Facilitating better knowledge management using leadership: A case of Meraas

Facilitating better knowledge management using leadership: A case of Meraas

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

Introduction

This chapter develops a critical analysis of the manner and process through which a study should be designed. The chapter details the process through which the research study data was collected and the rationale. This s through detailing the rationale for selecting one method and approach over the other possible alternatives. In developing this analysis, the chapter is guided by the Saunders onion. As Williamson and Johanson (2018) described it, some of the core components of the onion include the philosophy, approach, strategy and data collection process and analysis aspects, respectively. They are as detailed in this section.

Research Philosophy

Bryman (2012) describe a research philosophy as the world view adopted by a study. This impact and affects how the available data and information is viewed in a research study. The applicable world view is hedged on the perception of reality in the society. While as some view’s perspective the existing social reality as static, others perspective it as subjective. The static observations imply that social facts remain static and unchanged over a significant period, regardless of the perspective of respondents used in viewing them. However, under the subjective perception, the social reality dimensions shift and change based on the applied perception. The latter is a description of the interpretive philosophy (Bernard, 2006).

The developed study applied to interpretive philosophy. This is a philosophical view hat regarded the role of leaders on participating and supporting knowledge management and sharing as subjective. This is to mean the actual role and the areas of support of the process varied based on the contextual conditions in the organisations. As such, in addressing the study objectives, the analysis was guided by the understanding that the Miraas organisation has a unique operational context. This is in the form of its unique organisational structure, leadership styles and strategies, as well as the existing corporate culture. It is the combination of these factors that make the role and value of Miraas leadership process implications on the knowledge management process different (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2011).

Additionally, the perception of the role was bound to differ across the internal stakeholders involved in the process. This is based on their diversity and differences in beliefs, values, and regard for the leadership at the entity. Therefore, the study could not apply the positivist philosophy that would require the perception of the role of leadership as a static variable, rather than a subjective variable.

Research Approach

In developing and adopting a research approach, two variables are key. The first is the applied study philosophy. As Williamson and Johanson (2018) demonstrated, the applied study approach must be one that is compatible and aligns with the applied philosophy. On its part, the study analysis, as illustrated above, using the interpretive philosophy. This meant that it viewed data as subjective. Thus, this was an indication that the alternatives such as the triangulation and the quantitative data approaches were inapplicable. These are approaches that include the collection of quantitative data in a study. Such use of quantitative data was irrelevant as the study required subjective data. Thus, in aligning with the philosophy, the study adopted a qualitative data approach. This is an approach that enabled it sample and collects subjective non-quantifiable data for analysis (Bernard, 2006).

The second consideration factor in selecting a study research approach is the nature of the study objectives. The study’s primary objectives were on understanding the current procedures on knowledge management as well as the role played by the Miraas organisational leadership in developing effective knowledge management systems. Although there could be different strategies and roles played, these are dimensions that lack a key performance index (KPI) that is quantifiable. As such, there are no quantitative dimensions and measures that could be applied across the organisation by the respondents. Instead, the measure of the roles played, and the current situation in developing effective knowledge management systems was mostly subjective and based on the individual respondents’ perceptions. Hence, the study could not apply the approaches, including the use of quantitative data. Instead, the feasible plan for adoption and application was the qualitative approach. This is an approach that allowed for the inclusion of a diversity of perception and opinions on the leadership role in creating an effective knowledge management system at Miraas.

Research Strategy

Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2007) described a research strategy as the scope of a research study. This is the scope and threshold to which a research study extends to. Ideally, there are diverse strategies applicable to a research study. The study objectives inform the selection of a research strategy and predominantly the aim and expected value of the study findings. Different strategies impact differently on the value of conclusions obtained. For instance, under a case study strategy, the value is in the specificity of the obtained results. These are findings that are applicable in a specific context and situation. This is used when the context and situational variables differ from one entity to the next. However, the findings are not generalisable. This is a value derived trough the survey strategy. On its part, it allows for the generalisation of conclusions obtained to a large population base and scope. The practicability of the generalised results in specific organisational and context situations is often challenging (Bernard, 2006).

In the development of Miraas leadership role in developing practical knowledge management systems, the analysis focused on creating strategic findings and recommendations for the organisation. Ideally, the purpose of the established results was to support the decision-making process at Miraas. It was projected that the outcomes obtained would be used to pit areas of strengths for reinforcements and areas of leadership weakness for improvements. To realise this strategic objective, the study required a strategy that allowed for both the focusing on the specific organisational dimensions and offering particular organisational recommendations. This was achieved through the adoption of the Miraas organisational case study. With this, the study focused its data collection base on the organisation. This meant that its data collection base was limited to the organisational, mainly its internal stakeholders. The effect was the obtaining of organisational specific data with valuable practical recommendations.

Data Collection and Sampling

The next step is on data collection and determination of the respondents’ base and the ideal sources. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2007) noted that there are two main data sources, namely the primary and the secondary sources, respectively. The selection of each is pegged on the nature and availability of data. The primary data sources are used to acquire up to date and unavailable data. This is the scenario in the case of the Miraas organisational knowledge management systems. The organisation has not conducted a similar extensive study on the role of its leadership on its knowledge management systems. Thus, this means that secondary data as a source was inapplicable. Hence, the study settled for the adoption and collection of primary data.

In collecting primary qualitative data, there are fundamental to main data collection tools, namely the interviews and focus groups. The selection between the two is based on the study need, whether to establish an expert opinion (focus groups) or individual response and opinions (interviews) (Saunders, Thornhill and Lewis, 2009). On its part, the study focused on a typical subjective on the perspective role of leadership in supporting the knowledge management systems at Miraas. This is a non-expert topic. As such, this meant that there was no need or technical focus groups and expert interactions.

Additionally, the study target population was the internal organisational stakeholders, who are not experts in knowledge management. Hence, this meant that the focus group approach was inapplicable. Instead, the focus of the study was to examine the different internal stakeholders’ opinions on the organisational leadership contributions to successful knowledge management systems. This included a consideration of both majority and minority opinions. Thus, the study adopted semi-structured interviews (appendix 1).

In collecting the required data, the target population was significantly large, and the study could not include all the respondents. Thus, it used a sample base. This was a sample of 12 respondents selected through a non-probability purpose sampling technique. The inclusion criteria were hedged on the served department and management level. It was preferred that a mix of all departments were represented and the selected sample is one that had an understanding of the organisational leadership and knowledge management systems Hence, the respondents were from the middle-level management up the leadership hierarchy.

Data Analysis

The final aspect of a research study analysis is the data analysis stage. This is the step at which the obtained findings are analysed and interpreted. In the developed study, the review collected primary subjective data through interviews. At the interviewing stage, the researcher established interview transcripts. These were transcripts recorded verbatim of the interviewee’s responses. For those who agreed to it with direct consent, an audio recording of the interview sessions was established (Saunders, Thornhill and Lewis, 2009). The findings were then analysed through a qualitative thematic analysis model. This included the analysis of the responses for a majority and the minority responses obtained. The results were then analysed and compared o exiting literature for trends and patterns.

References

Williamson, K., & Johanson, G. (2018). Research methods: Information, systems, and contexts. Cambridge, MA Chandos publishing

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bernard, H. R. (2006). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.

Bernard, H. R. (2006). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2011). Research methods for business students. New Delhi: Pearson

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business Students. Pearson Education, UK.

Saunders, M. N. K., Thornhill, A., & Lewis, P. (2009). Research methods for business students. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Limited, 2009.