research topics, questions, hypotheses

7/26/2019 Research Topics, Questions, Hypotheses

1/34

Masters Level Module Research Methods

4-1

Chapter 4

Research Topics, Research Questions and

Hypotheses

Learning Outcomes

After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Distinguish between a research topic, a research question, and an

hypothesis, showing how the three items inter-relate.

2. Describe the process of research topic selection and indicate what

constitutes a good research topic.

3. Explain the process of research question selection and the parameters

of a good research question.

4. Explain the process of hypothesis or proposition selection and the

requirements for a strong and symmetrical hypothesis.

5. Describe a range of research question selection and appraisal

techniques, including brainstorming, De Bonos Six Hat Method, and

SWOT analysis.

6. Distinguish between deductive and inductive research approaches,

and the effect these can have on the selection of research topics and

research questions.

7. Discuss how the research question and hypothesis or proposition

relate to the overall research process.


2/34


4-2

4.1 Introduction

Conventional academic commentaries on the research process suggest

that the selection of the research question occurs after the study of the

literature and the familiarisation with the field are complete. The researchprocess is assumed to be linear and sequential, with the definition of the

research question representing a systematic focusing of the scope of the

research, a narrowing of many potential studies down to one. There is a

deliberate and well-founded logic to this, based on making decisions

from a position of knowledge and a wide perspective. It is based on the

premise that if the research question and the definition of the entire

research project are not considered against a broad setting, the results are

unlikely to be widely applicable.

The act of defining the research question usually involves producing an

explicit written statement about the boundaries of the research project, in

terms of the scope of its coverage, and commenting on the assumptions,

which are being made. The research question or its justification may also

stipulate specific issues, which the research will not cover. You should

begin the identification of your research question by first finalising the

research topic.

Activity

In this chapter will be involved in the process of selecting a research

topic and a research question. You will require a realistic or actual issue

to act as a focus for the activities. If you do not already have a specific

research field in mind for your dissertation, choose one for which you

have rounded background knowledge.

Record it in the box below now, before starting work on the chapter.

Research Field:

4.1 Research Topic Selection

4.1.1 Research field


3/34


4-3

When you have completed the literature review, you may find that the

maturity of knowledge in the research field significantly influences the

final selection of your research topic. Highly evolved research fields,

such as the physical and chemical sciences, progress by building upon a

vast and established body of knowledge. The research conventions and

methodologies are usually well defined, and therefore the selection of a

research topic and research question is generally a fairly straightforward

exercise.

In contrast, emerging research fields tend to be turbulent and are often

characterised by the fluidity of their definitions and theories and rapidly

changing boundaries. These research fields usually reach maturity before

a significant amount of research can progress in a co-ordinated manner.

In such instances, the research topics, contemporary literature, andassociated research methodologies tend to be exploratory in nature (such

as happened recently with the fields of quality and environmentalism).

Here the selection of a coherent research topic and research question,

which will not date rapidly, can be more challenging.

For construction, and in particular construction management, the research

field appears to be approaching an intermediate phase, where an

emerging consensus on some fundamental issues will start to offer a

sufficient body of knowledge to explore specific research questions in a

co-ordinated manner. For now there are still so many issues requiring

attention that finding an issue to research is not difficult. The difficulty

often lies in identifying a base for your conceptual foundations and

research question.

You can best accommodate the differences in maturity of the research

fields and their contemporary research approaches by adopting different

topic selection techniques and research methodologies. In order to do so,

it is worthwhile to consider the principles of research topic selection and

the definition of research questions more closely.


4/34


4-4

4.2 Selection Process

If you are approaching research in a commercial sense, the topic may be

pre-determined. For academics, and research students in particular,

however, it is common to have the scope to select your own researchtopic. In such cases, it is most important that you take a systematic

approach to how you select a topic. It is possible that when you approach

the research field that you will already have preconceptions of what the

study should entail, also your previous experience will suggest what is a

useful and practical output and what isnt, or what the industry may or

may not need.

Where you have the choice over the direction of the research you should

choose a topic which interests you, but it is important not to let this

overshadow your objectivity in how you tackle the project. In selecting a

topic based on personal preference, there are distinct advantages to

having a personal interest in a subject. Personal research can be a lonely

path, and in the periods when progress appears to be slow, it is important

to have a deep commitment to the issues, which you are grappling with.

Where research is conducted under commercial circumstances and the

topic is dictated, this can still work well for the individual researcher,

since there will be a focus from an early stage of the project and there

will usually be benefits of explicit support within the organisation interms of resources and access to data and experience.

