1. Management Research: Philosophy and Design
Dr Alexandra Bristow
University of Surrey

2. The Learning Objectives Developing your research philosophy as a reflexive process
Use purpose-built reflexive tool (HARP) to facilitate your reflection on your own beliefs and assumptions about management research and knowledge
Develop your understanding of how your beliefs relate to major research philosophies in the management field
Enable you to take a more informed and empowered approach to designing and conducting research.
Source: © Alexandra Bristow and Mark Saunders (2015)

3. Why Do Research Philosophies Matter?
Systems of beliefs & assumptions about…
everything!
the world (ontology)
knowledge (epistemology)
values (axiology)
Do you have a research philosophy?
are you aware of your beliefs & assumptions?
are they systematic?
What sort of things do we make assumptions about during a research process? Can you think of examples?
Everyone has beliefs & assumptions, whether or not they are aware of them, but not everyone has systems
Everyone has assumptions within every category (ontology, epistemology AND axiology), but they will not necessarily fit together in a coherent/systematic way.

4. What Does ‘Systematic’ Mean?
‘This thesis is based on a premise that very little is actually known about why formal organisational change programmes have such a high rate of failure. The aim of the research is therefore an in-depth exploration of the possible reasons for such failure. In particular, the study will look at the interpretations of failure by senior managers. 200 questionnaires have been sent to senior managers around the UK to test the relationships between the common causes of failure and their effects. The responses were analysed statistically using the SPSS. The key finding is that resistance to change is the most common cause of failure of formal organisational change programmes, which supports previous studies.’
Pass-the-story example

5. What kinds of assumptions do management researchers make?
Ontological
About the world and the nature of reality
Determine how you see your research objects
For example:
Organisation/Management versus Organising/Managing
What implications would ontological assumptions have for YOUR research? E.g. what theoretical frameworks you choose, what data you look for and collect, what you focus on in your analysis – what you notice.

6. What kinds of assumptions do management researchers make?
Epistemological
About what counts as valid, legitimate and acceptable knowledge
Determine what kinds of data you collect and how you communicate findings
For example:
Measurable facts and/or Stories and narratives?
If I wanted to find out whether you are enjoying this workshop, what could I do, if I believed that…
…statistics offered the ultimate proof?
…the opinions of each of you as individuals mattered?
What implications would epistemological assumptions have for YOUR research?

7. What kinds of assumptions do management researchers make?
Axiological
About the role of values & ethics in the research process
Determine how personally involved you become in the research process
For example:
Researcher objectivity
Versus
Researcher subjectivity

8. Some method(s) to this madness…
Objectivism ⇔
Subjectivism
Ontology
Real
External
One true reality (universalism)
Granular (things)
Order
Nominal/ decided by convention
Socially constructed
Multiple realities (relativism)
Flowing (processes)
Chaos
Epistemology
Facts
Numbers
Observable phenomena
Law-like generalisations
Opinions
Narratives
Attributed meanings
Individuals and contexts, specifics
Axiology
Value-free
Detachment
Value-bound
Integral and reflexive
Methods
Quantitative
Qualitative
Source: Saunders et al (2015)

9. Is there One Best Way? The nature of Management Studies as a Field
A newcomer among social sciences, themselves newcomers in the domain marked out between science and arts & humanities
Stuck between the cultural authority of science & the moral contribution of art
An academic chimera, and a philosophically & politically contested terrain
This is to explain why there is more than 1 accepted research philosophy and types of knowledge in management. Basically, management is a young discipline – even among the social sciences, which are themselves latecomers in the context of the history of disciplines. Social sciences institutionalised into distinct disciplines after the intellectual domain had already split up into the sciences on the one hand and the arts on the other hand. As a result, social sciences have always struggled with issues of status and recognition, and also with positioning and legitimising their knowledge (which in many ways falls short of the standards of both the sciences or the arts). Management suffers from these identity issues even more than some of the more established social science disciplines (e.g. sociology, psychology). It is inherently pluralistic – an academic chimera, within which different (and often incompatible) philosophies and approaches struggle for legitimacy and recognition.
How do YOU orient and position yourself in this field? What are the implications for your research practices?

