Interviews are a qualitative data collection method where the researcher asks participants questions to explore their experiences, opinions, or behaviours in depth. They are widely used in business research to gain detailed and context-rich insights that cannot be captured through quantitative methods. On this page: What are Interviews in Research Types of Interview When to Use Interviews Advantages and Disadvantages How to Conduct Interviews   Type Structure Flexibility Typical Use Structured Pre-defined questions Low Comparability, large samples Semi-structured Core questions + follow-ups Medium Most business research Unstructured No fixed questions High Exploratory studies Types of interviews at a glance   What are Interviews in Research? Interviews can be defined as a qualitative research technique which involves “conducting intensive individual interviews with a small number of respondents to explore their perspectives on a particular idea, program or situation.”[1] Interviews enable researchers to explore not only what participants think, but also why they think that way. This makes interviews particularly valuable for gaining in-depth insights into complex or context-specific business issues.   Types of Interviews There are three different formats of interviews: structured, semi-structured and unstructured. Structured interviews consist of a series of pre-determined questions that all interviewees answer in the same order. Data analysis usually tends to be more straightforward because researcher can compare and contrast different answers given to the same questions. Unstructured interviews are usually the least reliable from research viewpoint, because no questions are prepared prior to the interview and data collection is conducted in an informal manner. Unstructured interviews can be associated with a high level of bias and comparison of answers given by different respondents tends to be difficult due to the differences in formulation of questions. Semi-structured interviews contain the components of both, structured and unstructured interviews. In semi-structured interviews, interviewer prepares a set of…

The term experiment may seem to be associated with the image of a chemist surrounded by bubbling tubes and other related items. Traditionally, experiments have been used by physical and behavioural researchers to a greater extent compared to business scientists. Nevertheless, experiments research can be effectively used in businesses in order to analyse cause and affect relationships. Deductive approach is mainly used for experiments research in order to test hypotheses. Experiments are usually used in causal studies. Specifically, experiment researches involve manipulation with an independent variable in order to assess its impacts on dependent variables. Changes in price levels on volume of sales can be mentioned as a basic example for experiment. In this specific example, price can be specified as independent variable, whereas sales would be dependent variable. The nature of relationships between two variables in causal experimental researches may be divided into three categories: symmetrical, reciprocal and asymmetrical.   Symmetrical relationship can be observed when two variables fluctuate at the same time. However, in symmetrical relationship change in one variable is not caused by change in another variable. In other words, symmetrical relationships of two individual variables usually would be the cause of another factor. For example, decrease in the levels of consumption of luxury products and decrease on the levels of consumer trust on financial institutions may occur at the same time as a result of a third factor – increasing level of uncertainty of perspectives of national economy.   Reciprocal relationship between two variables occurs when there is a mutual influence and reinforcement between two variables. For example, impacted by a marketing message a consumer purchases a car from a particular brand for the first time. Consequently, the consumer becomes loyal to the brand considering more purchases from the same brand in the future. Hence, the mutual influence between…

Surveys are a data collection method that involves asking a group of individuals structured questions in order to gather information about their opinions, behaviours, or characteristics. They are widely used in business research for both quantitative and qualitative studies. On this page: What are Surveys? Types of Surveys Advantages and Disadvantages When to Use Surveys Method Description Typical Use Online survey Self-administered via internet Large-scale data collection Telephone survey Questions asked via phone Quick responses Face-to-face survey Conducted in person Higher response quality Mail survey Sent via post Low-cost but slow Survey methods at a glance Modern research primarily relies on online surveys due to speed and cost efficiency. Surveys involve: Asking the same questions to many people Collecting responses in a structured format Analysing results to identify patterns They help answer questions like:“What do people think?”, “How satisfied are customers?”, “What are common behaviours?” What are Surveys? The essence of survey method can be explained as “questioning individuals on a topic or topics and then describing their responses”[1]. In business studies survey method of primary data collection is used in order to test concepts, reflect attitude of people, establish the level of customer satisfaction, conduct segmentation research and a set of other purposes. Survey method can be used in both, quantitative, as well as, qualitative studies. Survey method pursues two main purposes: Describing certain aspects or characteristics of population and/or Testing hypotheses about nature of relationships within a population.   Types of Surveys Survey method can be broadly divided into three categories: mail survey, telephone survey and personal interview. The descriptions of each of these methods are briefly explained on the following table [2]: Survey method Description Mail survey A written survey that is self-administered Telephone survey A survey conducted by telephone in which the questions are read to the…

