Research methods are the techniques researchers use to collect data for analysis to reveal new information or enhance the understanding of an existing issue. Types of research methods with different tools for data collection that researchers use include qualitative, quantitative, and mix research methods (Zoellner & Harris, 2017). The choice of the research method depends on the purpose of the study and the research questions to be addressed.
The quantitative research method is a common approach employed to identify and quantify exact links and relationships between different phenomena (Smith & Zajda, 2018). The quantitative research method can be defined as the examination of a phenomenon using precise measurement based on controlled and rigorous design. Quantitative researchers gather numerical data which they use statistical analysis to rank, categorize or measure relationships between variables (Turner et al., 2017). According to Smith and Zajda (2018), researchers implementing quantitative studies move from general theories and assumptions to particular results in clearly described settings. The subjectivity of this method is minimal as measurements are precise and based on the scientific approach.
As far as the qualitative research method is concerned, the definition of this term is rather problematic, which is agreed by many researchers (Aspers & Corte, 2019; Vindrola-Padros & Johnson, 2020). The subjectivity of the method is significant, making it difficult to provide a clear description without void of potential disputes. Aspers and Corte (2019) referred to qualitative research as “an iterative process in which improved understanding to the scientific community is achieved by making new significant distinctions resulting from getting closer to the phenomenon studied” (p. 155). Qualitative researchers collect data about lived experiences, behaviors, or emotions, and the meanings individuals attribute to them (Edwards & Brannelly, 2017; Ramani & Mann, 2016).
When using mixed methods, researchers blend both qualitative and quantitative research by doing statistical data analysis and, at the same time, obtaining a deeper contextual insight on a phenomenon (Bester et al., 2017). The mixed method design can be referred to as an approach integrating qualitative and quantitative research questions, qualitative and quantitative research designs, and qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods, as well as quantitative and qualitative results (Noyes et al., 2019). Notably, different types of methods and data are provided separately, while the discussion of the results and implications of the study are usually synthesized. This method is widely used to support some general assumption or theory with particular evidence in a specific setting with the provision of a wider analysis that involves textual findings that can provide insights into the context or possible background for the studied phenomenon (Noyes et al., 2019). I will use the qualitative single case study design for this study.
Method
For the purpose of this study, I will utilize a qualitative method to examine the strategies frontline managers of transportation companies use to identify, address, and mitigate the incidence and effects of abusive supervision on employee performance. Qualitative studies are instrumental in attaining the views of people on phenomena as well as gaining insights into the reasons behind their behaviors (Lehmann et al., 2019). The focus is often on the meanings and perceptions of people that are based on particular contexts. Qualitative studies ensure the deep exploration of settings or rather the way these contexts are perceived by people. Although the methodology utilized by qualitative researchers may seem biased, rigorous instruments that have been validated in various studies are employed (Guest et al., 2020).
Thematic analysis, which is the major basis of the qualitative research method, implies the careful examination of themes and topics the participants uncover (Aspers & Corte, 2019). These themes are placed in the existing context and analyzed in terms of potential connections and relationships, which are further analyzed in other qualitative studies in similar or different settings. Ward et al. (2018) added that qualitative research methods enabled researchers to uncover new facets of the phenomenon under their study. These new aspects are further investigated and can become a topic for quantitative studies.
Although the lack of generalizability is often regarded as the primary limitation to the qualitative research method, Carminati (2018) claimed that generalizability could be at the necessary level if researchers employed an appropriate terminology and philosophy and if generalizability was made the major objective of the research. Importantly, in many cases, generalizability is not the focal point as researchers are more interested in individual perspectives, attitudes, themes that are often found to be common among different groups and populations. Data collection tools (with the focus on interviews, discussions, and surveys) are also rigorous and validated (Heath et al., 2018). Numerous types of interviews have been introduced and can be appropriate for the exploration of diverse phenomena and contexts.
