Concepts related to Emotions
Emotionally charged knowledge. Emotionally charged knowledge is more holistic since it involves mind and body, Keegan (2009). From a practical standpoint, this means that is important for practitioner-manager to unlock emotions through the research Vince (2004).
Rigour. From a practitioner-manager view the process of generating knowledge throughout achieves intellectual rigor. For example, “instant debrief” after fieldwork immediately replaces “reports written later”. Participants interpretation of research vs the researcher’s analysis or presentation provide a more rigorous approach to unlock knowledge otherwise tacit with participants.
Creative thinking. Creative thinking was associated with emotions, Damasio (2000). It is critically important for the practitioner manager to unlock them to gain and deeper understanding of the issues being investigated. Along the same lines Gordon and Langmaid (1988) highlighted the importance of understanding confusion as a means to “ understanding something.”
Conclusion.
“Emergent inquiry” provides practitioner managers with powerful methods to conduct rigorous research. Clearly though, such methods have to be placed within a theoretical or ontological and epistemological underpinning in order to maintain rigor. The emergent inquiry reshapes the researcher identity. From one hand, the researcher looses some elements of power to clients and participants for the sake of greater participation. From another hand the researcher or in this case the practitioner manager gain a more rigorous research and better data quality Keegan (2009).
The iterative knowledge creation and participatory approach, discussed above reinforce the validity of action research to conduct rigorous research and solve workplace-based problem. In our contemporary world were change is continuously affecting relationships of things around us, emergent inquiry is a powerful method to study such relationships and unlock the knowledge the research seeks. Without such factoring emotions into the research for example, the research would be practically invalid. The researcher is best positioned to disseminate knowledge because he/she is the one who created such knowledge and has an appreciation of what is in it. To devolve such task to any one else risk loosing the rigor of the research and loosing the essence of the research.
Last week we discussed, debated and challenged the relationships between academic theory and practice and the most appropriate role of research in the business environment. It was an interesting week of continued critique to support what is the best lens for insight to provide the optimal mode to enhance the scholar-practitioner experience. Ultimately, appreciation of what our underlying audience expects should govern our processes, as well as what we expect from ourselves in the process, in order to dictate the importance of rigor, relevance, or a collaboration thereof.
As iterated last week, learning alone can only result in substandard application (Dibb, S. & Simkin, L., 2009, p. 224). However, practice alone without a foundation of theory can result in substandard interpretation, reflection and analysis (Keegan, S., 2009, p. 238). Does academic theory and practice play a significant role independently? Absolutely. Can both play a better role if harmonized collectively? As debated last week, this is exactly what we are undertaking throughout our studies thus far with the University of Liverpool, and supported significantly by both Jenlink (2009) as he reflects on his mirror theory as both a leader practitioner and as a professor of leadership, as well as Keegan’s (2009) philosophy of emergent inquiry.
While we are stressed to become doctoral-level thinkers, critical action learners and action researchers, one can only appreciate the emotionally-charged tone of Keegan (2009) in encouragement of qualitative thinking as one appreciates the role of emotion involved in business management and decision making processes. Albeit emotion prompts instinctive thoughts of losing one’s head, Keegan invokes an understanding of utilizing emotion as a rational tool versus that of being reactive. As a researcher, intuition is given great credence as noisemaking has become more of an acceptable social constructivism trait today than traditional means of the past.
Keegan impresses that, while the role of researcher and client have overlapped of late to that of a co-creation methodology, it is important to recognize what the stakeholder ultimately expects, as noted above. If a structured “traditional” approach is expected, then that is what should be adhered (p. 236), and the exact opposite holds true with a more progressive stakeholder expectation. The importance is for the researcher to be self-aware to most appropriately apply a more empirical traditional approach, a constructivist creation of ongoing reality, or a collaboration of both (p. 237).
With this in mind, our debates of last week were all of significance and relevance, and we will all approach our thesis in varying ways based on this knowledge. As a self-professed social constructivist, I will look to strive for “the edge of chaos” (p. 239) in hopes of promoting more tacit knowledge generation and contribution to a progressive theory, with this emotionally-charged and evolving noisemaking in a very encouraged nonlinear mode. This emergent inquiry invokes a shared power by all parties involved (p. 243), and arguably, a more relevant appreciation for our studies themselves as we immerse ourselves to further bridge the rigor-relevance debate as we become process consultants (p. 244).
From an experiential standpoint, I had the pleasure today of speaking with an academic colleague of mine who is attending a different institution. We were exchanging notes with respect to our experiences to date, and she was absolutely ecstatic with the excitement I portrayed by our interactions at the University of Liverpool, which she has not had the same pleasure. Speaking along the lines of a novice researcher of course, I certainly do not profess to be anywhere close to possessing all knowledge necessary; however, from our exchanged notes, I can certainly attest that our knowledge creation to date, along with the critical reflection and action learning we have been involved, is certainly far more progressive than the experiences she has shared with me.
