Part -1:
Please write about 330 words for below comments and ask question?
Also mention some references
The study I would like to use for this shared activity is Internationalization of Lithuanian SMEs: Investigation of Barriers and Motives (Korsakiene, 2014). The study aimed to gain a deeper understanding of perceptions ofinternationalised and non-internationalized small and medium enterprises in Lithuanian. The researcher used a quantitative method with the use of questionnaires as its methods of data collection.
According to Easterby-Smith et al., (2012) all quantitative researchers summarizes their data and make inferences based on sample data collected. It could be said that bar chart and histogram are the two main form of quantitative data display (Easterby-Smith et al., 2012). Korsakiene (2014) used histogram to indicate the countries ofinternationalisation. The researcher used tables to show the responses in the internal and external motives ofinternationalised firms using mean, Standard deviation, and variance to obtain result from the survey done. This method was also used throughout the research to identify the barriers of internationalisation and strength of firms.
Furthermore, it could be said that the histogram the researcher used is a little confusing; the researcher should have used a less complicated histogram or a bar chart which is easier to understand. The researchers made used of mean and standard deviation which is quite ideal for quantitative methods. Korsakiene (2014) should have used the stem and leaf plot to present the external and internal motives of internationalisation. I do not detect any bias in how the data are presented because the researcher made the used of mean, standard deviation and variance effectively. However, it failed to explain how the result figures were calculated or the formula used.
References
Part - 2:
Please write about 330 words for below comments and ask question?
also mention some references ( 2 or 3 referrences)
For this academic exercise, I will analyze the article ¨Can You Say What Your Strategy is?¨ by Collis and Rukstad (2008). The authors provide a comprehensive study of managers from various industries to determine if they can articulate what their company´s strategy is. They claim that very few executives can articulate their strategy in less than thirty-five words, and most of them work for the most successful industries in their field.
Collis and Rukstad (2008) analyze natural language data from interviews with high executives; Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson (2012) define two methods of natural language analysis, which are content and grounded analysis. Content analysis consists of ideas that have been developed in advance and then using the data to construct and support them; on the contrary, grounded analysis lets the data speak for itself and guide them to draw conclusions. In my opinion, Collis and Rukstad (2008) implement a content analysis method to prove that top executives cannot articulate their company strategy in a concise manner. I think that they elaborated a theory based on observation and then used data to prove or disprove it.
Miles and Huberman (1994) state that qualitative data can be analyzed in different ways to accomplish diverse results; it is crucial to adopt the appropriate research methodologies for the type of study that is being developed. For example, this investigation could have had a grounded analysis approach that then led to the conclusion that many executives are not clear about their strategy. The main benefit of this method is that the researchers would investigate about corporate strategies and in the process of obtaining data, they would have noticed the pattern and focus the investigation towards that subject; instead of developing a theory and then investigating for corroboration.
The authors also included secondary data into their study, using a mixed research methodology approach. They summarized the data and presented it clearly, using many resources such as tables and graphics, making it easy to understand for the audience. I believe that the study was not biased by the theories presented by the authors; they used primary and secondary sources of data to analyze the scenarios and gave recommendations based on their findings. Finally, they used a narrative analysis of natural language data; this was done by gathering experiences and stories of members from different organizations and then interpreting them to support their study.
Please let me know what you think about the research methods used in this article.
Thank you,
References
Part -3:
Please write about 330 words for below
comments and ask question?
also mention some references ( 3 referrences)
Dear Folks,
Making Sense of data
One example of management research article identified for this SA, is one of the article presented earlier in the critical literature review titled "improving Employees interpersonal communication competencies: A Qualitative Study", by Geraldine Hynes (2012). This research study was to analyze the impact of employee engagement by providing training in interpersonal communication.
Analytical strategies and tools
As a strategy, the researcher roll out training programme to the large pool of eligible employees of 1300. Sessions were scheduled on a daily basis to maximum participant of 20 employees. And with focus on interactions with three audiences: superiors, peers in IT, and nontechnical colleagues in the company. For more effective and dynamic programs, the researcher sort for external vendors, subject matter experts who partnered the research team.
Methods and tools employed by the researcher
Feedback from the participants is solicited immediately post program via surveymonkey.com and again after 60 to 90 days. The first survey asks for satisfaction ratings of the instructor, materials, topics, and activities. It also asks participants which parts of the program they found to be most valuable and what changes they recommend. The Subsequent survey attempts to determine the extent to which participants have actually changed their behaviors because of the training, Geraldine Hynes (2012:470). Open-ended survey responses capture comments and recommendations for future programs
An alternative strategies and tools for this same research work would be the application of quantitative method: where after identified the potential respondents, mail of prepared questionnaire for their response and recorded after the training section.
In this manner analyzing the data could be altered and the feedback could be compromised, because, often with the quantitative study cannot be justified, and often researcher is either to start with a hypothesis about the nature of the world, and then seek data to confirm or disconfirm it, or the researcher poses several hypotheses and seeks data that will allow selection of the correct one Mark E-Smith, et al (2012:39), unlike with the a qualitative study can be justified because of "the opportunity it provides to get in touch with the feelings, concerns, and needs of the business community" (Hynes G., 2012:396).
Critical analysis on data summarized
In summary, this research has described a corporation that recognizes the centrality and criticality of interpersonal communication competencies for workforce productivity and engagement. Studying actual business cases that demonstrate the importance of communication informs our teaching. Business communication educators who collaborate with companies and other organizations are helping to improve the business world into which we send our students. However, I could detect I bias because, the research work was conducted among, Superiors, peers in IT, and nontechnical colleagues in the US company, and also was a research work conducted in a U.S.-based company. So the result could not have necessarily represented the entire spectrum of characteristics in IT organisation, as the research study was scope to the IT (information technology) division of the company.
Reference