- 著者
-
藤田 誠
- 出版者
- 日本経営学会
- 雑誌
- 日本経営学会誌 (ISSN:18820271)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- vol.46, pp.52-59, 2021 (Released:2022-05-18)
- 参考文献数
- 22
In the field of management research, although the number of quantitative studies has grown, we lack a robust theoretical and conceptual framework. Thus, we need to develop and advance theoretical construction in this area. In this paper, I suggest that we reconsider the scientific qualification of quantitative studies in management research and understand the usefulness of mixed methods for developing research. With reference to discourses regarding the philosophy of critical rationalism, we see that inductive reasoning from a singular statement, such as the description of an observation or experiment, to universal statements, such as a theory, is not logically justified. In contrast, neo-pragmatists insist that the difference between analytical and comprehensive propositions is obscure because it is impossible to define concepts in the former. Therefore, we can use inductive methods in management studies, although we still need to offer logical reasoning for business phenomena. In scientific discovery, the method of abduction starts with observations and then attempts to find the most likely conclusion from the observations. It is a logically false reasoning method, but has been adopted by many scientists in the course of the development of natural science. This method has also been adopted by management scholars. The mixed methods approach is a way to execute abduction studies, a combination of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analyses. In triangulation design, quantitative and qualitative methods are used within a time framework. Furthermore, while embedded design employs qualitative methods in quantitative methods or vice versa, explanatory design conducts quantitative methods followed by qualitative methods. The latter performs quantitative analyses after qualitative research. It is the only way to conduct research in areas of study which are underdeveloped.