Wednesday, 4 March 2009
Sunday, 15 February 2009
Wednesday, 7 November 2007
Popularity of my research topic
This is a kind of meta-analysis for my research topic called "5S" that often refers to as "housekeeping" or "workplace organisation" in the West. Actually, 5S is more than a tool and therefore those definition are narrowly defined.Please do not believe what is written about 5S in Wikipedia. It is based on partial understanding and the article is still developing. We need to wait and see how it evolves. In my view, 5S is a principle for better management. I am discussing the reason in my thesis. My first journal article is in press and part of my argument is included in it. You will see why 5S is not just a tool.
Anyway, this small study was only part of my literature review. By using the Emerald Insight database, I searched for the number of 5S-related articles have already been written. It was only 163 articles! Most of them mentioned just the word "5S", nothing else (I need to dig down it). The typical description was "... quality (or lean) tools such as kanban, ...(other terms) and 5S". That is it. No reference was given due to no description of 5S.
The leading scholar is Sam Ho as he provides more than 10 articles on 5S. However, some of them are just description of five words which comprises 5S and mainly the replication of Osada's (1991) work. Other articles were written based on Hirano's (1995) workbook or adoption of Ho's description. The Productivity Press Development Team (1996) published a summary version of Hirano's (1995) workbook that most of those academic articles used as reference.
It is obvious that 5S has not really been studied. I might have to take an exploratory approach. My initial look tells there are less than 50 articles on 5S in total and those are mostly conceptual papers. Why I have chosen this topic that looks not really attractive? Yes, it is attractive as the graph shows an increased occurance of 5S-related articles. The number os quality and lean literature (5S-related articles) increases, the more interest in 5S would grow.
When decomposing all 5S-related articles, 77% of those look like I can incorporate in my literature review in some degree. My next task is to investigate what is written in these 127 articles. I already done my literature review and wrote a chapter, but this small study would help to build my review chapter in a more systematic manner.*Full references are not provided for some reasons.
Saturday, 27 October 2007
How to cite non-English text?
Does anyone know how to cite non-English text?
I mean, how can I provide own translation of non-English text?
I have found that Author A used a block quote to cite text in a Swedish article by Author B. Provided text by Author A was in English. This indicates that the author A translated Swedish text written by Author B. No indication of translation was given.
I think this is a matter of validation.
I was thinking to use Author A to mention what Author B said. This is possible by the use of a secondary citation. However, secondary citation needs to me mimimal. The best way is to translate Author B's work by myself. But I will become the same as Author A. No validation.
I mean, how can I provide own translation of non-English text?
I have found that Author A used a block quote to cite text in a Swedish article by Author B. Provided text by Author A was in English. This indicates that the author A translated Swedish text written by Author B. No indication of translation was given.
I think this is a matter of validation.
I was thinking to use Author A to mention what Author B said. This is possible by the use of a secondary citation. However, secondary citation needs to me mimimal. The best way is to translate Author B's work by myself. But I will become the same as Author A. No validation.
Friday, 12 October 2007
Data Collection... Ooops!
As an academic researcher, I experienced a disaster.
Yesterday, I went into an organisation "to discuss a data collection process". That was my plan. However, a manager suddenly started to tell stories. It was formal because the time and date were arranged in advance. It supposed to be semi-structured with open questions but turned out to be unstructured. I did not have time to ask if I could record his voice. Holly #$%&!! I decided not to stop him and write down his talk.
The manager was so enthsiastic and supportive. But he just kept going his talk. It was around for 45 minutes. He already answered more than half of questions I prepared (but I did not show him). After he finished his talk, I said what I wanted for my research. He said he will organise another time for me. Recording should be no problem... but next time.
Then, we had a company tour. The manager show me around, explained and talked his concerns. Again, it was not all recorded. It was all informal, unstractured interviews... No, it was not. It was a narrative or story.
Hey, ethonographers! How can you guys do observation and interviews at once? It was so hard for me to talk with the managers while looking around the site. I was lucky because my supervisors were with me. They listened to the manager. I could write down some things. But I missed some part of his talk when my eyes were on some places.
You can say, "it should be recorded". Nah... it is easy to say, but hard to do in the noisy plant. I can guarantee that recording does not work in such an environment. It is physically and technically impossible unless I take a journalist approach (that means my research is not be academic any more).
My eyes can look at only one thing at a time.
My hands can write down only one thing at a time.
My ears can listen to only one thing at a time.
I could not listen to the manager's talk and the sound in the plant (it is important thing for my research) at once. While I wrote down the feature of the plant, I could not write down what the manager said. How could researchers in the pre-technology-age manage and accomplish such tough task... without recording devices? Although those divices were available, how can we record the sounds of more than two places at once?
