Science and Practice in Research Process

• Autorzy: Henryk Dźwigoł
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Purpose: The aim of the article is to compare the results of research on the use of research methods and techniques in solving management problems and in verifying which of the two acceptable approaches in the research process dominates among practitioners and theoreticians of management sciences. Design/methodology/approach: The survey was conducted by means of a questionnaire. The research was addressed to management science theoreticians and management practitioners being the target group covering: 272 foreign universities; 21,024 foreign researchers; 93 domestic universities; 2,307 domestic researchers; 52 foreign companies, 183 domestic companies. As a result of the research effort, 401 representatives of management science theoreticians and 118 practitioners were examined. Findings: The carried-out research has made it possible to identify methods, procedures, techniques and approaches that are most relevant to research processes in management sciences. Furthermore, both scientists and practitioners of management sciences use the same research methods. Research limitations/implications: It should be stated that management science and the methods used in it should support business practice and, to some extent, provide guidance to managers and directors. Management should be treated as a normative science, the aim of which is to formulate the principles of effective and efficient functioning of enterprises. Practical implications: The conclusions resulting from the carried-out research explicitly indicate that both scientists and practitioners of management sciences use the same research methods, i.e.: analysis of documentation, questionnaire, observation and interview. Research results obtained during the research process in the field of management sciences should be applied in practice. Social implications: Owing to the involvement of scientists and practitioners in research, it can be concluded that, while defining a research problem, it is difficult to choose a single method which allows for a full and thorough diagnosis of the problem under investigation. It is therefore necessary, in the research process, to use a variety of methods which will provide a comprehensive response to the posed problem. Originality/value: The research carried out has made it possible to identify methods, procedures, techniques and approaches that are most relevant to the research processes in management sciences. They were carried out in two stages. The commitment of both theoreticians and practitioners to the research process resulted in a broader interpretation of management sciences and allowed the author to diagnose the studied issues more fully and thoroughly. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Research methods; Scientific research; Research process

PL

Metody badawcze; Badania naukowe; Proces badawczy

• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2020
• Numer: z. 146 Competitiveness and Development of Regions in the Context of European Integration and Globalization. State - Trends -Strategies
• Strony: 77--85

Twórcy

autor

Henryk Dźwigoł

• Silesian University of Technology

Bibliografia

• 1. Almalki, S. (2016). Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Data in Mixed Methods Research-Challenges and Benefits. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), doi:10.5539/jel.v5n3p288.
• 2. Ansoff, H.I., Kipley, D., Lewis, A.O., Helm-Stevens, R., & Ansoff, R. (2018). Implanting strategic management. Springer.
• 3. Barney, J.B., & Hesterly, W.S. (2010). Strategic management and competitive advantage: Concepts and cases. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 4-25.
• 4. Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6(1), 3-37, https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058877.
• 5. Buck, T., and Shahrim, A. (2005). The Translation of Corporate Governance Changes Across National Cultures: The Case of Germany. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1), 42-64.
• 6. Carminati, L. (2018). Generalizability in Qualitative Research: A Tale of Two Traditions.
• 7. Carrier, J.G. (Ed.) (2012). A handbook of economic anthropology. Edward Elgar Publishing.
• 8. Dul, J. and Hak, T. (2016). Case Study Methodology in Business Research. New York: Routledge.
• 9. Dźwigoł, H. (2018). Współczesne procesy badawcze w naukach o zarządzaniu. Uwarunkowania metodyczne i metodologiczne. PWN: Warszawa.
• 10. Dźwigoł, H., Dźwigoł-Barosz, M., Zhyvko, Z., Miśkiewicz, R., Pushak, H. (2019). Evaluation of the energy security as a component of national security of the country. Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, 8(3), 307-317. http://doi.org/10.9770/ jssi.2019.8.3(2).
• 11. Ferran-Ferrer, N., Guallar, J., Abadal, E., and Server, A. (2017). Research methods and techniques in Spanish library and information science journals (2012-2014). Information Research, 22(1).
• 12. Hair, J.F., Page, M., and Brunsveld, N. (2019). Essentials of Business Research Methods. Routledge: New York, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429203374.
• 13. Hitt, M., & Duane Ireland, R. (2017). The intersection of entrepreneurship and strategic management research. The Blackwell handbook of entrepreneurship, 45-63.
• 14. Holloway, I., & Galvin, K. (2016). Qualitative research in nursing and healthcare. John Wiley & Sons.
• 15. Kirschen, D.S., & Strbac, G. (2018). Fundamentals of power system economics. John Wiley & Sons.
• 16. Korulczyk, T., Biela, A., & Blampied, N. (2019). Being more idiographic in the nomothetic world. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 50(2), 207-216.
• 17. Lyon, A.R., Connors, E., Jensen-Doss, A., Landes, S.J., Lewis, C.C., McLeod, B.D., & Weiner, B.J. (2017). Intentional research design in implementation science: implications for the use of nomothetic and idiographic assessment. Translational behavioral medicine, 7(3), 567-580.
• 18. Myrdal, G. (1987). Utilitarianism and modern economics. In: Arrow and the Foundations of the Theory of Economic Policy (pp. 273-278). Palgrave Macmillan: London.
• 19. Quinlan, Ch., Babin, B., Carr, J., and Griffin, M. (2019). Business Research Methods. South Western Cengage.
• 20. Salvatore, S., & Valsiner, J. (2010). Between the general and the unique: Overcoming the nomothetic versus idiographic opposition. Theory & Psychology, 20(6), 817-833.
• 21. Thomae, H. (1999), The Nomothetic-Idiographic Issue: Some Roots and Recent Trends. International Journal of Group Tensions, 28, 187-215, https://doi.org/10.1023/ A:1021891506378.
• 22. Tonidandel, S., King, E.B., and Cortina, J. (2016). Big Data Methods: Leveraging Modern Data Analytic Techniques to Build Organizational Science. Organizational Research Methods, 21(3), 525-547, DOI: 10.1177/1094428116677299.
• 23. Tsoukas, H. (1989). The validity of idiographic research explanations. Academy of management review, 14(4), 551-561.
• 24. Vaivio, J., & Sirén, A. (2010) Insights into method triangulation and "paradigms" in interpretive management accounting research. Management Accounting Research, 21(2), 130-141, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2010.03.001.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.29119/1641-3466.2020.146.6