Action research can be defined as “an approach in which the action researcher and a client collaborate in the diagnosis of the problem and in the development of a solution based on the diagnosis”[1]. In other words, one of the main characteristic traits of this type of research relates to collaboration between researcher and member of organisation in order to solve organizational problems. On this page: Essence of action research and its categories Advantages and disadvantages Action Research Spiral When to use Action Research Feature Action Research Traditional Research Researcher role Active participant Independent observer Purpose Solve practical problems Generate theoretical knowledge Process Cyclical and iterative Linear Context Real-world organisational setting Controlled or theoretical setting Output Practical improvements + insights Generalisable findings Action research at a glance Action study assumes social world to be constantly changing, both, researcher and research being one part of that change.[2] Action research is closely associated with applied research and is particularly suitable for studies aiming to solve real organisational problems. Unlike purely fundamental research, action research directly links knowledge generation with practical change within a specific context. In contemporary business research, action research is increasingly used to study organisational change related to digital transformation, artificial intelligence implementation, and innovation management. Its practical and iterative nature makes it particularly suitable for analysing rapidly evolving business environments. Generally, action researches can be divided into three categories: positivist, interpretive and critical. Positivist approach to action research, also known as ‘classical action research’ perceives research as a social experiment. Accordingly, action research is accepted as a method to test hypotheses in a real world environment. Interpretive action research, also known as ‘contemporary action research’ perceives business reality as socially constructed and focuses on specifications of local and organisational factors when conducting the action research. Critical action research is…

Deductive research approach refers to a method of reasoning in which researchers begin with an existing theory and develop hypotheses that are tested through empirical data collection and analysis. In deductive studies, conclusions are drawn by moving from general theoretical propositions to specific observations. This approach is commonly used in business and management research when the objective is to test whether existing theories apply in particular contexts.   On this page: Meaning of deductive research approach Advantages and disadvantages Stages of deductive research process When to use deductive approach The following table illustrates the main differences between the main two alternative approaches. Feature Deductive Approach Inductive Approach Starting point Existing theory Observations or data Purpose Test hypotheses Develop new theory Direction of reasoning General → specific Specific → general Research methods Often quantitative Often qualitative Outcome Confirmation or rejection of theory Development of theoretical insights   Meaning of Deductive Approach  A deductive approach is concerned with “developing a hypothesis (or hypotheses) based on existing theory, and then designing a research strategy to test the hypothesis”[1] It has been stated that “deductive means reasoning from the particular to the general. If a causal relationship or link seems to be implied by a particular theory or case example, it might be true in many cases. A deductive design might test to see if this relationship or link did obtain on more general circumstances”[2]. Deductive approach can be explained by the means of hypotheses, which can be derived from the propositions of the theory. In other words, deductive approach is concerned with deducting conclusions from premises or propositions. Deduction begins with an expected pattern “that is tested against observations, whereas induction begins with observations and seeks to find a pattern within them”[3]. Deductive research approach is commonly associated with positivism research philosophy. Positivism…

Fundamental research, also known as basic research or pure research, refers to research conducted to expand knowledge and improve understanding of theoretical concepts without aiming for immediate practical application. Unlike applied research, which focuses on solving specific real-world problems, fundamental research seeks to develop general principles, theories, and conceptual frameworks that contribute to the overall body of knowledge in a discipline. On this page: • Characteristics of fundamental research• Differences between fundamental and applied research• Examples of fundamental research in business• Advantages and disadvantages of fundamental research The following table highlights the main differences between fundamental and applied research: Feature Fundamental Research Applied Research Main objective Expand theoretical knowledge Solve practical problems Focus Concepts, theories, and general principles Real-world organizational issues Context Often conducted in universities Often conducted within organizations Time horizon Long-term knowledge development Short- to medium-term solutions Outcomes Conceptual insights and theoretical contributions Practical recommendations     Characteristics of Fundamental Research  Fundamental research is driven by curiosity and the desire to expand knowledge in specific research area. This type of research makes a specific contribution to the academic body of knowledge in the research area. Fundamental studies tend to make generalizations about the phenomenon, and the philosophy of this type of studies can be explained as ‘gathering knowledge for the sake of knowledge’. Fundamental researches mainly aim to answer the questions of why, what or how and they tend to contribute the pool of fundamental knowledge in the research area. Opposite to fundamental research is applied research that aims to solve specific problems, thus findings of applied research do have immediate practical implications.   Differences between Fundamental and Applied Research Differences between applied and fundamental research have been specified in a way that fundamental research studies individual cases without generalizing, and recognizes that other variables are in constant change. Applied…

