Qualitative and Quantitative Research in Business Settings

Research Methodologies and Implications for Modern Businesses
Today, two of the primary methods of collecting relevant information and interpreting it in unique ways to benefit business operations are qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Although these two research methodologies share some commonalities, they both differ in terms of what types of data is used for analysis and how the resulting analysis is applied in real-world settings. The purpose of this signature assignment is to provide a review and reflection on these two research methodologies to develop timely and informed recommendations for business practitioners concerning which research strategy is optimal for their purposes. A summary of the research concerning qualitative and quantitative methodologies and key findings concerning their use in real-world business situations are presented in the conclusion.
Review and Analysis
Qualitative methodology
Business practitioners in companies of all sizes and types are frequently faced with complex problem situations that defy easy explanations, and identifying which qualitative methodology is best suited for their purposes and needs is therefore the first step. In sum, qualitative research relies on text, pictures, recordings, empirical observations and virtually any other non-numeric dependent data to answer a guiding research question. In this regard, Chong and Yeo (2015) advise that, “Qualitative research is a practice of examining studied subjects in natural settings and then transforming and making sense of the studied phenomenon through the interpretation of gathered field notes, photographs, conversations, and the other similar representation” (p. 258). Although making sense of any studied phenomenon is what life is all about, the case is different in organizational settings because the phenomenon of interest may not be particularly relevant to business practitioners’ lives outside their jobs. This means that in the majority of cases, the answers needed for a given research question will require a design that transcends business practitioners’ personal experiences and interests.
While this process involves extra effort on the part of business practitioners, they will invariably enjoy a significant return on their investments in gaining a better understanding concerning how qualitative research designs can be used to make sense of the studied phenomenon. For example, business practitioners also have several different qualitative research strategies available, depending on what type of questions and answers they require and selecting the optimal qualitative methodology is thus the next step. In this regard, researchers at the University of Utah advise that, “Rather than by logical and statistical procedures, qualitative researchers use multiple systems of inquiry for the study of human phenomena including biography, case study, historical analysis, discourse analysis, ethnography, grounded theory and phenomenology” (Qualitative research, 2018, para. 2).
A brief description of each of selected qualitative research designs is presented in Table 1 below.
Table 1
Brief description of selected qualitative research designs
Type
Description
Biography
This research design draws on written histories of an individual’s life and may overlap with the case study approach (see below).
Case study
This design is “research is which one studies a few people or cases in great detail over time” (Neuman, 2008, p. 530).
Historical analysis
This research design “examines different cultures or periods to better understand the social world [and] the development of a concept, social theory, or set of findings over time” (Neuman, 2008, p. 536).
Discourse analysis
According to Zeeman and Poggenpoel (2002), discourse analysis “has its roots in linguistics, literary studies, and anthropology [that] does not describe and explain the world [or] make any claim on the truth [but is rather] a reflexive process that is directed at change and progress” (p. 97).
Ethnography
This research design uses field research to collect detailed data concerning various cultures, typically, but not always, those different from the business practitioner (Neuman, 2008). For example, Creswell (2003) advises that, “An ethnography is a description and interpretation of a cultural or social group or system [in which] the researcher examines the group's observable and learned patterns of behavior, customs, and ways of life" (p. 58).
Grounded theory
This research design is a form of social theory that is based on empirical observations of specific concrete details (Neuman, 2008).
Phenomenology
This research design generally “describes the meaning of the lived experiences for several individuals about a concept or the phenomenon" (Creswell, 2003, p. 51). The overarching objective of this type of research design is to develop an improved understanding of the fundamental elements involved in real-world experiences (Creswell, 2003).
