The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods provides perspectives on topics relevant to research in the field of business and management
For general enquiries email administrator@ejbrm.com
Click here to see other Scholarly Electronic Journals published by API
For a range of research text books on this and complimentary topics visit the Academic Bookshop
Information about The European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies is available here

linkedin-120 

 

twitter2-125 

 

fb_logo-125 

 

Journal Article

Managing the Fear Factor (or how a Mini‑Viva Assessment can Improve the Process of Learning for International Students)  pp83-92

Susan Sayce

© Jul 2007 Volume 5 Issue 2, ECRM 2007, Editor: Ann Brown, pp37 - 124

Look inside Download PDF (free)

Abstract

This paper is about an exploration of international business students' learning through the use of mini‑vivas as a form of assessment. It also includes an investigation of the meaning of a mini‑viva for students who come from a wide range of nationalities. Pedagogical research has indicated that using this form of summative assessment for large cohorts of international students may be problematic (Carless 2002). However, experimentation with this model of assessment with MA business students in research methods has indicated that mini‑vivas can enhance and consolidate the learning potential of international students. So in effect this paper is also about explaining why this has happened in relation to students' learning.

 

Keywords: international students, research methods, mini-viva, deep learning, assessment

 

Share |

Journal Article

Millennial Students and Technology Choices for Information Searching  pp73-76

Martin Rich

© Sep 2008 Volume 6 Issue 1, ECRM 2008, Editor: Ann Brown, pp1 - 94

Look inside Download PDF (free)

Abstract

This paper draws together ideas about different generations of students, notably the 'millennial generation' (born from around 1982 to 2000) which encompasses a high proportion of current students in higher education, and ideas about the different types of technology available when searching for information. In the context of higher education, this is particularly relevant when students are encouraged to find out information for themselves, typically to relate this to taught material. This is connected with information literacy, as it reflects students' abilities to carry out simple or complex research. This paper focuses on why students choose particular technologies to support their research and the effect of these choices on their learning and on their written work. A particular current issue is the emergence of the generation of Internet resources collectively known as 'web 2.0' notably Blogs and Wikis — and the relationship of these to the way that students presently in universities favour structuring their work. These resources also introduce issues of authoritativeness. It is tempting to dismiss wikipedia as the work of amateurs, but where a blog has been created by a notable expert, author, or journalist, questions arise as to whether the blog should be regarded as of different value from the same person's written work. Therefore some consideration will be given to how students can be encouraged to recognise and draw on intelligent exploitation of these new resources. Underlying data for the paper is drawn from discussions with current students, both individually and in groups.

 

Keywords: Millennial students, Web 2.0, information literacy

 

Share |

Journal Article

Research Philosophy Debates and Classifications: Students’ Dilemma  pp132-140

Marcia Mkansi, Edwin Asiamah Acheampong

© Dec 2012 Volume 10 Issue 2, ECRM, Editor: Ann Brown, pp53 - 153

Look inside Download PDF (free)

Abstract

Research philosophy classifications such as ontology, epistemology, and anxiology and their conflicting applications to the ‘quantitative‑qualitative’ debates, are a major source of dilemma to research students in establishing their relevance to subjects areas and discipline. A number of studies have used different descriptions, categorisations and classifications of research paradigms and philosophies in relation to research methods with overlapping emphasis and meanings. This has not only resulted in tautological confusion of what is rooted where, and according to whom; but raises a critical question of whether these opposing views are enriching knowledge or subtly becoming toxic in the field? . This paper puts forth a student voice towards these debates and aims to provoke research advocates from their peripheral standpoint to become concerned about this subtle but deepening concern of students and their future impacts. A concerted effort in this direction should eventually result in the development of a planned, systematic framework and procedure that show some consensus to bail research students from these bewildering classifications and debates. The paper briefly reviews, discusses, and analyses these research philosophy classifications and debates and provides a mapping thereby through literature. Then, assesses how they impact on research students through case studies based on three North West Universities in the UK. Responses were elicited using structured interview questionnaires where students fall into different faculties and subject groupings for comparison purposes. Although the findings paint a grim picture of research, they are not conclusive to all UK students as the sample studied is skewed geographically. Future studies must survey the impact from other geographical locations. It is the conglomeration of these studies that will provide the ‘real’ magnitude of the impact on research students. This paper contributes to discussions on research methods and calls for a consensus in the field of research.

 

Keywords: research philosophy, debates, students, dilemma

 

Share |

Journal Article

Innovative Methodologies in Qualitative Research: Social Media Window for Accessing Organisational Elites for interviews  pp157-167

Efrider Maramwidze-Merrison

© Nov 2016 Volume 14 Issue 2, Editor: Ann Brown, pp71 - 167

Look inside Download PDF (free)

Abstract

Reflexivity is the nature of qualitative research (Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Morgan an Smircich, 1980); implying that through reflectivity exercises researchers are able to demonstrate their research's rigour and also create a treasure trove of ideas and strategies, share the pleasures and agonies of doing qualitative research. The ever‑growing body of knowledge on the strategies for accessing research participants that researchers share, evidences the gains of reflexivity (see the newly injected literature Cunliffe and Alcadipani, 2016; Blix and Wettergren, 2015; Mikecz, 2012). Well, this article does the same; it reflects on the access methodology employed for a PhD research (Maramwidze, 2015) carried out to explore the challenges faced by Foreign Direct Investors (FDI) in the South African banking sector, which involved sampling elite respondents. Similar to other researchers' views on accessing potential research participants, in this case organisational elites, the researcher faced challenges associated with gaining access; as well as the usually high cost of conducting face‑to‑face qualitative interviews.

