The discussion presented will seek to identify and describe the use of the methods identified in the management of organizational change and productivity within the third world. In a report by Beach, Muhlemann, Price, Paterson, and Sharp, it was reported that the use of quantitative methods alone could not be adequate in capturing the essence of a complex subject as production management research. The team performed a study that identified that quantitative research was best suited to specific aspects of manufacturing but inappropriate for the assessment of the entire process. It is known that flexibility is a strategic objective in manufacturing organizations. Large mass producers tend to attempt to attain this through controlling the operating environment as opposed to responding to changes within the environment.
Traditional concepts are interested in measuring and observation and thus prefer the use of quantitative techniques. However, qualitative techniques which violate these rules have proven to be effective in providing facts on various processes. Qualitative techniques such as case studies have proven to be effective in the identification of problem areas. Further investigation during the study indicated that no single method has been able to provide a realistic assessment of the manufacturing environment. The rigid approach of quantitative studies and the risk associated with qualitative studies make both inappropriate. A combination of methodologies is thus suggested to be a better and more effective measure for studies in a manufacturing environment.
In the previous section, the discussion presented focused on identifying when to use which technique. In a similar fashion, with a view to management of organizational change and productivity, it would be best to identify how to employ the techniques as opposed to which technique to use for whatever purposes. It is reported that merely selecting an appropriate technique may not be adequate for our purposes if its implementation is not carried out in a manner that will bring about the best results.
Regarding productivity, research in this sphere is mainly involved with the measurement of processes and the people involved in the processes. Whereas the processes may be easily measured, the people involved and their behavior and influence in the production process may not be as easily measured. Traditional measures of productivity only measured the ratio of inputs to outputs. The modern business environment uses a more comprehensive assessment of productivity, with successful entities focusing more on customer and employee-based measurements.
Given the scenario described above, it would therefore appear that the rigid procedures of quantitative approaches though useful, should be adopted to allow the incorporation of more important yet difficult to measure aspects. As stated by Westerman, the entire process of research is interpretive. This should no doubt include the key process of measuring. The practice of excluding from research data that can not be measured should be replaced with a new idea of finding ways to quantify these essential aspects.
Another important point mentioned in the paper refers to the fact that though much controversy has arisen time and again about the use of various measures, these measures are merely pointers to certain facts. In future research, therefore, it may be essential to consider what facts the studies intend to unearth as opposed to what tools will be used in the process. The new concept can be considered an alternative measurement theory so long as it follows scientific principles in arriving at the conclusions.
Research is widely used within the developing world to identify problems and provide solutions that address these problems. This case is illustrated in a study by Place, Adato, & Hebinck to assess rural poverty and agricultural investment in Western Kenya. More specifically, the study was focused on identifying whether the rural populations were utilizing agroforestry to improve their welfare. The role that agroforestry was aimed at playing in these communities was to enrich the soils and improve soil fertility with a view to increasing the productivity of the rural subsistence farmers.
The study adopted both quantitative and qualitative techniques to answer the pertinent research questions. Based on the findings of the study, it was noted that the qualitative techniques were more appropriate at unearthing the attributes that were causes of poverty within the regions. The qualitative data, though, was also useful in establishing the degree to which these attributes were affecting the regions. From this study, it is possible to assume that in studies involving efforts to change the production levels or degree of productivity in diverse communities, qualitative techniques can be very effective in providing useful insights.
In addition to this, the study has indicated that after the collection and analysis of this qualitative data, quantitative data is equally useful in assessing the overall degree of the problem. This position further supports earlier points that indicate a combination of methods is often more appropriate in answering complex multi-faceted research questions. To reiterate an earlier point, it is also important to note that it is not merely the technique used that answers the research questions but a combination of both a good technique and an appropriate setting.
This again brings us to the researcher and their insight into how they intend to tackle the study. Still considering techniques and their role in organizational change and productivity, the paper discusses insights from a study by Raya on the role of mixed methods in library and information science. Again in the study, which considered data from over 400 studies, the findings indicate that mixed methods should not be applied merely for the purposes of mixing. Rater the criteria applied to justify their use should be the nature of the study, where complexity or no single approach can fully complete the relevant investigation on the problem.
Also observed in the study was the fact that the use of mixed methods in research allows the study to be tackled in a manner that addresses issues more widely and completely than would be the case if one method were utilized. The use of naturally different methods also fosters flexibility in the research. The data detailed in this report goes a step further to support the stance that, more often than not, in handling complex issues such as those within an organization, it may be more effective to combine methods while carrying out research.
The use of mixed methods in research has been effective in bringing to light several serious issues within the third world. In this section, the discussion looks at a report containing details of a study aimed at identifying the motivation of non-physician clinicians in Tanzania. In this report, the poor quality of health care services is a cause of concern and among the reasons suggested for this is the low motivation of the health workers. A functional health care infrastructure and human resources for routine health services are essential for any country.
Unfortunately, it is emerging that the motivation of the human resource is directly related to their productivity. In many cases in the third world, it would appear that the human resource has little motivation to perform routine tasks, and as such, the quality of health care is declining sharply. Owing to this, there was a need to carry out a study to ascertain the truth of these statements and prepare to take remedial action. It appears that it has been assumed for a long time that health care workers were benevolent by nature and were motivated by the nature of their work.
This opinion has led to the health workers working conditions and policies relating to work being ignored for decades. Owing to this situation, there was a need to provide evidence that could be used by legislators to begin taking remedial action. Based on the findings of the study, it was discovered that the staff at most health care institutions had a very low level of motivation and commitment to their duties. Among the reasons identified for this trend were low pay, poor working conditions, and long hours. The results of the study indicate that research, whether of a qualitative or quantitative nature, can be useful in addressing challenges related to organizational change and productivity.
To end the discussion on the identified methods and their role in managing organizational change, it is important to mention a major challenge especially facing mixed methods research. Much of the data in this section has shown a tendency to favor the use of mixed methods in carrying out studies. However, it has also been noted that mixed-method research is still undergoing a lot of discussion on the basic issues related to this approach. For instance, it is still not completely agreed upon as to whether mixed methods involve the merging of qualitative and quantitative techniques.
Proponents of this argument are of the opinion that the mixed methods, involving mixing structured data collection and analysis methods with less structured ones. The methods need not be from varied approaches. Another issue yet to be fully addressed in the mixed-method research argument is at what point mixing should occur. Some scholars have preferred to allow mixing in almost all stages of research. These are just a few of the issues related to the use of mixed methods. They are of importance because, in the selection of any criteria, it is important to be able to validate the reasons for its selection and justify the validity of its results.