Causal research, also known as explanatory research is a type of research that aims to identify the extent and nature of cause-and-effect relationships. Causal research can be conducted in order to assess impacts of specific changes on existing norms, various processes etc. On this page: Meaning of causal research and its components Causal research methods Examples of causal research methods Advantages and disadvantages of causal research methods The table below compares the main characteristics of causal research to exploratory and descriptive research designs:[1] Causal research Exploratory research Descriptive research Amount of uncertainty characterising decision situation Clearly defined Highly ambiguous Partially defined Key research statement Research hypotheses Research question Research question When conducted? Later stages of decision making Early stage of decision making Later stages of decision making Usual research approach Highly structured Unstructured Structured Examples ‘Will consumers buy more products in a blue package?’ ‘Which of two advertising campaigns will be more effective?’ ‘Our sales are declining for no apparent reason’ ‘What kinds of new products are fast-food consumers interested in?’ ‘What kind of people patronize our stores compared to our primary competitor?’ ‘What product features are the most important to our customers?’ Main characteristics of research designs   Meaning of Causal Research and Its Components Causal studies focus on an analysis of a situation or a specific problem to explain the patterns of relationships between variables. Experiments are the most popular primary data collection methods in studies with causal research design. The presence of cause cause-and-effect relationships can be confirmed only if specific causal evidence exists. Causal evidence has three important components: 1. Temporal sequence. The cause must occur before the effect. For example, it would not be appropriate to credit the increase in sales to rebranding efforts if the increase had started before the rebranding. 2. Concomitant variation. The…

Conclusive research design, as the name implies, is applied to generate findings that are practically useful in reaching conclusions or decision-making. In this type of studies research objectives and data requirements need to be clearly defined. Findings of conclusive studies usually have specific uses. Conclusive research design provides a way to verify and quantify findings of exploratory studies. Conclusive research design usually involves the application of quantitative methods of data collection and data analysis. Moreover, conclusive studies tend to be deductive in nature and research objectives in these types of studies are achieved via testing hypotheses. The table below illustrates the main differences between conclusive and exploratory research design: Factor Conclusive  Exploratory Objectives To test hypothesis and relationships To get insights and understanding     Characteristics Information needs a clearly defined Research process is formal and structured Large representative sample Data analysis is quantitative Information needs are loosely defined Research process is unstructured and flexible Small, non-representative sample Primary data analysis is qualitative Findings Conclusive Only tentative Outcome Findings used as input to decision making Generally followed by further exploratory conclusive research  Main differences between conclusive and exploratory research design It has to be noted that “conclusive research is more likely to use statistical tests, advanced analytical techniques, and larger sample sizes, compared with exploratory studies. Conclusive research is more likely to use quantitative, rather than qualitative techniques”[1]. Conclusive research is helpful in providing a reliable or representative picture of the population through the application of valid research instrument. The following are the main benefits of conclusive studies: Provides Definitive Answers. Offers clear and conclusive evidence to support or refute hypotheses.   Establishes Causal Relationships. Identifies the factors that influence or cause specific outcomes.   Generalizable Findings. Facilitates the application of research findings to real-world settings and broader contexts.   Advances Scientific Knowledge. Contributes…

Pragmatism research philosophy is a research approach that focuses on practical outcomes and problem-solving, allowing researchers to combine qualitative and quantitative methods based on what works best for the research question. Pragmatism research philosophy accepts concepts to be relevant only if they support action. Pragmatics “recognise that there are many different ways of interpreting the world and undertaking research, that no single point of view can ever give the entire picture and that there may be multiple realities”[1] Pragmatism is a philosophical approach that emphasizes the practical consequences of ideas. In the context of research, it suggests that the best research methods are those that are most useful and effective in solving particular research problems. Pragmatic researchers are flexible and open to using a variety of methods, both quantitative and qualitative, depending on the specifics of the research question. The following are core tenets of pragmatism research philosophy: 1. Practicality. Pragmatism emphasizes the practical consequences of ideas and actions. In research, this means that pragmatic researchers are concerned with conducting research that is useful and can be applied to solve real-world problems. 2. Flexibility. It is a flexible approach to research that does not adhere to a single set of methods. Pragmatic researchers are willing to use a variety of methods, both quantitative and qualitative, depending on the specifics of the research question. 3. Context. It also emphasizes the importance of context in research. This means that pragmatic researchers consider the specific circumstances of the research problem when choosing methods and interpreting results. 4. Process. Pragmatism views research as an ongoing process of inquiry. This means that pragmatic researchers are open to modifying their research methods and interpretations as they gather more data and insights. Positivism and interpretivism are two extreme mutually exclusive paradigms about the nature and sources of…