Taken together, it is clear that the qualitative research designs described in Table 1 above require different approaches and usually provide vastly different results. Furthermore, in sharp contrast to the conventional criteria that has been established for the validity of quantitative research, however, there remains a profound lack of consensus concerning the criteria that should be applied to qualitative research (Newman & Benz, 1998). Consequently, applying any of the foregoing qualitative research designs must take into account their respective limitations in order to achieve the best possible results. This also means that business practitioners may need to use a quantitative research design which remains the gold standard in research today as discussed further below.
Quantitative methodology
Like qualitative methodologies, quantitative methodologies seek to answer guiding research questions in the most complete fashion possible, but the latter relies strictly on some type of numeric measure for this purpose (Neuman, 2008). Given the ability of computer-based applications to process even enormous amounts of quantitative data, it is not surprising that there are also a number of different quantitative research designs available to business practitioners today, including those briefly described in Table 2 below.
Table 2
Brief description of selected quantitative research designs
Type
Description
Surveys
This design is perhaps the most commonly used quantitative research design that most people are already familiar with and is defined by Neuman (2008) as “social research in which one systematically asks many people the same question, then records and analyzes their answer” (p. 546).
Correlational design
According to Groat and Wang (2013), “Broadly speaking, [correlational designs] seek to clarify patterns of relationships between two or more variables, that is, factors involved in the circumstances under study” (p. 269). The variables in correlational designs are not controlled (i.e., an analysis of the relationship between intelligence quotient and the prevalence of clinical depression) (Quantitative approaches, 2018). In addition, Groat and Wang (2013) note that, “correlational design is distinct from qualitative design [and] although both strategies focus on naturally occurring patterns, qualitative research is more attentive to the holistic qualities of phenomena” (p. 269).
Experimental
This design is “research in which one intervenes or does something to one group of people but not to another, then compares results from the two groups” (Neuman, 2008, p. 535). Besides classic experimental designs, some other commonly used experimental designs include randomized, crossover, and nested (Quantitative approaches, 2018).
Quasi-experimental
This is “an experimental design [that is] a variations on the classical experimental design” that business practitioners] “use in special situations or when they have limited control over the independent variable” (Neuman, 2008, p. 542). According to the definition provided by Center for Innovations in Research and Teaching, quasi-experimental designs “test for casualty with suboptimal variable control; independent variable not manipulated” (Quantitative approaches, 2018, para. 6). Some commonly used quasi-experimental designs include pre- and post-tests, post-test only, and interrupted time-series (Quantitative approaches, 2018).
Descriptive
The key focus of this design is “observational [to] describe ‘what is’ [and] variables are not controlled” (Quantitative approaches, 2018, para. 4). Some typical descriptive designs include comparative, cross-sectional and longitudinal (Quantitative approaches, 2018).
Ex post facto
According to the definition provided by Black’s Law Dictionary (1990), this term simply means “after the fact” [and] by an act or fact occurring after some previous act or fact, and relating thereto” (p. 580). Therefore, this research design draws on archived numeric measures of various types concerning issues of interest to business practitioners.
As can also be easily discerned from the selected quantitative research designs briefly described in Table 2 above, each approach uses a different strategy to collect the numeric measures that are used for analyze, interpretation and application to the guiding research question, and it is also clear that both research traditions share some similarities despite their fundamental differences are summarized in Table 3 below.
Table 3
Similarities and differences between quantitative and qualitative analysis
Similarities
Differences
? Both involve a systematic process. ? Analysis for both involves inference, in other words, they both reach a conclusion that is based on evidence.
? Both involve comparisons, either internally or with related evidence from elsewhere.
? Both strive to avoid errors, false conclusions and misleading inferences and seek valid description and explanations.
? Quantitative analysis takes place at the end of data collection; qualitative analysis takes place during data collection.
? Quantitative analysis is highly standardized and does not differ significantly between projects; qualitative analysis has many more possible approaches.
? Quantitative analysis tends to test hypotheses through the manipulation of numbers representing ‘facts.’ Qualitative analysis blends empirical evidence and abstract concepts in the form of words to explain or illustrate a theory or interpretation.
? Qualitative analysis does not assume that real life can be measured by numbers.