Incorporating interviews (conversations) into participant observation is technically impossible. They need to be seperated, but they never can independently occur in reality.
Anyway, I have got some documents as well. Other materials are also coming soon. Next time I will organise another interviews, another site observation with photo-taking and photo-interviews.
I have a lot of data but I feel like I did not get any.
Yesterday, I went into an organisation "to discuss a data collection process". That was my plan. However, a manager suddenly started to tell stories. It was formal because the time and date were arranged in advance. It supposed to be semi-structured with open questions but turned out to be unstructured. I did not have time to ask if I could record his voice. Holly #$%&!! I decided not to stop him and write down his talk.
The manager was so enthsiastic and supportive. But he just kept going his talk. It was around for 45 minutes. He already answered more than half of questions I prepared (but I did not show him). After he finished his talk, I said what I wanted for my research. He said he will organise another time for me. Recording should be no problem... but next time.
Then, we had a company tour. The manager show me around, explained and talked his concerns. Again, it was not all recorded. It was all informal, unstractured interviews... No, it was not. It was a narrative or story.
Hey, ethonographers! How can you guys do observation and interviews at once? It was so hard for me to talk with the managers while looking around the site. I was lucky because my supervisors were with me. They listened to the manager. I could write down some things. But I missed some part of his talk when my eyes were on some places.
You can say, "it should be recorded". Nah... it is easy to say, but hard to do in the noisy plant. I can guarantee that recording does not work in such an environment. It is physically and technically impossible unless I take a journalist approach (that means my research is not be academic any more).
My eyes can look at only one thing at a time.
My hands can write down only one thing at a time.
My ears can listen to only one thing at a time.
I could not listen to the manager's talk and the sound in the plant (it is important thing for my research) at once. While I wrote down the feature of the plant, I could not write down what the manager said. How could researchers in the pre-technology-age manage and accomplish such tough task... without recording devices? Although those divices were available, how can we record the sounds of more than two places at once?
Incorporating interviews (conversations) into participant observation is technically impossible. They need to be seperated, but they never can independently occur in reality.
Anyway, I have got some documents as well. Other materials are also coming soon. Next time I will organise another interviews, another site observation with photo-taking and photo-interviews.
I have a lot of data but I feel like I did not get any.
Wednesday, 10 October 2007
The Methodology Chapter
It has finally been done...
- Intorduction
- The nature of management research
- Research orientation: nominarist ontology + anti-positivist epistemology
- Theoretical perspective: interpretivism, symbolic interactionism
- Methodology: case study
- Method: multiple methods
- Issues on Case Study
- Conclusion
My supervisor who recently submitted his own PhD thesis separated the "Research Design" part from the Methodology chapter. I follow this format at this stage.
Now, I can move onto writing Chapter 2: Literature Review. The reason for writing my thesis in reversed way is for quality assurance and improvement of consistency. I have already done my draft on this chapter. Thus, it is not actually "writing". Rather, it is at the revising stage.
Then, I will write Chapter 1: Introduction. I know this is the most critical part. I have started writing this chapter at the early stage then soon realised it is impossible to be completed until I finish Literature review and Methodology chapters. In qualitative research, it is very risky to have a priori assumptions, models, theories, and so forth. I have to write the Chapter 1: Introduction using the past tense anyway. It is impossible to write anything using the past tense because I have not done anything yet. I could write only one section, "Background of this research".
Tomorrow, I will visit an organisation to discuss about my plan and arrange a schedule for interviwing.
Saturday, 29 September 2007
Since then...
More than 3 months have passed since I stopped writing this blog. I was trying to have a contact with an organisation, it falied, I had another chance, it succeeded... and so forth. Finally, I have obtained an offer to enter a site which is on 11th October.
My research is about 5S, as a management concept, which is often adopted in manufacturing, particularly in the automotive industry. However, the organisation I will look at is dealing with public service. How interesting?!
At the same time, I was struggling with setting research orientation, theoretical framework, methodology and methods --- the whole methodology chapter. Developing interview questions was the hardest task ever. Each question needs to be linked to the researcher's ontology and epistemology, as well as to the result of literature review and thus to the primary research question.
How many people actually have considered and done it? I suspect.
Now, my research orientation consists of nominarist ontology and interpretivist epistemology. I did not like to adopt "social constructionism" for ontology and "anti-positivism" for epistemology. In my view, reality is not socially constructed. I think this term is best suitable in sociology, but not in management research. I do not want to argue against positivism because my previous research adopted a quantitative method (content analysis). I cannot be an anti-positivist.