10. Major Philosophical Identities - who are you and who will you be?
HARP (Heightening Awareness of Research Philosophy) – reflexive tool by Bristow and Saunders (2014)
Exploring own beliefs and mapping them against major research philosophies
Starting point for exploration – not a personality test!
Research journey changes the researcher

11. Your Own Research Philosophy
Reflecting on your HARP scoring sheet:
Do you have a clear fit with one research philosophy? Or do you have a close contention between two or more philosophies? Why do you think this is?
Which philosophy do you disagree with the most? Are they the same philosophies for both of you? Why do you think this is?
What implications do your beliefs have for choosing your research approach and methods?
Which philosophy and types of research are you most drawn towards? Does this fit or conflict with your current assumptions?

12. Major Philosophical Identities in Management Research
Positivist the natural scientist Critical Realist the archaeologist Interpretivist the artist Postmodernist the political activist Pragmatist the architect

13. Positivists Management researchers as natural scientists
Extreme objectivists: truth seekers, number crunchers, glove-wearers
Ontology
Epistemology
Axiology
Typical methods
Management and organisations are:
real, just like physical objects
uninfluenced by how we feel about them.
granular, fixed and structured
Discover the truth and predict the future through:
observable, measurable facts
causes & effects
laws, rules & generalisations
Value-free research.
Researcher is detached, neutral and independent
Maintains objective stance.
Quantitative methods
highly structured
large samples
measurement

14. Positivism: The Clockwork Universe
One of the ways of visualising positivist philosophy is to think of Newton’s and his contemporaries’ idea of the clockwork universe. This was the understanding that everything in the universe was governed by laws and mechanisms, which we can observe and measure, and the behaviour of which we can predict on the basis of our observations and measurements. Orreries were clockwork-based planetariums of the Solar System and allowed to calculate and demonstrate the exact position of planets at any given point in time.
Clockwork ideas were also later applied to living organisms and the construction of automata (mechanical models of living beings) became very popular. The Duck of Vaucanson was a mechanical model of a duck that appeared to be able to eat corn, digest and defecate it.
Today the fascination with automata continues in, for example, robotics and artificial intelligence. In management research, a mechanistic view of organisations still constitutes a dominant perspective.
Small Orrery (Image by Kaptain Kabold)
Duck of Vaucanson, 1739 (Mistaken Reproduction)

15. Positivists gloved hands
What are the equivalent practices in management research?

16. Critical Realists Management researchers as archaeologists
Mild objectivists: foundation seekers, structure excavators, cautious historians
Ontology
Epistemology
Axiology
Typical methods
Management and organisations are:
real, but not like physical objects
structured and layered
underlying causal mechanisms determine what happens ‘on the surface’
Excavate truth through:
historically situated facts and stories.
historical causal explanation.
Value-laden research.
Recognition of bias and its minimisation
as objective and detached as possible.
In-depth historical analysis of social and organisational structures.
Range of methods
and data types to fit
subject matter.

17. Critical Realism and Illusions
This is an example of an optical illusion (squares A and B appear to be different colours because of neighbouring contrasting squares, but actually they are the same colour). Realism takes into consideration problems of perception like this one, because it recognises that our senses and other factors may get in the way between us as researchers and researched reality.
Edward H. Adelson (1995)

18. Realism and Facts Culture Relationships Organisational reality…
Physical Facts
Social Facts
Culture
Relationships
Organisational reality…
Critical realism takes into account different layers of reality and recognises the difference between physical and social reality. The rules and mechanisms governing social reality are more malleable than those governing physical reality. In other words, you are less likely to be able to defy the laws of gravity than, for example, laws of marriage (e.g. in some countries you can’t be married to more than one person or to a person of the same gender, but you could move to another country to be subject to different rules; even within the same country you could exercise agency to change the law – e.g. gender equality). Much of organisational reality is social reality.
(Lookang 2011)

