Research Methodology Explained

Introduction

According to Blair (2016), the introduction chapter of a research paper should clearly state the purpose of the study and show that the problem is worthy investigating. The research paper by Lo and Yeung (2006) defines its purpose as identifying the critical factors of a supply quality management (SQM) system that the leading manufacturing companies in Hong Kong have adopted in order to improve organisational quality performance. Although the authors do not directly indicate the importance of the paper in terms of its contribution to existing literature, they hint that there is scarce literature of the practices of SQM in Hong Kong, which shows there is need for more studies in this field thus justifying the need for this study. However, the authors do not outline the importance of the study in relation to quality management in the Hong Kong manufacturing firms.

Review of the Literature Reviewed

Hart (2018) argues that conducting literature review helps a researcher generate and refine research ideas while Saunders et al. (2016) hold that literature review helps a researcher gain a good knowledge of the research area. For these two reasons, a researcher must understand the reason for reviewing existing literature. In their study, Lo and Yeung (2006) reviewed existing literature in order gain a good understanding of the critical areas of an SQM system. As a result, the authors identified three critical areas of an SQM model which are supplier selection, supplier development, and supplier integration and based their review on these areas.

In my opinion, the authors do not critically evaluate existing literature. According to Denyer and Tranfield (2015), convincing literature review should be able to identify significant and the most relevant theories recognised by experts in the field of study. Lo and Yeung (2006) do not identify these theories, which makes their review of existing literature less convincing. To make the review more convincing, the authors would have considered theories of supply quality management and show how these theories affect their understanding of the research topic. Saunders et al. (2016) posit that while conducting a critical review, researchers should consider and discuss research that supports and that which opposes their ideas. Lo and Yeung (2006) do not identify research that support or oppose their ideas, which makes their review less convincing. For example, when reviewing literature on supplier selection, the authors argue that SQM systems require a shift in buyer-supplier relationship from short-term to long-term relationships but they do not consider research that supports or opposes this idea. Instead, the authors consider the characteristics of a customer-oriented supplier. Torraco (2016) notes that a critical literature review should make reasoned judgements regarding the value of others’ research and clearly show how it relates to the study at hand. In their study, Lo and Yeung do not assess the value of others’ research given they are not able to challenge the views they adopt. Additionally, the authors fail to show how the reviewed literature relates to their study.

Review of Research Methods

Lo and Yeung (2006) clearly explain their research methods and justify some of them. However, Saunder et al. (2016) note that research philosophy is important as it helps a researcher portray the assumptions held thus help readers understand how the authors perceive the world. In their study, Lo and Yeung (2006) came up with five phases in the methodology which included the theoretical foundation of the study, the study design, the development of research instrument, the data collection as well as validation of research instrument. Phase one of the methodology involves the literature review of the study, the industrial interview as well as construction of framework of the research. Moreover, it formed a theoretical background of the research. At phase two, mail survey was the major research design utilized since its time efficiency and cost effective especially in researching g a wide geographic region. Phase three was the construction of research instrument sector and developed instrument was addressed to four hundred executives for collecting data which is phase four. Finally, as peer the study, phase five collected data which was used to evaluate the validities and reliabilities of the scale items. This divisions validate the study and makes it reliable. Moreover, looking at the study, it is well informed which makes the study applicable globally. Sefotho (2015) states that the important issue is not whether a research is philosophically informed but how well the findings can be applied in the immediate context, which defends Lo and Yeung’s research methods. The authors clarify the adopted the mail survey as it is cost effective and time efficient. Looking at the study, Lo and Yeung (2006), made their research methods clearer, though, they failed to identify the target audience and the sampling techniques adopted (Saunders et al. 2016). The authors also failed to identify the sampling technique that was used to select the 400 companies. Additionally, the author failed to detail ethical considerations made during the study. For example, was approval sought from the 400 companies? was informed consent sought? How was confidentiality promoted? If the authors did more than explaining the purpose of the study, I believe they would have realised a higher response rate as compared to the 22.5% (90 responses out of the 400 mailed companies). The analysis of data is clear. The results are tabulated and correlations made. The authors also use the principal component analysis with Varimax rotation tool to reduce the 51 scale items to fewer component and justify this action using evidence. The authors also explain the measures to promoting reliability of their research findings (using the Cronbach’s Alpha), which gives me confidence in that conclusion of the research.

Conclusions

The conclusions of the study are aligned to knowledge in the information in the literature review section. For example, the study concludes that the critical constructs of an effective SQM model are supplier selection, supplier development, and supplier integration, which was earlier mentioned in the literature review chapter. In addition, the conclusion restates the purpose of the study and presents the 10 critical constructs of an SQM systems that the authors have extracted from the developed 48 scale items. The 10 constructs are then categorised in relations to supplier selection, supplier development, and supplier integration. Finally, the conclusions are clearly communicated and outlined as bullet points, which differentiates them from the rest of the content.

References

Blair, L., 2016. Writing a graduate thesis or dissertation. Brill Sense.

Denyer, D. and Tranfield, D., 2015. Doing a literature review in business and management. Sage.

Hart, C., 2018. Doing a literature review: Releasing the research imagination. Sage.

Lo, V.H. and Yeung, A., 2006. Managing quality effectively in supply chain: a preliminary study. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A., 2016. Research methods for business students (Seventh). Nueva York: Pearson Education.

Sefotho, M.M., 2015. A researcher’s dilemma: Philosophy in crafting dissertations and theses. Journal of Social Sciences, 42(1-2), pp.23-36.

Torraco, R.J., 2016. Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), pp.404-428.