My theoretical framework is symbolic interactionism. My methodology is to be hermaneutic-phenomenology, but with suspect. I know that it is definitely not grounded theory because my goal is not generation of theory. My goal is developing a conceptual framework or model towards theory. What is wrong with this?
Someone told me, "You need to build a theory at the end since you are a qualitative researcher". Huh??? Who said that? Did Max Weber say that?
Only one thing is very clear to me... many qualitative researchers misunderstand that we have to generate theory out of research findings. Theory generation is only possible when the researcher used grounded theory. Since grounded theory is too attractive as it has a concrete set of methodological concepts and procedures, many qualitative researcher have mistakenly used it as a "grounded theory approach". Because they believe that theory generation is only the way that can compete against positivist's theory testing and varification or explanation of causal relationships.
Researchers in the critical theorist paradigm can contribute to existing knowledge by discovering and revealing hidden issues/factors. They do not deal with theory generation. They suggest alternatives to existing theories. This is a respectful contribution. Similarly, interpretivist researchers can contribute to existing knowledge by describing unknown or unfamiliar issues, problems, phenomenon, and so forth, using the ability of Verstehen (understanding). Why is this not good enough? Why not can you respect this contribution?
Anyway, my method is still a case study. Its design is still multiple-holistic. The case for this study is a 5S program in an organisation and unit of analysis is thus organisation. This is because my study is not about organisations, but a 5S program. Each case of 5S needs to be integrated as a 5S practice within an Australian management context. Individuals within each unit (organisation) act as representatives of the organisation. My research is not study of individuals' perceptions or collective behaviour. My study investigate the meaning of 5S through interactions between people and the 5S program, like studies in Human-Computer Interactions. My research subject is one, 5S, like ethonographers study a perticular culture through people.
Data collection methods involve: formal and informal semi-structured interviews with open questions; photo-elicitation (a combination of photo-recording and interviews); and participant observations with a interrupting stance. Documents and physical artefacts are also needed. Another set of literature review is also required as secondary data.
Data analysis methods include: critical incident analysis; thematic analysis; qualitative content analysis; and perhaps analytic induction. I attempt to achieve trustworthiness of this research. Thus I will not use terms validity and reliability to assure the quality standard of my research. This can be done the use of quality audit methods used in management. It is very practical.
The issue with my research is generalisation. However, I do not need to concern statistical generalisation. Rather, I would have to concern theoretical generalisation. My final outputs are to be integrated as local knowledge, thus it would be subjected to transferbility. This could be assured by reviewing original (Japanese) 5S literature. Bcause case organisations cannot read Japanese so that they do not know what the original 5S concept is.
Another issue immediately will occur. How can I demonstrate whether statements in the Japanese 5S literature are adequately translated (without bias)? Perhaps I will have to use Brisline's "back translation technique" which is very costly.
This is all I have been working on.
My research is about 5S, as a management concept, which is often adopted in manufacturing, particularly in the automotive industry. However, the organisation I will look at is dealing with public service. How interesting?!
At the same time, I was struggling with setting research orientation, theoretical framework, methodology and methods --- the whole methodology chapter. Developing interview questions was the hardest task ever. Each question needs to be linked to the researcher's ontology and epistemology, as well as to the result of literature review and thus to the primary research question.
How many people actually have considered and done it? I suspect.
Now, my research orientation consists of nominarist ontology and interpretivist epistemology. I did not like to adopt "social constructionism" for ontology and "anti-positivism" for epistemology. In my view, reality is not socially constructed. I think this term is best suitable in sociology, but not in management research. I do not want to argue against positivism because my previous research adopted a quantitative method (content analysis). I cannot be an anti-positivist.
My theoretical framework is symbolic interactionism. My methodology is to be hermaneutic-phenomenology, but with suspect. I know that it is definitely not grounded theory because my goal is not generation of theory. My goal is developing a conceptual framework or model towards theory. What is wrong with this?
Someone told me, "You need to build a theory at the end since you are a qualitative researcher". Huh??? Who said that? Did Max Weber say that?
Only one thing is very clear to me... many qualitative researchers misunderstand that we have to generate theory out of research findings. Theory generation is only possible when the researcher used grounded theory. Since grounded theory is too attractive as it has a concrete set of methodological concepts and procedures, many qualitative researcher have mistakenly used it as a "grounded theory approach". Because they believe that theory generation is only the way that can compete against positivist's theory testing and varification or explanation of causal relationships.