19. Interpretivists Management researchers as artists
Subjectivists: meaning makers, storytellers, empathisers
Ontology
Epistemology
Axiology
Typical methods
Managing and organising are:
Flux of processes, experiences, practices
Complex, rich
Socially constructed through culture and language
Multiple meanings, interpretations, realities
Make meaning through:
Focus on narratives, stories, perceptions and interpretations
New understandings and worldviews
Value-bound research
Researchers are part of what is researched
Subjectivity and empathy
Researcher interpretations key to contribution.
Qualitative methods
small samples,
in-depth investigations
interpretations

20. Interpretivism: How many fingers do you have?
This slide and the next demonstrate how Interpretivism takes further the issue of social construction than critical realism. For interpretivists, even ‘hard’, physical realities are socially constructed.
When asked the question on this slide, some people are guaranteed to say ’10’, others are guaranteed to say ‘8’, and others will say ‘20’ depending on where they are from. How can this be? (In UK, people have 8 fingers – thumbs don’t count as fingers; in other countries (e.g. Germany) they have 10, in yet others (e.g. Russia and Greece) ‘toes’ count as ‘fingers’ so you get 20). This demonstrates how our understanding of the physical world is mediated by language and culture in which we are steeped.

21. Interpretivism: How many planets does the Solar System have?
Another example to continue the Solar System theme.
Do you know the story of Pluto’s demotion? In 2005, Pluto was one of 9 official planets, but so many other celestial objects were being discovered – some larger than Pluto, that different new planets were being announced by various individuals/organisations. This caused a public outcry and in 2006 the International Astronomical Union officially demoted Pluto as a planet. It also created a new category of ‘dwarf planets’, with Pluto and 2 others in it, so depending of whether you want to include or exclude ‘dwarf planets’ as ‘planets’, currently the Solar System has either 8 or 11 planets.
From an interpretivist perspective, this again shows how seemingly ‘hard’, ‘physical’ reality is constructed (and changed) through language and social consensus (or the lack of it). The same argument can be applied to both ‘social’ and ‘physical’ aspects of organisational realities.
Can you think how this could apply to organisations? How about the re-packaging and re-presentation of sub-prime mortgages, which has led to the 2008 financial crisis?
NASA, 2010

22. Postmodernists Management researchers as political activists
Sceptics: truth questioners, revolutionaries, emancipators
Ontology
Epistemology
Axiology
Typical methods
Managing and organising are:
Flux of processes, experiences, practices
Complex, rich
Socially constructed through power relations
Some meanings, interpretations, realities are dominated and silenced by others.
Expose power relations and question dominant views through:
Showing ‘truth’ to be a product of ideology
Focus on absences, silences, and repressed meanings and voices.
Value-constituted research
Researcher and research embedded in power relations.
Some research narratives are repressed and silenced at the expense of others.
Researcher radically reflexive.
Qualitative methods
Deconstruction of texts and realities
In-depth investigations of silences and absences
Search for hidden voices and perspectives
‘sceptic’ – ‘a person inclined to question or doubt all accepted opinions’, ‘an ancient or modern philosopher who denies the possibility of knowledge, or even rational belief, in some sphere’ (OED).

23. Postmodernism radical reflexivity

24. Pragmatists Management researchers as architects
Doers: problem solvers, outcome seekers, jacks-of-all-trades
Ontology
Epistemology
Axiology
Typical methods
Managing and organising are:
Flux of processes, experiences, practices
Complex, rich
‘Reality’ is the practical consequences of ideas.
Solve problems and inform future practice through:
Search for practical meaning of knowledge in specific contexts
Theories that enable successful action
Focus on problems, practices and relevance.
Value-driven research
Research initiated and sustained by researcher’s doubts and beliefs.
Researcher reflexive.
Range of methods to fit research problem.
Often mixed and/or
action research, but could be anything.
Emphasis on practical
solutions and outcomes.

