Business Research Through Argument

162 Pages·1996·5.77 MB·English

by  Mike Metcalfe (auth.)

BUSINESS
RESEARCH
THROUGH
ARGUMENT
BUSINESS
RESEARCH
THROUGH
ARGUMENT
Mike Metcalfe
Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
Library оС Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Metcalfe, Mike.
Business research through argument / Ьу Mike Metcalfe.
р. ст.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-4613-5967-8 ISBN 978-1-4615-2291-1 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4615-2291-1
1. Business--Research--Methodol0gy. 2. Reasoning. 1. Title.
HD30.4.M477 1995
650'.072--dc20 95-31417
CIP
Copyright © 1996 Springer Science+BusinessMedia New York
Originally pubIished Ьу Кluwer Academic Publishers in 1996
Softcover reprint ofthe hardcover 1st edition 1996
АН rights reserved. No part of this publication тау Ье reproduced, stored in
а retrieval system or transmitted in any form or Ьу any means, mechanical,
photo-copying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of
the publisher, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
Printed оп acid-free рарег.
DEDICATION
To Katie, Rachael and Joan, for the smiles they put into my life.
CONTENTS
Preface: ix
The Argument ix
Definitions ix
Introduction and Motivation x
Evidence for Argumentation xi
Conclusion and Implications xii
Acknowledgements xv
Chp.l: Against Personal Objectivity 1
Objectivity 2
Some History 4
Self -deception 5
Appendix from Broad and Wane 9
Objectivity and Group Argument 14
Conclusion 16
Chp.2: People Ain't Molecules 17
The Impact of the Observer 18
Argument vs Observation 22
Against the Dominance of Statistics 24
Interpretive or Qualitative Methods 29
Eclectic Methods 32
Conclusion 33
Appendix 35
Chp.3: Argument 39
Limits of Proof 42
Argument for Objectivity 47
Definition of Theory 50
Commitment 54
Bias Ethics 55
59
Scientific Thinking
59
Perelman & Olbrechts-Tyteca
Source of Argument? 62
Conclusion 65
67
Appendix
viii
Chp.4: Argument Structure 71
Specific vs General 73
Motivation for the Study 75
Parts of the Structure 76
Unwanted Attributes? 82
Conclusion 85
Appendix 87
Chp.5: Commentaries 91
A: The Business Suit Theory 91
B: The Lego Assignment 104
C: The Austrian Experience 112
Chp.6: Evidence from Interviews 119
Who to Interview 120
Intentions vs Opinions 120
Concerned Persons 121
Best Experts 121
Unlearning and Anchoring 123
Optimism 125
Interaction Effects 126
The Interview 128
Problems with Human Judgment 130
Chp.7: Evidence from Questionnaires 131
Organization 131
Data Types 135
Annual Profit Questionaire 138
Questionnaire 140
Tests 141
Internal and External Validity 142
References 145
152
Index
PREFACE:
The brief
The Argument
This book is for those who have tried to start academic research into some
business activity and found themselves confused. Why is a bibliography
with-abstracts not a literature review? What is the role of reasoning in
empirical research? How can a heated argument break out over the results
of an objective and unbiased experiment? What is the difference between
multiple hypotheses, a null hypothesis, a theory, a theoretical framework
and a model? If theory comes from the Greek to speculate, then does not
doing theory-based research mean merely collecting confirming evidence?
This confusion often occurs because the so-called scientific method has
been explained as a research strategy rather than in its correct role as one
evidence collection technique. Added to this, the term theory has been
much abused and/or been give unwarranted status. A much clearer and
more strategic way of thinking about research is to think of it as being a
process of arguing to convince your peers. This perspective has the
advantage of avoiding the ill defined jargon and makes the task of
planning your research much easier.
The perspective of research being a product of argument is not new, it has
found to be historically correct, is more explicit about the biases of the
researcher, and, it encourages the use of multiple method in research, that
is, the use of both the quantitative methods and the qualitative methods.
However, it is not common to find it being mentioned in research methods
books.
By clarifying the language and encouraging the use of multiple research
methods, the book also expects to improve the quality and the
communication of research. Accepting that research is a process of arguing
with your peers encourages high quality, acceptable, evidence collection
methods coupled with an acceptable method for collating and
communicating this evidence to clear purpose.
Definitions
[A] It is assumed that the reader knows what is meant by a reasoned,
balanced, fair argument and understands that such an argument needs to
x
be supported by credible (maybe including scientific) evidence. The
process of preparing and presenting an argument is called argumentation.
More formally it is defined as:
Argumentation is a social, intellectual, verbal [spoken or
written] activity serving to justify or refute an opinion [idea,
conception, policy], consisting of a constellation of statements
and directed towards obtaining the approbation of an audience
[Eemeren et al., 1989]
It is not being suggested that rhetoric replace careful observation and
reasoned conclusions, rather, that these important attributes of quality
research are encouraged by healthy argument.
[BI Business research is considered different from research in the physical
sciences because it involves subjects that use language, understand they
are being studied, can be influenced by the results and are extremely
situational in their behavior. Research is defined so as to include what
some would call both normal science and major advances (paradigm
shifts). The word research is used to mean a careful, through, acceptable
collection of convincing evidence which should use observation and
measurement whenever possible.
Introduction and Motivation
As a postgraduate co-ordinator I have the task of helping some very able
students get started on formal academic research. Many come to talk to me
after having read books like, "What is this called Science" or the many
"Business Research Methods" clones. They have picked up words like