Researchers in the critical theorist paradigm can contribute to existing knowledge by discovering and revealing hidden issues/factors. They do not deal with theory generation. They suggest alternatives to existing theories. This is a respectful contribution. Similarly, interpretivist researchers can contribute to existing knowledge by describing unknown or unfamiliar issues, problems, phenomenon, and so forth, using the ability of Verstehen (understanding). Why is this not good enough? Why not can you respect this contribution?
Anyway, my method is still a case study. Its design is still multiple-holistic. The case for this study is a 5S program in an organisation and unit of analysis is thus organisation. This is because my study is not about organisations, but a 5S program. Each case of 5S needs to be integrated as a 5S practice within an Australian management context. Individuals within each unit (organisation) act as representatives of the organisation. My research is not study of individuals' perceptions or collective behaviour. My study investigate the meaning of 5S through interactions between people and the 5S program, like studies in Human-Computer Interactions. My research subject is one, 5S, like ethonographers study a perticular culture through people.
Data collection methods involve: formal and informal semi-structured interviews with open questions; photo-elicitation (a combination of photo-recording and interviews); and participant observations with a interrupting stance. Documents and physical artefacts are also needed. Another set of literature review is also required as secondary data.
Data analysis methods include: critical incident analysis; thematic analysis; qualitative content analysis; and perhaps analytic induction. I attempt to achieve trustworthiness of this research. Thus I will not use terms validity and reliability to assure the quality standard of my research. This can be done the use of quality audit methods used in management. It is very practical.
The issue with my research is generalisation. However, I do not need to concern statistical generalisation. Rather, I would have to concern theoretical generalisation. My final outputs are to be integrated as local knowledge, thus it would be subjected to transferbility. This could be assured by reviewing original (Japanese) 5S literature. Bcause case organisations cannot read Japanese so that they do not know what the original 5S concept is.
Another issue immediately will occur. How can I demonstrate whether statements in the Japanese 5S literature are adequately translated (without bias)? Perhaps I will have to use Brisline's "back translation technique" which is very costly.
This is all I have been working on.
Friday, 22 June 2007
Ethical Clearance Approved!
I received a letter from the Ethics Committee that my application was officially approved and confirmed. Now I can start collecting data. Yes, Yes!!
It took longer time than I imagined. However, it was not as difficult as I thought. Some students took more than 3 months that is usual. One example took almost a year!
I am so happy. Now I only have to wait for a reply from organisations which I am accessing.
It took longer time than I imagined. However, it was not as difficult as I thought. Some students took more than 3 months that is usual. One example took almost a year!
I am so happy. Now I only have to wait for a reply from organisations which I am accessing.
Tuesday, 19 June 2007
This is the letter: PhD Confirmation
Dear Kay,
I am pleased to advise that the Dean, Griffith Graduate Research School has executively approved the recommendation from the Griffith Business School that your Doctor of Philosophy candidature be confirmed. Please find a copy of the assossors' comments to guide you in your research.
Congratulations on this achievement and best wished for the reminder of your candidature.
Yours sincerely
Research Higher Degrees Officer
... That's it!
I am pleased to advise that the Dean, Griffith Graduate Research School has executively approved the recommendation from the Griffith Business School that your Doctor of Philosophy candidature be confirmed. Please find a copy of the assossors' comments to guide you in your research.
Congratulations on this achievement and best wished for the reminder of your candidature.
Yours sincerely
Research Higher Degrees Officer
... That's it!
Sunday, 17 June 2007
Methodology: Take 2
This semester is over. Bye-bye, students! I can have a peaceful time for a while.
I have to start organising my finance for next semester as International students have to pay upfront. It costs over $9000 per semester. Everytime I prepare this amount of money, I think of a car. Doing PhD or buying a brand-new sport car... which is better option in my life? Although I get a $700 fortnightly stipend, it just passes from one account to another. Hum... do not worry about it! My partner got me a brand-new car anyway.
The biggest concern for me at this stage is still about Methodology. How many times did I mention it? But I am getting there. Where? It is the right direction (hopefully). The key is, "Back to basics".
As my research is in the field of management, I looked at scholars' works in "Management Research" and "Organisation Studies". Some scholars talk about methodology, such as in the book of Management Research: An Introduction by Easterby-Smith and others (2002, 2nd ed. London: Sage). I have found that case study research involves two approaches!
I am going to read this and sum up my thoughts. I feel I can get there (where?).
My article got another twist and was sent to "Management Decision" journal. My supervisors say, "Squeeze your lemon". This is to be my second publication. I wish it will be accepted.