Where there is an extensive body of existing knowledge in the research

field, this can tend to predetermine the methodological conventions and

scope for new research work. In the context of problem-solving research,

this can give a great boost to the project, whereas in personal academic

research a large body of existing research can be a barrier to identifying a

short and self-contained (but pertinent) piece of research. In the

established academic disciplines, such as the physical sciences, this can

mean that a great deal of background familiarisation is needed before an

apparently small step forward can be made. The contrasting situation of a

research field with little or no existing published research findings can

mean that the first steps in a project are very difficult, since there is a

scarcity of agreed knowledge or research conventions upon which to


5/34


4-5

build. In either of these circumstances there may be uncertainties over

how generally applicable your findings will be.

Activity

version of your research topic now and record it here. It may change as

you progress through the chapter.

Is your research topic accessible to quantitative or qualitative analysis, or

both? Why?

Record your thoughts here;

4.3 Inductive And Deductive Research

As we saw in Chapter 1, the conventional process of research is that you

commence by analysing the literature, you identify and state a single

selected problem, from which you then isolate the major research

question(s) for which the existing knowledge is inadequate. Based on

this, you formulate a hypothesis (usually accompanied by a series of sub-

hypotheses), collect the necessary data using an appropriate research

methodology, and analyse your findings in terms of the existing

knowledge as you found it. Note that the hypothesis may be in the form

of a conceptual model. If the testing of your hypothesis illuminates new

knowledge either way, that is the hypothesis is clearly proven/ unproven

(unusual) or partly proven/ disproven (more normal), you may be able to

answer the purpose of the research, perhaps even make a contribution to

knowledge.

This exercise starts with your presentation and analysis of the existing

work in the field. This will probably need to cover issues such as the

principal theories and the distinctions between them, perhaps making a


6/34


4-6

statement about the evidence to support existing data and findings, The

purpose behind this is to ensure that the research topic is worthy of

contributing resources to its study, and also to define the foundations

upon which these studies can build.

The major research questions could arise from a variety of circumstances,

such as the identifiable gaps between existing theories or evidence.

Where there are overlaps between findings or theories, there may be

contradictions, which you wish to explore. Apparently sound findings

may simply be out of date and need repeating for todays context. In

some cases, the assumptions underlying previous research may render

them invalid for your application. In these circumstances, your research

might focus on testing others findings in your own context.

If you were working within the scientific method paradigm (see Chapter

6), you would next go on to identify your hypothetical answers and

preferred methodology for gathering the evidence to test these

hypotheses. By considering these issues now you can filter the research

questions on the basis of availability of data or methodological expertise.

The advocates of some alternative methodological paradigms dispute that

this is always the most appropriate way of selecting realistic research

topics and research questions. The main arguments against the scientific

method hinge on the constraints which its methodological paradigms

place upon realism. Undertaking a linear and focal approach to research

tends to stifle the open-ended questioning from which new perspectives

and new knowledge comes. In essence the scientific method, or

deductive approach, is claimed to perpetuate the methodology and

assumptions underlying existing work and therefore constrain novelty.

Certainly the conventional research process presents the researcher with

conventional views and methodologies, but this may be a strength rather

than a weakness for the novice researcher. In the context of an industry

based upon engineering and scientific experience, research findings

produced using recognisable and traditional methodologies tend to be

given a greater amount of credit compared with the novel, qualitative

insights emerging from some of the more interventionist social science

methodologies.


7/34


4-7

Novel methodological approaches originating in other disciplines and

now emerging in construction research include grounded theory, action

research, and ethnography. These approaches certainly offer new insights

into existing issues, however there are recurrent disputes about the rigour

and reliability of findings produced using these methods. Such concerns

usually originate from concerns and misunderstandings about the

unfamiliar, but are nonetheless heartfelt.

These alternative techniques are inductive, that is explanations and

theories are developed from observations of the empirical world

(deductive is vice versa). The argument for their adoption is that

phenomenological explanations which are not based on a grounding or

observation and experience of the real world are worthless in real use.

Taking this to its application to research questions, the inductivist stanceis that a research question has to relate to all the complexities of the real

situation if the findings are to be at all applicable to the real world.

Inevitably, as soon as the researcher attempts to deal with the breadth of

direct and indirect issues associated with a single research issue in its

broad real-world context, the data and its analysis becomes horribly

complex. The attraction of deductivist research questions is immediately

appealing, since they simplify the world with systematic assumptions to

control the scenario and allow it to be simulated. In very simplistic terms,

the decision rests on whether you want a simplified research questionwhich may not be very realistic but is relatively straightforward to

express and explore, or a complex research question which is problematic

to explore and analyse, but of potentially greater value ultimately. This

decision depends on how applicable or extendable your results will be in

a simple form.