theory, hypothesis data analysis and literature review. However, when
they tried to apply these ill defined terms to their own research they
become confused. They ask questions like those listed at the start of this
preface. Initially, I tried to simply tried to provide my own, hopefully
better, explanations of the language their research methods books had
introduced. However, reading on, especially the work of Kuhn,
Feyerabend and Morgan, coupled with the informal logic philosophy
literature, it soon became obvious that an wider and better perspective on
how to plan research does exist. It seems to pre-date the scientific
revolution, it is the basis of our legal system, it is well established in the
humanities subjects, (English, History, anthropology) and may be a much
better way of understanding the role of the so-called scientific method.
Research should be perceived as being an argument. This perspective
covers research from the level of discussions between learned academics
xi
in different universities, to the preparation of a postgraduate thesis.
Indeed, the word thesis can be translated from the Greek to mean position
or argument.
By explaining to those starting out in research that their thesis will be an
argument, in much the same way a lawyer argues for her defendant in
court, makes the task much clearer to the student. Students understand
that research in earnest cannot start until they can answer questions like,
"What is your argument?" "What evidence do you intend to present, what is
there in the literature to support your argument, will you need to calculate
some correlations to support your other evidence"? The only real
difference between a thesis undertaken using this perspective and any
other is that the researcher is not required to hide his or her expectations
of any results. The argument method assumes that quality research
depends on debate between experts. This is how objectivity is achieved.
Objectivity cannot be achieved by one individual. Research is assumed to
require the presence of an advocate (the researcher) and a universal
knowledgeable audience (examiners or journal readers). The researcher is
required to use quality evidence, including reasoning and experiments, to
try and convince a knowledgeable audience. This will need to include
anticipating the counter arguments in much the same way some editors
insist that all papers contain alternative hypotheses. You will not convince
someone unless you can alleviate their concerns about alternative
explanations.
Making research methodology more understandable must be an important
objective. The journals are full of apparently mis-directed, unconvincing or
trivial research. Often research fails to be communicated to students or to
practicing managers because its overall purpose was not clear. Students
and practicing managers understand the concept of presenting an
argument. In my experience they pick up the language very quickly. They
understand that research is about evidence collection, and convincing a
knowledgeable reader that they have done a thorough job. It is something
they have done many times it the past. Formal, academic, research simply
requires more rigor and originality in the evidence collection process.
The Evidence for Argument
The evidence presented in this book in support of the argument approach
is to first emphasise the now well reported limitations in the language of
the so-called scientific method. For example, poor definition of the word
'objectivity' has caused some to forget that experimenters cannot be
xii
trusted to be completely objective (unbiased). Objectivity (like justice) is
better trusted if it is practiced in the open, with an advocate and an
audience. Next, the book presents evidence to underline that any research
into business activity is really a study of people. It is then pointed out that
the scientific method was not designed for the study of animals, let alone
species that have language. The research methods that have been
specifically designed to deal with language are then introduced. Chapter 3
then directly introduces the argument approach, as a cure for the apparent
limitations of so-called scientific method. This is done by contrasting it
with the terms like thesis, hypothesis and theory. Because of the enormous
range of possible approaches it is difficult to be explicit about exactly how
to compile a quality argument, however, the chapter directly explains the
argument approach. The next chapter discusses alternative structures, or
styles, that can be used in an argument. This, partly, allows the attributes
of a good argument to be discussed. Chapter 5 provides a summary of
what has been said in the previous chapters in the form of a commentary
on three short articles. The first is written by Schreuder mocking brute
empiricism. It is hoped that this will not only provide some general
background on empirical testing, but will also highlight the advantages of
the argument approach. The next article is a very compact experimental
piece, which is reviewed using the argument approach. Last, a story about
one researcher's search for an argument (research topic) is presented.
The second part of the book is a much more traditional summary of the
attributes of various research methods such as interviews and
questionnaires.
Conclusion and Implications
So, the purpose of this book is to convince you that undertaking research
using the language associated with the so-called scientific method might
not be a wise, or easy, thing to do. Rather the more universal, more easily
understood, more honest method of argument should be your guide. The
author's experience of guiding his students towards this argument method
is that they have been much more focused, and their resulting thesis much
more acceptable to a wider range of audience.
The argument approach is expected to be of benefit in terms of the
performance of individual students but it has wider benefits. For example,
many of the major academic business journals are of little interest to other
academics, teachers and managers. Above all the argument approach is a
communications approach. To do research without communication is an