social science research in the next section to understand the justification for the preferred method for this study; a detailed discussion of how the method was applied to this study can be found in Chapter 5.