The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 

About: The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods is an academic journal published by Academic Conferences and Publishing International. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Qualitative research & Grounded theory. It has an ISSN identifier of 1477-7029. It is also open access. Over the lifetime, 220 publications have been published receiving 13308 citations. The journal is also known as: EJBRM & e-Journal of business research methods.

Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit

Abstract: The following paper presents current thinking and research on fit indices for structural equation modelling. The paper presents a selection of fit indices that are widely regarded as the most informative indices available to researchers. As well as outlining each of these indices, guidelines are presented on their use. The paper also provides reporting strategies of these indices and concludes with a discussion on the future of fit indices.

The Research Audit Trial - Enhancing Trustworthiness in Qualitative Inquiry

Abstract: Positivist and interpretivist researchers have different views on how their research outcomes may be evaluated. The issues of validity, reliability and generalisability, used in evaluating positivist studies, are regarded of relatively little significance by many qualitative researchers for judging the merits of their interpretive investigations. In confirming the research, those three canons need at least to be re-conceptualised in order to reflect the keys issues of concern for interpretivists. Some interpretivists address alternative issues such as credibility, dependability and transferability when determining the trustworthiness of their qualitative investigations. A strategy proposed by several authors for establishing the trustworthiness of the qualitative inquiry is the development of a research audit trail. The audit trail enables readers to trace through a researcher's logic and determine whether the study's findings may be relied upon as a platform for further enquiry. While recommended in theory, this strategy is rarely implemented in practice. This paper examines the role of the research audit trail in improving the trustworthiness of qualitative research. Further, it documents the development of an audit trail for an empirical qualitative research study that centred on an interpretive evaluation of a new Information and Communication Technology (ICT) student administrative system in the tertiary education sector in the Republic of Ireland. This research study examined the impact of system introduction across five Institutes of Technology (IoTs) through case study research that incorporated multiple evidence sources. The evidence collected was analysed using a grounded theory method, which was supported by qualitative data analysis software. The key concepts and categories that emerged from this process were synthesized into a cross case primary narrative; through reflection the primary narrative was reduced to a higher order narrative that presented the principle findings or key research themes. From this higher order narrative a theoretical conjecture was distilled. Both a physical and intellectual audit trail for this study are presented in this paper. The physical audit trail documents all keys stages of a research study and reflects the key research methodology decisions. The intellectual audit trail, on the other hand, outlines how a researcher's thinking evolved throughout all phases of the study. Hence, these audit trails make transparent the key decisions taken throughout the research process. The paper concludes by discussing the value of this audit trail process in confirming a qualitative study's findings.

The Use of Grounded Theory Technique as a Practical Tool for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis

Abstract: 1. IntroductionOne of the main problems of conducting interpretive qualitative research is to decide an appropriate starting point for the research, and the basic framework within which the data will be collected and analysed. Qualitative studies tend to produce large amounts of data that are not readily amenable to mechanical manipulation, analysis and data reduction (Yin, 1984). It not only generates large amount of data, but it generates data in a non standard format which makes analysis problematic (Turner, 1983). Qualitative analysis provides an opportunity for the researcher to gain information and gather insights that may be overlooked with traditional data analysis techniques. The analysis of the case study is done in pursuant to guidance provided by many scholars in this field, (such as Glaser, 1978; Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Lofland and Lofland, 1984; and Taylor and Bogdan, 1984).The process of data analysis in qualitative research involves working with data, organising it, breaking it down, synthesising it, searching for patterns, discovering what is important and what is to be learned, and deciding what you will tell others (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982). Spradley (1979) refers to analysis as a systematic examination of something to determine its parts, the relationship among parts, and their relationship to the whole. While Miles and Huberman (1984) describe data analysis as consisting of three concurrent activities - data reduction refers to the process of selecting, simplifying, abstracting and transforming the new case data. They argue that data collection and data analysis should overlap to allow for flexibility in data collection procedures so that the researcher remains open to new ideas or patterns which may emerge.There are many ways of analysing qualitative data and a number of approaches were considered such as hermeneutics, content analysis and semiotics (Myers, 1997). These approaches come from diverse fields and all offer the possibility of different insights on the data. These approaches were evaluated from the perspective of whether the approach draws on all features of case study and whether the philosophy of the approach imposes any pre-existing theories. Eisenhardt (1989) suggests that theory building research must begin as close as possible to the ideal of no theory under consideration and no hypotheses to test since preordained theoretical perspectives may bias and limit the findings.The objective of the case study research was the development of a conceptual model that explains the adoption of Internet in small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the objective of the study fits well with the philosophical nature of grounded theory. Accordingly, proponents of the grounded theory advocate that an approach which concerns itself with the meanings, definitions, and interpretations which are made by the subjects of the study has greater potential for depicting their world and priorities more accurately than methods which begin by preconceiving the world and its meaning (De Burca and McLoughlin, 1996). The researcher did not come to the field with a well-defined set of constructs and instruments with which to measure the social reality; rather the researcher derives the categories from the field by in-depth examination and exposure to the phenomenon.The selection of grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Glaser, 1978; Strauss, 1987; Strauss and Corbin, 1990, 1998) amongst a myriad of other qualitative methods is not arbitrary but rather because it has been a dominant paradigm for social research (Hughes and Jones, 2003) and its use is increasing in the IS field. This is evidenced by the growing literature that is either discursive on philosophy and application or detailed about method (Toraskar, 1991; Orlikowski, 1993; Baskerville and Pries-Heje, 1999; Trauth, 2000; Hughes and Howcroft, 2000; Urquhart, 2001). Hughes and Jones (2003) note that more researchers are taking up qualitative studies, it is therefore worth reflecting on lessons learned from the practical application of the method. …