So, for that very reason, when I run across literature that speaks “to” me, rather than “at” me, such as Keegan’s emergent inquiry, I am grateful. Her internal debates and paradigm challenges were constructively presented, with a reflection and appreciation of both classical methodologies as well as commercial practitioner highlights. This, along with Jenlink’s (2009) experiential appreciations as a scholar and practitioner, gives us as novice researchers an acknowledgement that it is okay for us to be questioning of what methodologies will be best for us, that uncertainty is not a bad thing, and that these debates are to be appreciated as opportunities, rather than threats, during our academic careers. In other words, our own critical reflections are continuing to grow, and I am sure I share the same experiences that my own critical thinking has evolved exponentially over the past four modules. This alone, is an attestation to the bridge of rigor and relevance and its importance.
Commercial business research: its components and applications
Introduction
Qualitative research can span a wide variety of methodologies, is influenced by a broad range of factors the key is which is the purpose of the study. Qualitative studies draw strength and versatility from the ability to provide textual descriptions of peoples’ experience that pertains to the issue being considered (Bryman & Bell, 2015). They can present the human side of a phenomenon such as beliefs, opinion, often contradictory behaviors, emotions, as well as individual relationships. Qualitative methods are also imperative in identifying imperceptible factors such as socioeconomic status, social norms, gender roles and religion, whose role in the phenomenon may not be readily discernable (Jenlink, 2009).
The primary purpose of business research, however, is to unbiased and structured perspectives that allow business firms to provision their customers with the most appropriate goods and services and to deliver them in the most efficient manner (Jenlink, 2009). As such most firms are rather inclined towards commercial qualitative research, which serves to help guide the business decision made by the clients. The purpose of the study is to determine primarily perceived usefulness; if the client cannot make better decisions, it holds no value. On the contrary, academic research is primarily concerned with generating knowledge. Consequently, there exists a great disparity in perspectives, styles and approaches to methodologies and analytical styles between the two distinct approaches (Keegan, 2009).
What is commercial qualitative research?
Traditionally, commercial qualitative research was rooted in scientific principles but has over the years tended towards a fluid exploratory approach. The research participants are viewed as co-creators of the research outcomes; the members are regarded as experts based on their experiences, while the researchers have to apply their expertise in the context of the participants’ experiences for the benefits of the client, as well as the consumers (Keegan, 2009). Thus, commercial qualitative research is rapidly moving from the detached observer data gathering approach and is increasingly gravitating towards a social construction, which delves into the cultural and historical context. From this new perspective, the knowledge gained by an individual is based on their interpretation of the world which is adversely influenced by their social and cultural settings (Keegan, 2009).
Commercial qualitative research is credited with the ability to make the connection between various factors, improvisations, and its flexibility to include new emergent information. As such, it has been possible to incorporate new scientific breakthroughs that make it
What is the role of emotional response in commercial research?
The emotional concept, on the other hand, takes cognizance that decision-making in the human brain involves more than rational thoughts, and the role emotions play in making these decisions (Keegan, 2009). It postulates that experiences are a culmination of a whole body learning experience, central to which is the emotional status of the concerned individual. This concept is premised on the fact that opinions and feelings are informed by past experiences or future expectations that are centered on around emotions. Therefore, emotion is critical and a necessary component of experiential learning and underpins research findings. When researchers incorporate emotions in research findings, they can gain a deeper insight into the issue being investigated (Keegan, 2009).
What are the components of an emergent inquiry?
Therefore, if any practitioner needs to investigate the effects of introducing an electronic procurement system into the work place, they would be better placed to incorporate the concept of emergence and emotions into the research methodologies in order to have a full understanding of the effect of these changes on the stakeholders. It is, therefore, important for the researcher to conduct an emergent inquiry i.e. a collaborative action research often viewed as an ongoing iterative learning process (Keegan, 2009). As such the research process involves all parties that are affected by these changes affected, and leaves room for effects that are realized after the process has been implemented by were not as apparent from the onset.
In an emergent inquiry, the problem definition is carried out in a broader context that includes all the stakeholders as well as opposed to the clients defining the problem themselves. As such a manager should incorporate views from the workers as part of the organizational learning and change development, and encompasses views from the workers. Such consultations would define the problem being investigated, and valid research parameters instituted. After the sudy has been completed, the researcher is also charged with helping to disseminate the study’s outcome and helping the employees put the results into practical use (Keegan, 2009). Taking on this approach minimizes opposition, and everyone in the organization gets to be part of the change process.
Conclusion
The inquiry method is an efficient way to carry out commercial qualitative research as it encompasses views and inputs from the stakeholders, adopts new and versatile approaches and is fluid in its execution. Consequently, the researchers can gain better insight into areas that were previously lost to them.