In many, or most, cases the nature of the available data or resources

coupled with the purposes of the research and the expected form and

content of the findings will tend to dictate the approach to the problem,

and therefore the type of research question. In instances of industry-

sponsored research, the pragmatic approach to yield real-world solutions

to real-world problems will win through. This can cause tensions for the

academic requirements of research, and there is some skill required, to

balance the two sets of expectations of research process.


8/34


4-8

As always, research questions and research methodologies are inter-

linked. An inductive, or alternative, approach to the research question

will attract an inductive research methodology. The inductive approach is

more suited to theory building than theory testing, and is therefore better

for fields where there is not a strong body of accepted theory. Examples

include action research that can be used to influence and measure change

from a position internal to the research problem. This is particularly

useful for researchers undertaking a piece of reflective study on an issue

in which they have the scope to make changes. These methodologies are

outlined in Chapter 6.

A deductive research question will require a deductive research

methodology. Examples include experimentation, questionnaires, and

surveys, all of which involve collecting evidence to test a hypothesis. Thedeductive approach is more suited to theory testing than theory building,

and is therefore better for fields where there is a strong body of accepted

theory.

Activity

Think of some research issues for which the construction industry needs

answers and distinguish between those, which have to be tackled in a

deductive manner and those, which could be dealt with inductively. Can

any issues be addressed in both ways?



9/34


4-9

4.4 Sources Of Research Topics

In a commercial scenario, research topics, and therefore research

questions, tend to lead the research process and do not have to be

searched for. In academia, there is often more scope to assist andcollaborate with others in a range of areas, which interest the researcher.

Here it is common for there to be a choice of areas and topics for the

researcher to work within. In funded research, there is clearly some pre-

selection by the theming of the research funding initiatives, and the

development of an industry/ academia collaborative bid usually involves

a compromise to produce something which is practically useful and may

push the general field knowledge forward. In such cases, the research

questions tend to appear pragmatically through the discussions.

In the academic context, perhaps in the particular scenario of a student

seeking a dissertation, one of the most obvious sources of research topics

lies within previous or ongoing work experience. Others include personal

experience, publicised industry trends or issues, or a straightforward

analysis of the field. A fruitful area to search lies in other contemporary

research papers and academic theses, which usually complete with

suggestions for further work.

Activity

What sources of information did you use to select your research

question? How could you supplement these?

Record your thoughts here.


10/34


4-10

4.5 Research Questions

Once you have confirmed the research topic, the research question

usually follows closely. Good research questions should satisfy several

parameters that can be considered under the broad headings ofaccessibility and achievability . Both are potential blockers to the project

as a whole or to particular components of the research process. It is

important to look systematically at the research project when defining the

research question. Use the research question as a vehicle for enclosing

the scope of the project to keep it controllable and manageable.

Activity

What is the question your research topic most readily needs addressing,

and why?

Record your thoughts here.

4.5.1 Accessibility And The Research Question

Look at accessibility from all aspects of the project and the process of

doing the research. Consider personal accessibility, both physical and

intellectual, literature and data accessibility, access to expertise and other

resources, and finally the perspectives of sensitivity and confidentiality

essentially these represent accessibility to publication of the findings.

Literature: Is the literature on the subject accessible, more to the point is

there too much or too little, because both can be problematic for the

researcher. Can you get the key documents, and in time. If, for instance,

your research relates to issues that are the subject of a new code of

practice, do you have access to the draft codes during the consultation

phase? What will be the impact on your project if the publication of the


11/34


4-11

code is delayed for a significant period of time? Can you afford the

specialist literature if you have to purchase it? Is your key reference

source an overseas one, which will attract special costs, delays in access,

and/ or language problems?

Data: The issue of accessibility may extend beyond simply accessing

data, since it is important that you have confidence in the reliability and

pertinence of the data that becomes available. For instance, it is very

difficult to get neutral interview or questionnaire data on quality

assurance, partly because of the difficulties in defining it, but also

because of sensitivities and the unwillingness to admit that there is any

shortcoming in a quality assurance system.

Activity

For your chosen topic, list examples of data which will be readily

available, and data which will be difficult to get hold of (or verify).


The form of data is also relevant. Is your research question one which

requires access to subjective or objective data? For instance, a research

question concerned with exploring the differing perspectives of truth

about the causes of adversarialism in the construction industry will

probably involve the collection and analysis of subjective opinion. This

raises several issues of accessibility. First, can you access the breadth and

depth of opinion needed to make a rounded assessment of the issue? Will

it be available to a sufficient depth to make a meaningful analysis?