Mixed Methods Research: the Five Ps Framework

Abstract: 1. IntroductionMixed method research is a growing area of methodological choice for many academics and researchers from across a variety of discipline areas. Tashakkori and Teddlie (2010b: 803-804) refers to the MM community which has:gone through a relatively rapid growth spurt it has acquired a formal methodology that did not exist before and is subscribed to by an emerging community of practitioners and methodologists across the disciplines. In the process of developing a distinct identity, as compared with other major research communities of researchers in the social and human sciences, mixed methods has been adopted as the de facto third alternative, or "third methodological movement"'.The definition of MMR remains are contested area. Johnson, Onwuegbuzie and Turner (2007) asked 21 researchers for a definition of MM and received 19 responses. These definitions were diverse and were differentiated in terms of what was being mixed, the stage in the research process were the mixing occurred, the extend of the mixing, the purpose of the mixing and the drive behind the research. There are limitations as to the extent at which this paper can delve into these definitional debates and as a result definitions utilised by prominent mixed methodologists have been chosen for this paper.The Journal of Mixed Methods (2006), in its call for papers defines mixed methods as 'research in which the investigator collects, analyses, mixes, and draws inferences from both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study or a program of inquiry'. A more comprehensive definition is provided by Creswell and Plano Clark (2007: 5) who define mixed methods as follows:Mixed methods research is a research design with philosophical assumptions as well as methods of inquiry. As a methodology, it involves philosophical assumptions that guide the direction of the collection and analysis of data and the mixture of qualitative and quantitative data in a single study or series of studies. Its central premise is that the use of quantitative and qualitative approaches in combination provides a better understanding of research problems that either approach alone.Teddlie and Tashakkori (2010: 5) define the methodology of MM as: "The broad inquiry logic that guides the selection of specific methods and that is informed by conceptual positions common to mixed methods practitioners (e.g., the rejection of "either-or" choices at all levels of the research process). For us, this definition of methodology distinguishes the MMR approach to conducting research from that practiced in either the QUAN or QUAL approach".This paper will explore the challenges of undertaking mixed methods research through a conceptual framework referred to as the Five Ps of mixed methods research. The Five Ps tend to cover the key categories of challenges that arise from mixed methods research designs. They include philosophical considerations and approaches, as well as methodological choices and processes, competencies, practicalities and political considerations. The Five Ps are aligned against two frameworks for mapping the contemporary MMR landscape before a more detailed discussion on each of the Five Ps is progressed. The paper concludes with options for developing research capacity in MMR.The five Ps of mixed methods researchSeveral mixed methods proponents acknowledge the controversies/crises/challenges that face those embarking on mixed methods research (Mingers 2001; Tashakkori and Teddlie 2003; Onwuegbuzie and Collins 2007). Mingers (2001) described in detail four types of barriers to multimethod research however he also argues these are not insurmountable. The barriers identified are: philosophical; cultural; psychological (cognitive); and practical. Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003: 672) identified six continuing points of controversy in mixed methods design and expanded this in 2010 to nine important issues or controversies in contemporary MMR (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2010a). …

Issues and challenges in the use of template analysis: twocomparative case studies from the field

Abstract: One of the most problematic issues for researchers who conduct qualitative research using semi-structured, unstructured interviews or story telling data collection methods is the analysis of large quantities of rich data. In the past this has often led to fairly unmethodical approaches to analysis which in turn has led to qualitative business and management research being seen as insubstantial and unworthy of consideration. A relatively recent development in organisational research has been the application of Template Analysis to rich unstructured qualitative data following the primary data collection phase. Template Analysis appears to have emerged from the USA during the 1990s and academics familiar with the Grounded Theory approach to data analysis may see similarities in the techniques used. Nevertheless, it has gained credibility in the UK through the work of Nigel King and other colleagues researching in health and sociology related fields. This paper provides an overview of the origins of Template Analysis and discusses how it has been used to structure qualitative data. It then goes on to examine through two case studies how Template Analysis has been extended and used by the authors in two different research projects. Both case studies involved the study of Information and Communication Technology. In the first case study the research team worked within a Primary Care Trust in the North East of England and the second project focused on the NHS Secondary Care sector. This paper critically examines these two case studies in terms of their particular research philosophy, epistemological approach and the lessons learnt from the techniques employed. The paper then provides a discussion of the principles and practicalities of template analysis and explores the benefits to the business and management research community at large.