I have to start organising my finance for next semester as International students have to pay upfront. It costs over $9000 per semester. Everytime I prepare this amount of money, I think of a car. Doing PhD or buying a brand-new sport car... which is better option in my life? Although I get a $700 fortnightly stipend, it just passes from one account to another. Hum... do not worry about it! My partner got me a brand-new car anyway.
The biggest concern for me at this stage is still about Methodology. How many times did I mention it? But I am getting there. Where? It is the right direction (hopefully). The key is, "Back to basics".
As my research is in the field of management, I looked at scholars' works in "Management Research" and "Organisation Studies". Some scholars talk about methodology, such as in the book of Management Research: An Introduction by Easterby-Smith and others (2002, 2nd ed. London: Sage). I have found that case study research involves two approaches!
I am going to read this and sum up my thoughts. I feel I can get there (where?).
Thursday, 14 June 2007
Post Conference
ANZAM Conference in Melbourne was really successful. I enjoyed everything (me - wearing a red top). I met some supportive people who offered me to conduct a study. My problem is becoming resolved.I got some good news. Firstly, I obtained a provisional ethical clearance only with minor changes which is unbelievable. Many people complained about the long process of ethical clearance. I just got through pretty easily.
Secondly, organisations who I can access required to see my research summary. My supervisors had to work on it. It was just a lucky as those organisations were really supportive. I think I can access at least two organisations.
Thirdly, I got an official letter from the Graduate Student Office that I was certainly confirmed as a PhD candidate with no revision. This was a miracle because I was expected to provide some responses to comments by an independent assesor (examinar). But it did not happen. The assesor reported, "No revision is needed". It was only suggestions in the letter. That made me so happy.
In fact, I am still working on the methodology, epistemology, ontology, and so forth. I used to be with critical realist's epistemology to interpretivist's one. I still do not understand how many epistemological options are available.
I just wonder about my research design and what scholars said at my confirmation, the doctoral workshop and the conference. My design aimed at achieving a theoretical replication logic but it was almost ignored by many scholars. They were more interested in just a comparative study. This indicates that not so many researchers understand what the case study really is. This scares me a bit.
Sunday, 10 June 2007
ANZAM Workshop & Conference
I had a really good time in Melbourne. Although the schedule of both events were tight, I enjoyed everything. I got along with many people. I used to be extremely shy, but not any more. I spoke up, introduced myself and my topic, and discussed with others.
I met some female students and became friends. Their names were like US presidents' wives so I named our group as "First Ladies Club". They loved it. We had nice coffee chats. Two of them recently changed their supervisors that was the most interesting.
At the doctoral workshop, the main topics of discussion were:
I met some female students and became friends. Their names were like US presidents' wives so I named our group as "First Ladies Club". They loved it. We had nice coffee chats. Two of them recently changed their supervisors that was the most interesting.
At the doctoral workshop, the main topics of discussion were:
- Dilemma in publishing to journal articles and conference papers;
- Battling against first authorship;
- Supervision disasters;
- Miserable isolation;
- Scary confirmation seminar (for early candidates);
- Access to organisations (data collection stage);
- Annoying ethical clearance procedure;
- Developing a career in the white, male dominant world;
- Methodology disasters; and
- Time, stress, motivation and health management.
At the conference, guest speakers came from a large enterprise and its major suppliers. It was lucky that I could take a seat with professors and the guest speakers. They were interested in my topic and a manager of the large enterprise offered to support for data collection. Yeah me!
I also had a quick, but invaluable discussion with a delegate. His question was, "Why don't you use SH's articles more? I think he is a leader in your topic area". I answered, "Well, I wish I could do so... but I found that his series of articles are identical to texts in TO's book".
"Hey, hey, really? You need to be careful to say it. It sounds the matter of plagiarism!"
"Yest, I guess so. I know SH is a visiting professor here (venue of the conference), a leader in my topic area, an editor of journals I want to publish my articles. I am annoyed and scared."
"Well, talk with your supervisors. I think you should mention it somewhere at some stage. Your thesis will be stuck, otherwise."
"Yes, it is one of the biggest issues at this stage. Thank you very much for your consideration. I will think about it more and talk with my supervisor. But he knows SH very well..."
"Oh, well, I think you really should find a way to deal with SH's articles. Your examiner might have the same question I gave. You will need to explain it in your thesis anyway."
It reminds me a case about David Robinson, a former vice-chancellor of Monash University who resigned over plagiarism claims.
I think I should raise a voice.
Saturday, 2 June 2007
At the PhD Confirmation Seminar
This is myself at the PhD confirmation seminar. My friend DC sent me some photos today. I cannot believe that the seminar was held almost a month ago! Somehow I look so happy. Unfortunately, other photos were not clear enough to see. I feel strange and nervous when I see this photo because it reminds me that time. Hope I can perform better at a conference next Wednesday.
