Scientific research focuses on solving problems and pursues a step‐by‐step logical, organized,

And rigorous method to identify the problems, gather data, analyze it and draw valid conclusions
from it. Thus, scientific research is not based on hunches, experience, and intuition but is purposive
and rigorous.

Scientific investigation tends to be more objective than subjective, and helps managers to highlight
the most critical factors at the workplace that need specific attention so as to avoid, minimize, or
solve problems. Scientific investigation and managerial decision making are integral aspects of
effective problem solving.

The Hallmarks or main distinguishing characteristics of scientific research may be listed as

follows:

(Let us consider the case of a manager who is interested in investigating how employees’
commitment to the organization can be increased)

1. Purposiveness
The manager has started the research with a definite aim or purpose. The focus is on increasing the
employees’ commitment to the organization, as this will translate into lower turnover, less
absenteeism, and enhanced performance levels.

2. Rigor
A good theoretical base and a sound methodological design add rigor to a purposive study. Rigor
connotes carefulness, scrupulousness, and the degree of exactitude in research investigations. Let us
say the manager asks 10 to 12 of its employees to express what would increase their level of
commitment to the org. If, solely on the basis of their responses, the manager reaches several
conclusions on how employee commitment can be increased, the whole approach is unscientific. It
lacks rigor for the following reasons:
1. The conclusions are incorrectly drawn because they are based on the responses of just a few
employees
2. The manner of framing and addressing the questions could have introduced a bias in their
responses.
3. There might be many other important factors that this small sample of respondents did not/ could
not verbalize during the interviews

3. Testability
Testability is a property that applies to the hypotheses of a study. Hypothesis is as a tentative, yet
testable, statement, which predicts what you expect to find in your empirical data. Hypotheses are
derived from theory, which is based on the logical beliefs of the researcher and on previous
research.
The manager might hypothesize that those employees who get greater opportunities for
participation in decision making will have a higher level of commitment. This is a hypothesis that can
be tested when the data is collected.

4. Replicability
Let us suppose that the manager concludes that participation in decision making is one of the most
important factors that influences the employees’ commitment to the organization.
We will place more faith and credence in these findings if similar findings have been discovered by
others employing the same methods. Replication demonstrates that our hypotheses has not been
supported merely by chance, but is reflective of the true state of affairs.

5. Precision and confidence

We would like to design the research in such a manner that ensures that our findings are as close to
reality as possible, so that we can place reliance on it.
Precision refers to the closeness of the findings to “reality”. For example, if I estimated the number
of production days lost during the year due to absenteeism at between 30 and 40, as against the
actual figure of 35, the precision of my estimation is good.

Confidence refers to the probability that our estimations are correct.

6. Objectivity
The conclusions drawn through the interpretation of the results of data analysis should be objective.
They should be based on the facts and not on our own subjective or emotional values. For instance,
if we had a hypothesis that participation in decision making would increase the commitment of
employees to the org and this was not supported by the results, it would make no sense if the
manager continued to argue….

7. Generalizability
Generalizability refers to the scope of applicability of the research findings in one organizational
setting to other settings. The wider the range of applicability, the more useful the research is to the
users.

8. Parsimony
Simplicity in explaining the problems that occur is always preferred to complex research
frameworks. For instance, if two or three specific variables in the work situation are identified, which
when changed would raise the organizational commitment of the employees by 45%, that would be
more useful and valuable to the manager than if it were recommended that he should change ten
different variables to increase organizational commitment by 48%.

THE HYPOTHETICO DEDUCTIVE METHOD

The hypothetico‐deductive method provides a useful, systematic approach for generating
knowledge to solve problems.

It is a seven-step process:

1. Identify a broad problem area

A drop in sales, frequent production interruptions, low ‐yielding investments, lack of interest of
employees in their work and customer switching could attract the attention of the manager and
catalyze the research project.

2. Define the problem statement

To find solutions for identified problems, a problem statement that includes the general objective
and research questions should be developed. Gathering initial information about the factors that are
possibly related to the problem will help us to narrow the broad problem area and to define the
problem statement.

3. Develop hypotheses
In this step, variables are examined to ascertain their contribution or influence in explaining why the
problem occurs and how it can be solved. The network of associations identified among the
variables is then theoretically woven, together with justification as to why they might influence the
problem. From a theorized network of associations among the variables, certain hypotheses can be
generated.
A hypothesis must meet two requirements.
 It must be testable
 It must be falsifiable

4. Determine measures
Unless the variables in the theoretical framework are measured in some way, we will not be able to
test our hypotheses. To test our hypothesis that unresponsive employees affect customer switching,
we need to operationalize unresponsiveness and customer switching.
 5. Data collection
Data with respect to each variable in the hypothesis needs to be collected.

6. Data analysis
Data collected is statistically analyzed to see if the hypotheses that was generated has been
supported. To see if unresponsiveness of employees affects customer switching, we might do a
correlation analysis to determine the relationship between these variables.

7. Interpretation of data
Now we must decide whether our hypotheses is supported or not by interpreting the results of the
data analysis.

The CIO Dilemma

Identifying the broad problem area

Sara is the IT Director. She observes that the newly installed MIS is not being used by managers the
way it should be. Some managers have occasionally approached the ICT helpdesk for help, whereas
others make decisions without facts. Recognizing there is surely a problem, Sara develops the
following broad problem Statement: “What the $$$$ should be done to increase the use of the
newly installed MIS by our managers?”