 

Keywords: Keywords: Reflexivity in qualitative research, organisational elites, innovative and diplomatic access strategies, social media, LinkedIn, research students, teaching research methods

 

Share |

Journal Issue

Volume 5 Issue 2, ECRM 2007 / Jul 2007  pp37‑124

Editor: Ann Brown

View Contents Download PDF (free)

Editorial

The 5th European Conference on Research Methods in Business and Management attracted a wide range of papers. The conference fell naturally into a number of key themes organized into mini tracks. These included a number of different methods (Action research, Grounded Theory, Ethnography), specific issues (Teaching Research Methods) and philosophical paradigms (Critical approaches to research). A strong sub theme within all tracks was the concern with the complex problems that business and management research poses. The quality of the papers was high and the selection of those papers for the Journal presented a difficult choice. The papers selected were chosen for their quality of writing and relevance to the Journal’s objective of publishing papers that offer new insights or practical help in the application of research methods in business research.

The papers deal with the problems facing management researchers in a variety of ways. Most papers focus on the problems of applying research qualitative methods. The papers by Chester et al, Gehrels, Rodon and Pastor, and Vasconcelos all present case examples analysed from an interpretivist view using methods like Action Research and Grounded Theory Methods. Several papers confront the ambiguity and conflict inherent in researching people and their actions as they carry out their jobs (Mendy, Wagner and Brooke). The teaching research mini track was received with particular enthusiasm and one of the chosen papers is from this group (Sayce). A few papers adopt a traditional positivist stance creating new constructs (Schutz et al; Phillips and Phillips).

 

Keywords: action diagrams, arenas/social worlds theory, assessment, case study, coding paradigm, compliance, critical research, deep learning, discourse analysis, driving powers, epistemology, grounded theory, grounded theory, hospitality management curricula, ICT security, information systems adaptation, international students, inter-organizational IS implementation, language, learning, methodological dilemmas, mini-viva, organizational misbehaviour, performance assessment, performance constructs, print-catalogs, public transit, research methods, stakeholder, Straussian approach, theory and practice, transit performance, upper segment restaurants, usability scale implementation, value systems, verbal protocols

 

Share |

Journal Issue

Volume 6 Issue 1, ECRM 2008 / Sep 2008  pp1‑94

Editor: Ann Brown

View Contents Download PDF (free)

Editorial

The 7th European Conference on Research Methods in Business and Management attracted a wide range of papers. The conference fell naturally into a number of key themes organized into mini tracks. These included a number of different methods (Action Research, Grounded Theory, Mixed Methods), specific issues (Teaching Research Methods, Information Systems Research) and philosophical issues (the role of Paradigms). The quality of the papers was particularly high and the selection from those papers for the Journal presented a difficult choice. The papers selected were chosen for their quality of writing, their relevance to the Journal’s objective of publishing papers that offer new insights or practical help in the application of research methods in business research and to represent as many of the major themes of the conference as possible.

The papers dealt with the problems facing management researchers in a variety of ways. The majority of the papers focused on the problems of applying a variety of techniques – some through the discussion of theoretical issues, others by case examples. The technique of mixed methods was discussed at the conference for the first time and two papers have been chosen to represent this theme – both of which describe case examples using the tool (Branka Krivokapic‑Skoko and Grant O'Neill, Barbara Crump and Keri Logan). This technique combines both qualitative and quantitative tools. Two papers have been chosen for their contribution towards improving our understanding of quantitative analysis tools (Daire Hooper, Joseph Coughlan and Michael R. Mullen; Elisa Chami‑Castaldi, Nina Reynolds and James Wallace). One of the tracks was on ‘researching sensitive issues’. For most contributors this meant an exploration of ethical issues for researchers or the complexity inherent in researching the life world of people as they carry out their jobs. One paper stood out from this track (Gisela Schulte‑Agyeman) for its insight and practical advice when researching such topics. Grounded Theory and the challenge of coaxing meaning from the vast mass of qualitative data that this approach creates, was a major issue for several tracks. Three papers discuss this approach to qualitative research (Svetla Georgieva, Teresa Waring and David Wainwright, Linda Dawson). The track on teaching research methods attracted several papers and one was chosen from this group (Martin Rich). The paper by Peter Bednar and Christine Welch, revisited the important topic of paradigm choice and its impact on research methods.

 

Keywords: action diagrams, arenas/social worlds theory, assessment, case study, coding paradigm, compliance, critical research, deep learning, discourse analysis, driving powers, epistemology, grounded theory, grounded theory, hospitality management curricula, ICT security, information systems adaptation, international students, inter-organizational IS implementation, language, learning, methodological dilemmas, mini-viva, organizational misbehaviour, performance assessment, performance constructs, print-catalogs, public transit, research methods, stakeholder, Straussian approach, theory and practice, transit performance, upper segment restaurants, usability scale implementation, value systems, verbal protocols

 

Share |