What I learnt through that experience is how I can engage audience and keep them being interested in my presentation. Interacting with audience is essential. Presenters should pay attention to not only their talk contents but also other verbal aspects including: tone and pitch of voice, pace in talk, and pose between sections. Non-verbal aspects are also vital, such as gesture, eye contact, position, posture, and appearance. Body language needs to be aware of because some hidden intentions are revealed to audience that sometimes gives them surprising meanings.
I will definitely use a technique, posing between sections, and a magic word, "Are you comfortable so far?" People suggested me just to say, "Are you with me?" or "Are you following me?". But somewhat I am really uncomfortable with using these phrases. So, I used the first one. It worked! The audience nodded with smile. Then I said, "Then, we shall move onto next section". Some people grinned.
After the presentation, my friend DC said, "You were too polite. It was a little bit strange". However, I cannot change my style so easily. Perhaps I will do the same thing next Wednesday.
Friday, 1 June 2007
MELBOURNE
Wow, Melbourne looks like Tokyo!!
MELBOURNE Train & Tram map
I will attend the ANZAM 2007 Mid-Year Doctoral Workshop on the 5th and 6th held at Monash University Clanfield Campus. It takes only 20 minutes away from CBD (Flinders Railway Station). This is the first trip to Melbourne so I think it must be safer if I catched a train. I would like to try a tram so I will catch it on return.
On the 6th and 7th, 5th ANZAM Operations Management Symposium is held at RMIT University. It is just 10 minutes walking distance so it should be no problem. However, the Conference Dinner is held at University of Melbourne. This must be another change to catch a tram.
Gee... I will travel across three universities!
Hope I won't get lost.
MELBOURNE Train & Tram map
I will attend the ANZAM 2007 Mid-Year Doctoral Workshop on the 5th and 6th held at Monash University Clanfield Campus. It takes only 20 minutes away from CBD (Flinders Railway Station). This is the first trip to Melbourne so I think it must be safer if I catched a train. I would like to try a tram so I will catch it on return.
On the 6th and 7th, 5th ANZAM Operations Management Symposium is held at RMIT University. It is just 10 minutes walking distance so it should be no problem. However, the Conference Dinner is held at University of Melbourne. This must be another change to catch a tram.
Gee... I will travel across three universities!
Hope I won't get lost.
Saturday, 26 May 2007
A Good Chat
Nothing happened. In fact today's meeting with GR (the male PhD student) was good. Having a preconception or stereotyping is not a constructive approach. I could learn a lot. Although GR's method is a case study, his approach is the use of mixed methods which is totally different from mine. He has actually been managing his research well.
Our discussion was mainly about methodology. The primary question was: What can we begin with?
KK (me): What is methodology, anyway?
GR: Yeah, that's also my concern.
KK: Perhaps we should state exactly what methodology is. There is no consensus in the definifion of methodology.
GR: Agree. Is it an approach or should we include a theoretical perspective?
We actually could not define what methodology is!!
We already looked at theses in past years. However, none of them had a clear structure in the methodology chapter. Finding a clear definition of methodology became our homework.
Crotty (1998) defined methodology as the overall approach taken in a piece of research. He also stated that methodology is the strategy, plan of action, process or design...
If this was true, we should begin with stating either quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods as an approach. Most of theses, however, do not begin with this. Instead, they start with stating an epistemological position or a theoretical perspective.
I know that people in general start this chapter with ontology and epistemology. But this approach is inconsistent with Crotty's definition. There is one possibility that Crotty's definition is wrong or at least little adopted. I think it too much, otherwise.
Reference:
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundation of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. St Leonalds, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
Our discussion was mainly about methodology. The primary question was: What can we begin with?
KK (me): What is methodology, anyway?
GR: Yeah, that's also my concern.
KK: Perhaps we should state exactly what methodology is. There is no consensus in the definifion of methodology.
GR: Agree. Is it an approach or should we include a theoretical perspective?
We actually could not define what methodology is!!
We already looked at theses in past years. However, none of them had a clear structure in the methodology chapter. Finding a clear definition of methodology became our homework.
Crotty (1998) defined methodology as the overall approach taken in a piece of research. He also stated that methodology is the strategy, plan of action, process or design...
If this was true, we should begin with stating either quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods as an approach. Most of theses, however, do not begin with this. Instead, they start with stating an epistemological position or a theoretical perspective.
I know that people in general start this chapter with ontology and epistemology. But this approach is inconsistent with Crotty's definition. There is one possibility that Crotty's definition is wrong or at least little adopted. I think it too much, otherwise.
