Methodological choices of the study

The choice of the research approach is depending on the nature of the research. Most of research is executed between two opposite research philosophies; positivism and hermeneutic science.

Positivism is based on the ideas of August Comte (1798-1857) and the “father” of hermeneutics is Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834). The continuum in research traditions is shown in the Figure 7.

Figure 7 Research approaches in the continuum of research traditions (adapted from Hirsjärvi et al., 2008;

Kasanen et al., 1993; Olkkonen, 1993; Model, 2010)

This study links to the industrial engineering and management research tradition where both quantitative and qualitative methods can be used. The suitable research methods under quantitative and qualitative research are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Examples of quantitative and qualitative research (adapted from Eriksson and Kovalainen, 2008;

Myers, 2013)

The objective of this study is to understand the operations and actions of existing research institutions. As an outcome, novel development ideas are expected to be refined to tools for improving performance at the organization level.

The background described above was the reason why action research was selected as the main methodology in this study. The term action research has been introduced by Lewin (1946). Action research aims at understanding real world actions in a chosen research frame. According to Denscombe (2010), the purpose of the action research strategy is to solve a particular problem and to produce guidelines for best practice. Figure 8 illustrates the issue.

Figure 8 Systems model of the action-research process (Lewin, 1958)

Figure 8 summarizes the steps and processes involved in planned change through action research.

Action research is depicted as a cyclical process of change.

1. The cycle begins with a series of planning actions initiated by the client and the change agent working together. The principal elements of this stage include a preliminary diagnosis, data gathering, feedback of results, and joint action planning. In the language of systems theory, this is the input phase, in which the client system becomes aware of problems as yet unidentified, realizes it may need outside help to effect changes, and shares the process of problem diagnosis with the consultant.

2. The second stage of action research is the action, or transformation, phase. This stage includes actions related to learning processes (perhaps in the form of role analysis) and to planning and executing behavioral changes in the client organization. As shown in Figure 8, feedback at this stage would move via Feedback Loop A and would have the effect of altering previous planning to bring the learning activities of the client system into better alignment with the change objectives. Action-planning activity carried out jointly by the consultant and members of the client system is included in this stage. Following a workshop or learning sessions, these action steps are carried out on the job as part of the transformation stage.

3. The third stage of action research is the output or results phase. This stage includes actual changes in behavior (if any) resulting from corrective action steps taken after the second stage. Data are again gathered from the client system so that progress can be determined and necessary adjustments in learning activities made. Minor adjustments of this nature can be made in learning activities via Feedback Loop B.

Action research is problem-centered, client-centered, and action-oriented. It involves the client system in a diagnostic, active-learning, problem-finding and problem-solving process. The concepts and methods of action research have been studied by Argyris et al. (1985), the system level approach aiming at whole system change by Burns (2007), and the role of participative inquiry and practice by Reason and Bradbury (2007).

Linked to the action research methodology case studies are also used in this study. One case, LUT CST, was studied in several research contexts (value creation, Triple Helix and interest group management).

Thomas (2011) gives following definition of case study: "Case studies are analyses of persons, events, decisions, periods, projects, policies, institutions, or other systems that are studied holistically by one or more method. The case that is the subject of the inquiry will be an instance of

a class of phenomena that provides an analytical frame — an object — within which the study is conducted and which the case illuminates and explicates."

There is lots of literature available concerning case study design, and methods and the implementation of the results (Yin, 2009; Stake, 1995; Baxter and Jack, 2008). There is always a scientific risk present if the results of a single case with relatively limited data are generalized. In this study this risk is noted and also the conclusions are tightly focused on the case environment.

According to Saunders et al. (2009), one of the criteria for action research is that it is about the resolution of issues together with those that experience them directly. Action research may involve practitioners so that they collaborate with the researcher, and the researcher may also be a practitioner him/herself. A third characteristic is the process of action research, which is iterative.

This action process is depicted in Figure 9.

Figure 9 The action research spiral (Saunders et al. 2009).

The Figure 9 shows the nature of action research as a continuous process. After the diagnosis comes the planning of performance improvement. Plans are implemented and later evaluated before the next research spiral starts.

Qualitative analysis was executed during this research project as well. It was based on data collection, which is discussed in the following subchapter.