One of the peculiarities of the qualitative study is the small sample that can be sufficient to address the questions raised. In qualitative studies, the exact number of participants is not as critical as in quantitative research. Saturation is achieved when no new themes and topics emerge when collecting data (Guest et al., 2020). Once the topics and themes become redundant, the recruitment process can be terminated since new participants are unlikely to bring out any novel behaviors and attitudes. I will use a small purposive sample of informants who are well conversant with the strategies frontline managers use to identify, address, and mitigate the incidence and effects of abusive supervision on employee performance.
The common characteristics in qualitative method irrespective of the theoretical framework include:
- data collection in a natural setting (Heath et al., 2018);
- researchers as the principal data collection instruments (Heath et al., 2018);
- face-to-face interaction between researchers and participants (Lehmann et al., 2019);
- participants involvement in the data collection process (Heath et al., 2018; Lehmann et al., 2019);
- multiple sources of data in the analysis (Carminati, 2018; Heath et al., 2018);
- research process is emergent (Ward et al., 2018);
- the meaning participants hold regarding the issue under study is central (Lehmann et al., 2019);
- data analysis is inductive (Smith & Zajda, 2018);
- researcher develops a complex picture of the issue under study (Aspers & Corte, 2019; Smith & Zajda, 2018; Ward et al., 2018);
- interpretation is on what the researcher see, hear, and understand (Aspers & Corte, 2019; Smith & Zajda, 2018).
I will use qualitative research method in this study because I want to gain insights into the strategies frontline managers of transportation companies use to identify, address, and mitigate the incidence and effects of abusive supervision on employee performance. Other types of research designs are not appropriate for this study as they are unable to address the major goal. The quantitative research method is associated with the focus on quantitative data and precise measurements. Researchers implementing quantitative studies manipulate variables, measure them, and examine the existing correlations and links between them (Pluye et al., 2018). For the purpose of this research, it is important to identify people’s views on a particular phenomenon experienced in a specific environment. This study does not aim at measuring variables associated with the phenomenon or calculating exact trends. Therefore, the quantitative research method will not address the purpose of this study and cannot be utilized.
The mixed method research is not suitable for the present study as well due to the analysis of empirical quantitative data. This study aims at gaining insights into the specific strategies SME managers employ under certain conditions. Researchers conducting mixed method studies pay equal or considerable attention to quantitative data and analysis (Noyes et al., 2019). This approach may shift the focus towards the correlations between variables rather than exact views and attitudes.
Research Design
The most commonly employed qualitative research designs include ethnography, phenomenology, case studies, and narrative inquiry (Hamilton & Finley, 2019). I will use the case study design for this study as this framework can be the most effective in addressing the purpose of this research. (Alam, 2021). Cases studies ensure the focus on a phenomenon in a particular setting, which is consistent with the purpose of this study. I will explore the case of SME managers working in transportation companies and concentrating on identifying and exploring the effects of abusive supervision on employees. Hence, the use of case studies as the framework for this research is beneficial as it ensures the focus on a particular group and clearly specified context.
The case study can be defined as a qualitative research method “used for theory building, theory testing, and theory refinement” (Hoorani et al., 2019, p. 2). The method is characterized by the utilization of various data sources “to develop a contextualized understanding of the phenomenon” (Hoorani et al., 2019, p. 2). The present study focuses on the perspectives of SME managers on supervision abuse and its impact on employees’ performance, as well as the mitigation of potentially harmful effects. Thus, the central aspects of the qualitative study, phenomenon and contexts, are present and properly analyzed with the help of this design. The participants share their views on the phenomenon they experience at the present moment, and their natural context is preserved (Rashid et al., 2019). This natural setting and the time span of the study enable researchers to identify the most apparent details regarding the participants’ views and behaviors that can be seen as their responses to particular phenomena, settings, and events.
Single and multiple case studies can be utilized to implement qualitative research. In multiple case studies, researchers analyze several contexts or compare them (Gunasekaran et al., 2018). These designs help in tracing trends or similarities across contexts, which can be further used in the development of a theory and generalization of the findings (Gunasekaran et al., 2018). For the purpose of this study, I will use a simple case study that concentrates on one case, a transportation company, and the corresponding workplace environment. This focus will be instrumental in obtaining in-depth insights into the perspectives of a particular group of people, managers addressing the effects of abusive leadership.