Reference:
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundation of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. St Leonalds, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
A colleague or a free-rider?
A PhD student, who I met at my confirmation seminar, rang me up today. This male student is my old classmate in the Master of Management degree program. We set up a meeing on Saturday (tomorrow!). Initially, he mentioned that he wanted to have study friends as he is working full time. He also wants to get information about a PhD confirmation seminar as his turn comes soon. That is all fine for me.
However, my supervisor RD told me, "Be careful". What does this mean?
The guy has co- principle supervisors and one of them is RD. The primaly person who usually looks after him is at Nathan campus to which he belongs. According to RD, he already gave him an initial direction for his research, explained the possible methodologies, how he can design and organise his study, and how he can write up his thesis. That amazed me a lot. What RD did to the guy is completely different from what I have got from RD.
The guy concerns his methodology and his approach is a case study based on Yin (a positivistic view). He uses a survey that seems no problem. What else he wants to know, especially from me??
It is interesting. I will find out the meaning of RD's "Be careful" tomorrow.
In the meantime, I decided to attend the "Thesis Writing Group" workshop. I missed the first one because I totally forgot. A lovery staff gave me a reminder for the second chance. I am really interested in joining this group for knowing people rather than working on my thesis at this workshop. It will be held on Monday.
I am working hard on marking assignments of underdraduate students. There are more than 140 papers around me. It is really frustrating when I see bad assignments because they are totally far away from the course reqirements. How can I give them Pass??? They study little. I am having sleepless nights because of this. I really want to get rid of this task as soon as possible as I have to prepare my presentation for a conference.
However, my supervisor RD told me, "Be careful". What does this mean?
The guy has co- principle supervisors and one of them is RD. The primaly person who usually looks after him is at Nathan campus to which he belongs. According to RD, he already gave him an initial direction for his research, explained the possible methodologies, how he can design and organise his study, and how he can write up his thesis. That amazed me a lot. What RD did to the guy is completely different from what I have got from RD.
The guy concerns his methodology and his approach is a case study based on Yin (a positivistic view). He uses a survey that seems no problem. What else he wants to know, especially from me??
It is interesting. I will find out the meaning of RD's "Be careful" tomorrow.
In the meantime, I decided to attend the "Thesis Writing Group" workshop. I missed the first one because I totally forgot. A lovery staff gave me a reminder for the second chance. I am really interested in joining this group for knowing people rather than working on my thesis at this workshop. It will be held on Monday.
I am working hard on marking assignments of underdraduate students. There are more than 140 papers around me. It is really frustrating when I see bad assignments because they are totally far away from the course reqirements. How can I give them Pass??? They study little. I am having sleepless nights because of this. I really want to get rid of this task as soon as possible as I have to prepare my presentation for a conference.
Wednesday, 23 May 2007
Doctoral Workshop
ANZAM Doctoral Workshop will be held on 5-6 June. This is overlapping with the 1st Asia Pacific & 5th ANZAM Operations Management Symposium 2007 (6-7 June).
ANZAM Doctoral Workshop Program
Wow, it is interesting. In fact it is the first time I will participate in this kind of activities. As I am an extreme introverted person, there are many challenges in doing my research project. Hopefully I can open myself to others to share some concerns.
When I attended a PhD workshop at my university, I was a bit embarrased. I talked my journey, especially about my personal concerns. "One day, I felt myself like rubbish", I said. Many people laughed at me. Oh OK, local students never experience that feeling... they can always be confident and sure what they do. Self-disclosure did not bring any benefit.
One thing I really wonder is, why people tend to be so competitive? It is not necessary for us at all but people always talk like "Mine is better than yours". That makes me more hesitated to attend (social) activities. Why they do not take a win-win approach?
ANZAM Doctoral Workshop Program
Wow, it is interesting. In fact it is the first time I will participate in this kind of activities. As I am an extreme introverted person, there are many challenges in doing my research project. Hopefully I can open myself to others to share some concerns.
When I attended a PhD workshop at my university, I was a bit embarrased. I talked my journey, especially about my personal concerns. "One day, I felt myself like rubbish", I said. Many people laughed at me. Oh OK, local students never experience that feeling... they can always be confident and sure what they do. Self-disclosure did not bring any benefit.
One thing I really wonder is, why people tend to be so competitive? It is not necessary for us at all but people always talk like "Mine is better than yours". That makes me more hesitated to attend (social) activities. Why they do not take a win-win approach?
Tuesday, 22 May 2007
Under 100 words
ANZAM Doctoral Workshop held in Melbourne (5-6 June) asks me to describe my thesis under 100 words. OK, let's try it!