25. Research Philosophies & Research Design
Positivism
Deductive
Quantitative
Experiments, Surveys
Interpretivism
Inductive
Qualitative
Interviews, Ethnography, Grounded Theory
Critical Realism
Abductive (Retroductive)
Qualitative and/or quantitative
Archival research, historical analysis +
Postmodernism
Abductive
Qualitative
Discourse analysis, visual methods +
Structured versus unstructured observation.
Pragmatism
Abductive
Quantitative and/or qualitative
Any of the above in any combination

26. Positivism and deduction Theory testing
Scientific principles
Focused on causal relationships
Highly structured methodology
Large samples
Quantification
Incremental contribution to theory
Theory
Hypothesis
Measurements
Hypothesis testing

27. Interpretivism and induction Theory building
Phenomena/problems/data are primary
Focus on meanings and contexts
Tendency to qualitative analysis
More flexible research process
Less predictable
More radical contribution to theory
Phenomena
Context
Qualitative data collection
Existing theory
New theory

28. Pragmatism, postmodernism, critical realism and abduction Theory generation and modification
Combines deduction and induction
Ongoing movement between theory and phenomenon
Flexible and cyclical
Can fit with a range of methods
Varied contribution to theory
Surprising fact
Conceptual framework
Induction
Deduction

29. Implications of research philosophy
What will your starting point be (theory or phenomena)?
What research objects/phenomena will you focus on?
What theories will you choose?
What data will you collect and how? How will you analyse it?
How will you communicate your findings?
How personally involved will you become in your research?
What limitations will your research have?
Will it all fit together in the end?

30. Is this extract ‘systematic’?
‘This thesis is based on a premise that very little is actually known about why formal organisational change programmes have such a high rate of failure. The aim of the research is therefore an in-depth exploration of the possible reasons for such failure. In particular, the study will look at the interpretations of failure by senior managers. 200 questionnaires have been sent to senior managers around the UK to test the relationships between the common causes of failure and their effects. The responses were analysed statistically using the SPSS. The key finding is that resistance to change is the most common cause of failure of formal organisational change programmes, which supports previous studies.’
Pass-the-story game

31. This extract is inconsistent
‘This thesis is based on a premise that very little is actually known about why formal organisational change programmes have such a high rate of failure. The aim of the research is therefore an in-depth exploration of the possible reasons for such failure. In particular, the study will look at the interpretations of failure by senior managers. 200 questionnaires have been sent to senior managers around the UK to test the relationships between the common causes of failure and their effects. The responses were analysed statistically using the SPSS. The key finding is that resistance to change is the most common cause of failure of formal organisational change programmes, which supports previous studies.’
This is an example of a shortened dissertation abstract that doesn’t have a systematic (internally consistent) underlying research philosophy and strategy.
The bits highlighted in RED are interpretivist. They are based on an assumption that people’s interpretations constitute acceptable, valid knowledge and seek to examine them in-depth. They follow an inductive approach by starting with the phenomenon of change programmes rather than setting out to test a theory (which would be deductive). They set out for an in-depth exploration which would suggest that qualitative methods would be adopted.
However, the second half of the abstract – the bits highlighted in BLUE are based on assumptions that belong to Positivist research philosophy. Deductive approach is adopted to test causal relationships (which would suggest that a particular theory is tested) and a quantitative, questionnaire-based strategy is embraced. Data is analysed statistically, which suggests positivist epistemology, which views measurable facts and statistics as acceptable and valid knowledge (as opposed to interpretations and narratives). Furthermore, results are said to support previous studies, which contradicts the claim made in the beginning of the abstract that ‘very little is actually known about’ the phenomenon studies.
The two halves of the abstract therefore do not fit together.

32. Further reading
Saunders, MNK, Lewis, P, Thornhill, A and Bristow, A (2015): ‘Understanding Research Philosophies and Approaches’ in MNK Saunders, P Lewis and A Thornhill Research Methods for Business Students, 7th ed., Harlow: Pearson Education. Chapter 4.
Free download available from: