Research methodologies

A methodology refers to the way that the researcher conducts the research process. There are several research methodologies from which the

researcher must choose to achieve the research goal. According to Morgan (2014, p. 3), “different methods have different strengths” and

shortcomings; therefore, the choice of the right methodology involves decisions. Opoku et al. (2016, p. 33) agree that this choice is difficult and should be based on the researcher’s “convictions, beliefs, and interests”

(Jonker & Pennink, 2009; Morgan, 2014; Opoku et al., 2016).

Regardless of the considerable subjectivity involved in the selection of a methodology, the researcher should ensure that the one to be selected always presents three main characteristics: suitability, feasibility, and ethical practices. The methodology to be adopted should serve the research purpose by providing suitable types of data to answer the research questions. It should be feasible by allowing the researcher to conduct the research in a practical manner, and it should ensure honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of data and possible conflict of interests. However, the choice for a given methodology will be dictated effectively by the researcher’s interests, namely: the aim of the research he/she intends to conduct, the type of information needed to accomplish such an aim, target groups, and available samples

(Denscombe, 2010; Opoku et al., 2016).

Harrits (2011, p. 152) states that a research paradigm is a common research practice in a research community that has a shared identity and set of problems. Ménacère (2016, p. 42) identifies a consensus among authors when saying, “[A] paradigm is a set of beliefs and assumptions about the world.” Saunders et al. (2019, p. 143) describe research paradigms as research approaches, stating that there are distinctions between the former and research philosophies, also called “schools of thought”.

60

According to Saunders et al. (2019, p. 130), a research philosophy is a

“system of beliefs and assumptions about the development of knowledge,”

which is the research process of developing knowledge for a field. There are five main philosophies: positivism, postmodernism, interpretivism, critical realism, and pragmatism.

The pragmatic research philosophy is relevant to the present research since it “asserts that concepts are only relevant where they support action”

(Saunders et al., 2019, p. 151). In pragmatist research, the researcher starts developing its research to achieve a practical solution to a problem or an improvement of a practice. This research philosophy aims to attain practical outcomes in research development rather than abstract ideas (Saunders et al., 2019).

During the research process, different methodologies and data collection methods were used. Johnson et al. (2007) affirm that mixed-methods research has pragmatism as its philosophy. Morgan (2014, p. 8) describes pragmatism as a “paradigm of choices,” which is an appropriate description of mixed-methods research, a complex process that involves several choices.

Therefore, this dissertation follows a pragmatic research philosophy using mixed-methods research approaches. This section will briefly provide an explanation of the research methodologies used. The reason for

choosing the action research methodology was due to its collaborative approach. This methodology allows the researcher to participate and be involved in a study’s activities. The choice of the DSR methodology derives from it being a methodology that targets the development of software with practical applicability.

3.1.1 Mixed-methods research

According to Johnson et al. (2007, p. 123), mixed methods is a type of research where there is a combination of “elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches,” such as distinct data collection

methods, techniques, and viewpoints, to achieve a deeper understanding of the subject. Mixed-method research entails “concrete operations at the technique level of research” where there is the combination and

61 integration of qualitative and quantitative techniques (Sandelowski, 2000, p. 248).

Mixed-methods research has three main characteristics: It uses

qualitative and quantitative approaches, focuses on the link between these approaches, and emphasizes the use of practical approaches in research problems (Denscombe, 2010).

Mixed-methods research is “not dependent on a specific issue or topic of study,” allowing the researcher to examine a variety of problems when only one data collection method is insufficient (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011, p. 18). However, the research design must also link the research’s purposes to its procedures. Thus, the researcher must clearly understand its purposes when combining both qualitative and quantitative methods (Morgan, 2014).

3.1.2 Action research methodology

Action research methodology is a pragmatic research approach that incorporates theory with practice by reflecting on a problem and implementing changes to solve it. This methodology addresses the

“complex real-life problems” and concerns of the practitioners (Avison et al., 1999, p. 95), which leads to actions to find a solution and then a

reflection to reach the best solution (Mackenzie et al., 2012; Somekh, 1995).

Action research consists of three recurrent phases (diagnosis, action, and reflection) that involve both researchers and practitioners in the cycle of activities (Figure 10). According to Mackenzie et al. (2012, p. 12), this iterative process allows “continual improvement” on the knowledge and understanding acquired in the diagnosis phase.

Being a methodology that involves the researchers and practitioners in the activities, “a process of participatory observation is implied,” which grants the researchers an interpretivist viewpoint (Baskerville, 1999, p. 7).

By allowing the researchers also to be part of the study, they can observe the iterations, deeply understand the processes, and gather meaningful observations. Action research is a collaborative methodology that

“enhances the competencies of the respective actors” (Baskerville, 1999, p.

7).

62

Figure 10. Action research methodology cycles (Adapted from Baskerville, 1999; Baskerville & Wood-Harper, 1998).

3.1.3 Design science research

Design science research (DSR) methodology addresses the development and improvement of solutions for relevant problems. This methodology can be seen as iterative three-cycle research (Figure 11). The cycles are relevance, rigor, and design cycle. The relevance cycle provides the context in which the problem occurs. The rigor cycle supports the background knowledge for the framework development. The design cycle involves all the cycles to build and develop an artefact. After the artefact’s

development, the design cycle ensures its evaluation to identify

weaknesses and improvements. This process leads to the development of alternatives to be implemented. The iterative feature of DSR methodology allows an evaluation and redesign loop that enables the constant

improvement of the artefact (Article VI; Article VII; Hevner, 2007; Hevner &

March, 2003; March & Storey, 2008).

63 Figure 11. Design science research cycles (Hevner et al., 2004)