Source: Neuman (2008)

In addition, there are also some similarities and differences between quantitative and qualitative research designs with respect to data collection protocols, the quantitative of data needed for each approach, the focus of each design, the type of output that results, and their respective epistemological stances are set forth in Table 4 below.
Table 4
Other similarities and differences between qualitative and quantitative designs
Traditional perceptions
Qualitative research
Quantitative research

Data collection
Focus groups, in-depth interviews, accompanied shopping
Surveys, audits

Quantity of data
Small
Large

Nature of data
Unstructured (i.e., verbal comments)
Structured (i.e., survey responses to closed questions)

Focus
Why? How do things work?
What? How many?

Output
A description
Projectable numbers

Epistemological stance
Constructionist
Positivist



Source: Qualitative research in a new world, 2018

The similarities and differences between qualitative and quantitative research as well as the wide array of research designs that are available within each tradition make it essential for business practitioners to use the research strategy that will provide the answers they need, when they need them, and these issues are discussed further below.
Implications for business practice
Any type of research project that is undertaken in an organizational context will invariably require the allocation of some level of resources. Indeed, even one business practitioner performing brief, short-term independent research using existing resources will expend the costs of salary and benefits. Without a comprehensive understanding of the similarities and differences between qualitative and quantitative research, though, as well as which research design is best suited to organizational research, it is possible for business practitioners to waste valuable time and energy without achieving any substantive results. For example, if business practitioners have used surveys in the past to good effect to develop the answers needed for a given project, they may tend to rely on this research design to the exclusion of other, potentially more effective approaches.
Likewise, experimental and quasi-experimental designs typically require the expenditure of substantial organizational resources to administer and the findings that emerge from these research designs may not provide the specific answers that are required, thereby essentially wasting time, money and most especially the opportunity to do it right the first time. Moreover, when other research methods are used such as focus groups that require compensating participants or the development and administration of large-scale questionnaires are used, these research costs increase substantially.
In many cases, the best approach to achieving optimal research outcomes may be to draw on both qualitative and quantitative designs (Neuman, 2008). Using a mixed methodology in this way can provide more robust findings that overcome the respective limitations of each tradition while capitalizing on their respective strengths. For instance, business practitioners wanting to learn more about current fashion trends in other countries could use a phenomenological research design to identify the most popular styles and how they are being marketed to their targeted consumers. This information could then be used to develop a custom survey that could be mailed, emailed or posted on a social media platform to learn more about what their existing consumers want and how best to respond to these trends. Further, surveys can include qualitative elements such as open-ended questions that may require additional time and effort to analyze but which will provide valuable insights that might otherwise not have been possible with just a quantitative survey.
Because organizational resources are by definition scarce, it is therefore incumbent upon business practitioners to ensure that they fully understand the similarities and differences between qualitative and quantitative researcher methodologies and when each is best suited to develop the informed answers they need to formulate appropriate responses and recommendations for this purpose are presented below.
Recommendations for business practitioners
· Using a mixed methodology drawing on both qualitative and quantitative research designs can produce superior results compared to using either approach alone (Neuman, 2008).
· Avoid complacency by becoming trapped in a comfort zone that fails to recognize the potential advantages of using alternative or mixed methodologies.
· Keep a copy of the brief descriptions of qualitative and quantitative research designs presented in the tables above available (laminate it if possible) to remind them that there is more than one approach to gaining the information that is needed to achieve and sustain a competitive advantage in an increasingly globalized marketplace and it is in their organization’s best interests to identify the best possible approach or approaches to a given research enterprise.
· Collaborate in a cross-disciplinary fashion with coworkers and executives who possess relevant experience when seeking to identify optimal research designs.
· Keep track of the effectiveness of each type of research design in achieving the desired outcomes and record important lessons learned for future research initiatives.
Conclusion
It is reasonable to conclude that virtually everyone has been involved in some type of qualitative and quantitative research at some point in their lives, even if it was informally and intuitively performed. Everyone has compared others based on their clothing and hair styles, for example, and all but the most affluent consumers routinely compare prices when they are shopping for groceries or any other products. Any mistakes or erroneous conclusions that are drawn on these types of informal analyzes, though, carry far fewer and severe consequences than they do when applied to an organizational setting. Business practitioners cannot afford to use a “seat-of-the-pants” approach to conducting the research they need to achieve and maintain a competitive advantage. Therefore, the extent to which they fail to apply the most appropriate research design will likely be the extent to which the fail in this regard. More to the point, there is nothing especially mysterious, arcane or even difficult about quantitative and qualitative research, and a comprehensive understanding of these research traditions and how they are best used represents an essential part of any business practitioner’s professional skill set. While it is easy to assume that what has worked well in the past will work equally well in the future, the pace of change today has never been greater and identifying and applying optimal research designs in organizational settings has assumed new importance and relevance.



References
Chong C. H. & Yeo, K. J. (2015, June). An overview of grounded theory design in educational research. Asian Social Science, 11(12), 258-261.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Groat, L. N. & Wang, D. (2013). Architectural research methods. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Lowe, C. (2018). Data collection strategies in qualitative research. Public Policy & Administration. Retrieved from https://web.csulb.edu/~msaintg/ppa696/696quali.htm.
Newman, I. & Benz, C. R. (1998). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Neuman, W. L. (2003). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, 6th ed. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Qualitative research. (2018). The University of Utah. Retrieved from https://nursing.utah. edu/research/qualitative-research/what-is-qualitative-research.php.
Qualitative research in a new world. (2018). The New Marketing Research. Retrieved from https://newmr.org/ blog/how-do-we-define-qualitative-research-in-a-new-mr-world/.
Quantitative approaches. (2018). Center for Innovations in Research and Teaching. Retrieved from https://cirt.gcu.edu/research/developmentresources/research_ready/ quantresearch/approaches.
Zeeman, L. & Poggenpoel, M. (2002, Fall). An introduction to a postmodern approach to educational research: Discourse analysis. Education, 123(1), 96-100.