Ethnography is a common qualitative design that can uncover peculiarities of meanings and contexts. However, ethnographic studies concentrate on the beliefs and cultures of groups of individuals, which is not the focus of this study (Hamilton & Finley, 2019). Phenomenological design is characterized by the focus on a particular actor and individuals’ lived experiences (Aspers & Corte, 2019). However, this approach is inappropriate for the present study since the purpose of this research is to analyze people’s attitudes, not their reflections on their lives. Narrative inquiry is not suitable for this study as well because it encompasses the analysis of people’s reflections and accounts on the events that may be connected (Caine et al., 2020). The purpose of this research is not to elicit meaning from people’s reflections on their lives but to analyze employees’ attitudes towards and behaviors related to a specific phenomenon. I will use a single case study design to achieve an understanding of what strategies frontline managers use to identify, address, and mitigate the incidence and effects of abusive supervision on employee performance.
References
Alam, M. K. (2021). A systematic qualitative case study: Questions, data collection, NVivo analysis and saturation. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 16(1), 1-31.
Aspers, P., & Corte, U. (2019). What is qualitative in qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology, 42(2), 139-160.
Caine, V., Clandinin, J., & Lessard, S. (2020). Considering response communities: Spaces of appearance in narrative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 27(6), 661-666.
Carminati, L. (2018). Generalizability in qualitative research: A tale of two traditions. Qualitative Health Research, 28(13), 2094-2101.
Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PLOS ONE, 15(5), 1-17.
Gunasekaran, A., Yusuf, Y. Y., Adeleye, E. O., & Papadopoulos, T. (2018). Agile manufacturing practices: The role of big data and business analytics with multiple case studies. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1-2), 385-397.
Hamilton, A., & Finley, E. (2019). Qualitative methods in implementation research: An introduction. Psychiatry Research, 280, 1-8.
Heath, J., Williamson, H., Williams, L., & Harcourt, D. (2018). “It’s just more personal”: Using multiple methods of qualitative data collection to facilitate participation in research focusing on sensitive subjects. Applied Nursing Research, 43, 30-35.
Hoorani, B. H., Nair, L. B., & Gibbert, M. (2019). Designing for impact: The effect of rigor and case study design on citations of qualitative case studies in management. Scientometrics, 121(1), 285-306.
Lehmann, O. V., Murakami, K., & Klempe, S. H. (2019). A qualitative research method to explore meaning-making processes in cultural psychology. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 20(2), 1-22.
Noyes, J., Booth, A., Moore, G., Flemming, K., Tunçalp, Ö., & Shakibazadeh, E. (2019). Synthesising quantitative and qualitative evidence to inform guidelines on complex interventions: Clarifying the purposes, designs and outlining some methods. BMJ Global Health, 4(Suppl 1), 1-14.
Pluye, P., Bengoechea, E. G., Granikov, V., Kaur, N., & Tang, D. L. (2018). A world of possibilities in mixed methods: Review of the combinations of strategies used to integrate qualitative and quantitative phases, results and data. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 10(1), 41-56.
Rashid, Y., Rashid, A., Warraich, M., Sabir, S. S., & Waseem, A. (2019). Case study method: A step-by-step guide for business researchers. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1-13.
Smith, K., & Zajda, J. (2018). Qualitative and quantitative methodologies: A minimalist view. Education and Society, 36(1), 73-83.
Vindrola-Padros, C., & Johnson, G. (2020). Rapid techniques in qualitative research: A critical review of the literature. Qualitative Health Research, 30(10), 1596-1604.
Ward, J. K., Comer, U., & Stone, S. (2018). On qualifying qualitative research: Emerging perspectives and the “Deer” (Descriptive, Exploratory, Evolutionary, Repeat) paradigm. Interchange, 49(1), 133-146.