Defining the problem statement

Talking to some of the managers, Sara finds that many of them have very little idea as to what the
MIS is all about, what kinds of information it can provide, how to access it and HOW TO TAKE
advantage of it. This information helps Sara to narrow the broad problem area and to define the
problem statement: “To what extent do knowledge ‐related factors and openness to change affect
the use of the newly installed MIS by managers?”

Developing Hypothesis
Sara develops a theory incorporating all the relevant factors contributing to the use of the newly
installed MIS by managers. From such a theory, she generates various hypotheses for testing, one
among them being: Knowledge of usefulness of the MIS would help managers to put it to greater
use.

Determining of measures and data collection

Sara then develops a short questionnaire measuring the various factors theorized to influence the
use of newly installed MIS by managers, such as the extent of knowledge of what the MIS is, what
kinds of information it provides and how often managers have used the MIS in the preceding three
months.

Data analysis
Sara then analyzes the data obtained through the questionnaire to see what factors prevent the
managers from using the newly installed MIS.

Interpretation of data:
Based on the results, Sara concludes that a lot of managers do not use the MIS because:
 They do not believe that using the MIS would enhance their job performance.
 They do not know how to use it effectively.
These deductions help Sara to take necessary CORRECTIVE actions such as organizing training
sessions for training managers on the use of MIS and illustrating the advantages of using the MIS.

In deductive reasoning, we work from the more general to the more specific. We start out with a
general theory and then narrow it down into specific hypotheses we can test. We narrow down even
further when we collect specific observations to test our hypotheses. Analysis of these specific
observations ultimately allows us to confirm or refute our original theory.

In inductive reasoning, we work from the more specific to the more general. It is a process where
we observe specific phenomena and on this basis, arrive at general conclusions.

Theory testing (deduction) AND theory generation (induction) are essential parts of the research
process.

Deduction and induction are often used in a sequential manner. Induction takes place when a
researcher observes something and asks, “Why does this happen?” In answer to this question, the
researcher may develop a hypothesis. Deduction is subsequently used to test this hypothesis.

Deduction is used in causal and quantitative studies, whereas induction is used in exploratory and
qualitative studies.

[{The manager hypothesizes that frequent price promotions negatively affect the reputation of the product and hence
product sales. The manager may test this hypothesis by means of deduction}]

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO RESEARCH

Positivism
Science and scientific research is seen as the way to get at the truth. Positivists believe that there is
an objective truth out there – to understand the world well enough so that we are able to predict
and control it. Positivists believe that the world operates by laws of cause and effect that we can
discern if we use a scientific approach to research. Positivists are concerned with the rigor and
replicability of their research. The key approach of positivists is the experiment, which allows them
to test cause‐and‐effect relationships through manipulation and observation.

Constructionism
Constructionism criticizes the positivist belief that there is an objective truth. Constructionists hold
the opposite view that the world is fundamentally mental or mentally constructed. For this reason,
constructionists do not search for the objective truth. Instead, they aim to understand the rules
people use to make sense of the world by investigating what happens in people’s minds.

Critical realism
Critical realism is a combination of the belief in an external reality with the rejection of the claim that
this external reality can be objectively measured; observations will always be subject to
interpretation. It believes that researchers are inherently biased.

Pragmatism
The focus of pragmatism is on practical, applied research where different viewpoints on research
and the subject under study are helpful in solving a problem. Pragmatism describes research as a
process where concepts and meanings (theory) are generalizations of our past actions and
experiences, and of interactions we have had with our environment. Pragmatists thus emphasize the
socially constructed nature of research.

You may have asked yourself repeatedly, “Why do I need to know this?” Knowledge of epistemology
may help you to relate to and understand the research of others and the choices that were made in
this research. Different researchers have different ideas about the nature of knowledge:
These different ideas translate into:
 different approaches to research
 different research designs,
 different research methods used.
Another answer to the question “Why do I need to know this?” is that you will probably have
noticed that you prefer one research perspective over the other. Understanding your personal ideas
on research and how it should be done IS IMPORTANT.

All research is based on beliefs about the world around us and what we can possibly discover by
research.
Different researchers have different ideas about these issues. Your viewpoint on the nature of
knowledge and on how we come to know things will have a strong influence on the research
questions you ask, your research design, and the research methods you will use.

A sales manager might observe that customers are perhaps not as pleased as they used to be. The
manager may not be certain but may observe uneasiness among consumers and observe that the
number of customer complaints has increased recently.
This process of observation ignites the research. The manager needs to determine whether there is a
real problem and, if so, how serious it is. This calls for some preliminary data gathering. The manager
might talk casually to a few customers to find out how they feel. The manager might find that the
customers like the products but are upset because the product is frequently out of stock, and they
BLAME the salespersons as not being helpful. From discussions with some of the salespersons, the
manager might discover that the factory does not supply the goods on time and delivery dates are
not abided by and sales person have to lie to customers to retain them.

Integration of the information obtained through the informal and formal interviews helps the
manager to determine that a problem does exist and to define the central question of the study as
follows: “How do delays affect customer satisfaction?” It also helps the manager to formulate a
theoretical framework of all the factors contributing to the problem.
From the theoretical framework, several hypotheses can be generated and tested. Concepts are
then operationally defined so that they can be measured. A research design is set up to decide on
how to collect further data, analyze and interpret it, and finally, to provide an answer to the
problem. The process of drawing from logical analysis an inference that purports to be conclusive is
called deduction.