How does this sound? Oh, do not criticise hard on my English...
Another application form asks me to describe it under 25 words. Wow, this is much tough! OK, I will try it again...
Does anyone make sense of this?
A current research is an investigation of how Australian organisations understand and apply a management concept called “5S” which stems from Japanese life wisdom for improving quality of life and work. Using a qualitative-oriented case study method, this research attempts to understand and illustrate the importance of 5S in an Australian management context. A multiple-holistic case study was designed to compare and contrast its result with the original 5S concept. The goal of this research is to construct a basic framework of 5S that Australian organisations can incorporate into their quality improvement programs. (93 words)
How does this sound? Oh, do not criticise hard on my English...
Another application form asks me to describe it under 25 words. Wow, this is much tough! OK, I will try it again...
My thesis is a qualitative case study with a multiple-holistic design to investigate how Australian organisations understand and apply a management concept called 5S. (24 words)
Does anyone make sense of this?
Thursday, 17 May 2007
More about coding
Apart from ethical concerns, coding is still useful. To analyse the data collected in a more effective way, coding is necessary. If so, what and how we code the data?
I have a strong resistance against coding. It is because I strongly believe that coding is associated with grounded theory. Many scholars indicate coding techniques used in grounded theory and apply them for other qualitative methodologies. However, grounded theory comes from a theoretical assmption of symbolic interactionism. When we use those techniques in grounded theory, a methodological inconsistency would appear. Nevertheless, no one points out this inconsistency yet.
As coding systems in grounded theory is so poweful, structured, clear and therefore influential. many people just use them. However, Colazzi (1978) provides a method for data analysis in line with phenomenology which is totally different from that in grounded theory. Phenomenological data analysis takes the following steps:
In case studies, researchers are basically allowed to take any qualitative data analysis method. So, I need to decide my theoretical perspective or assumption that drives methodology. Then, I finally can make decision on whether I should code the data I will collect.
Reference:
Colaizzi, P. (1978). Psychological research as a phenomenologist views it. In R. Valle & M. King (eds), Extential Phenomenological Alternatives for Psycology (pp.48-71). New York: Oxford University Press.
I have a strong resistance against coding. It is because I strongly believe that coding is associated with grounded theory. Many scholars indicate coding techniques used in grounded theory and apply them for other qualitative methodologies. However, grounded theory comes from a theoretical assmption of symbolic interactionism. When we use those techniques in grounded theory, a methodological inconsistency would appear. Nevertheless, no one points out this inconsistency yet.
As coding systems in grounded theory is so poweful, structured, clear and therefore influential. many people just use them. However, Colazzi (1978) provides a method for data analysis in line with phenomenology which is totally different from that in grounded theory. Phenomenological data analysis takes the following steps:
- After transcripts of interviews, read all of them as a whole;
- Take one transcript at a time, extract significant statements out of each page or section;
- Provide criative insight. However, try not to fomulate meanings at this stage;
- Identify formulated meanings out of creative insight that become themes. Cluster those themes;
- integrate all of themes and create an exhausive description;
- Reduce the exhausive description to an unequivocal statement of identification of the fundamental structure of a phenomenon; and
- Validate them with participants.
In case studies, researchers are basically allowed to take any qualitative data analysis method. So, I need to decide my theoretical perspective or assumption that drives methodology. Then, I finally can make decision on whether I should code the data I will collect.
Reference:
Colaizzi, P. (1978). Psychological research as a phenomenologist views it. In R. Valle & M. King (eds), Extential Phenomenological Alternatives for Psycology (pp.48-71). New York: Oxford University Press.
Why coding is needed?
I have figured out. In general it is not ethical to use direct quotations from a story of a participant without his or her consent. I should do either: (a) to inform participants clearly that my study needs to use direct quotes; or (b) to code (paraphrase) the story and not to use direct quotes.
Now, the Ethics Committee requires me to provide a special form of informed consent because I am involved in a case study which has a high probability to deal with narratives (direct quotations from stories). Alternatively, I need to state the use of direct quotations clearly in the Information Sheet and the Informed Concent Form to obtain an agreement of participants.
Gosh! Is this why positivists always code into numbers? (a bad joke!)
Now, the Ethics Committee requires me to provide a special form of informed consent because I am involved in a case study which has a high probability to deal with narratives (direct quotations from stories). Alternatively, I need to state the use of direct quotations clearly in the Information Sheet and the Informed Concent Form to obtain an agreement of participants.
Gosh! Is this why positivists always code into numbers? (a bad joke!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