Perhaps the negotiation of access will involve signing a confidentiality

agreement, which may compromise the publication of your analysis

and/or findings? Once collected, these opinions are unlikely to directly


12/34


4-12

correspond or correlate with each other. Do you have access to the

methodological and analytical skills required to rigorously collect and

appraise the data? Furthermore, is a complex qualitative analysis going to

suit the purposes for which the research was originally intended?

Activity

What sort of study approach do you find most appealing, and how might

this be reflected in your research design (through the research question)?

Expertise: Consider who the gatekeepers are for your data

requirements. In an emergent field, the sole data source may be expert

opinion, which in turn may be difficult to elicit, and be geographically

dispersed. This will have an impact on its physical collection and also

what you actually expect to be able to collect. Also, do you have the

influence to gain and maintain access to the expertise personally or via a

third party? If not, you will not be able to answer your own research

question (note that this is distinct from it being unanswerable).

Activity

Who are the gatekeepers for your data?

Record your answer here.


13/34


4-13

In addition to the problems of physical remoteness of data, issues of

political, professional or commercial sensitivity may block any or certain

data being collected. Alternatively, they may restrict its depth and

therefore pertinence to the project. Highly variable data depth or quality

can make comparative analysis very difficult, and if you are looking for a

replication of phenomena in different circumstances as the test of your

research issue, it may be difficult to make a very meaningful appraisal.

There is always the potential of a completely unforeseeable event

occurring which seriously affects the data or your access to it. Take

timing and external unpredictable events for instance. In the mid-1980s I

was conducting research into life safety in building fires and collecting

interview data via a Delphi group which had Fire Service personnel as

one of the sources of expert opinion on building performance in fires. Inthe middle of the data collection, a major fire led to an urgent review of

fire safety at all sports grounds, which meant that my access to certain

fire service personnel vanished almost overnight.

Activity

Consider your research question. What are the accessibility issues

surrounding it and how can they be resolved? Use the sample

accessibility issues outlined above as a starting point. Are there any

other accessibility issues particular to your research topic?



14/34


4-14

4.5.2 Achievability And The Research Question

This relates to the resources available to you to undertake and complete

the entire research project, also to the ultimate value of the research once

it is completed. As you design your research question, considerobjectively whether the research as proposed is really worth doing. Will

it add to the existing field knowledge in a meaningful manner, or will the

limited scale, excessive and unrealistic assumptions or limited data

access mean that it is only an addendum to the existing material? Can

you achieve the necessary rigour, in the methodology, in the data, and

within the time available to you?

Research often takes longer than you anticipate and a small but rounded

piece of work will usually be more valuable than an ambitious under-

achievement. The deeper the study becomes, the more likely it is that

issues emerge which appear to be central to the research question, and

may divert your efforts away from the initial goal and objectives of the

project. Defining the research question and its attendant assumptions and

limitations tightly at the start will allow you to systematically retain your

focus on the original goal.

Consider also the following issues related to achieving the goals of the

research. Are the data that you require straightforward and economical to

collect? Are your capabilities in accordance with the type of data analysisthat will be involved in answering the research question which you are

posing? These issues can be addressed by working in collaboration with

someone else with a specialism and/or geographical location and access

to data that complements yours.

Achievability is also relevant where your methodology or data are

hostages to fortune. What will be the effect on the achievability of your

research of a sudden event, and could you still learn something if the

hypothesis is unproven or the data analysis is inconclusive? For instance,

if you are studying an issue based on the assumption of a recessionary

market when a sustained upturn appears, this will invalidate the

assumptions upon which your data collection or analysis are based, and

may be fatal for the results. Here it is worth considering the symmetryof

your hypothesis, the subject of the next section.


15/34


4-15

Activity

Consider your research question again. What are the achievability issues

surrounding it, and how can they be resolved? Use the sample

achievability issues outlined above as a starting point. Are there any

other achievability issues particular to your research topic?

After considering the issues of research question selection outlined in this

chapter, you may feel that you need to re-define your research question

from that which you recorded at the start of the chapter.

If your research question has changed, record the new version here and

compare it with the old version. Why have you changed it and in what

ways is it a better research question now?

Record the current version of your research question here;

Transfer the starting version of your research question to here:

Why have you changed the research question and in what ways is it a

better research question now? Record your answer here.


16/34


4-16

4.5.3 The Research Hypothesis

The research question and the hypothesis are of course intimately related,

one being the expected answer to the other. The hypothesis should as a

minimum be logical and testable. To help protect the research projectagainst the risks of loss of data availability, inconsistency or

inconclusiveness, it is also worthwhile designing symmetry into the

hypothesis where possible. This is sometimes referred to as a refutable

hypothesis. Note that the qualitative research approach usually refers to

propositions rather than hypotheses, since the hypothesis implies a

greater degree of fixity and more of a testing approach, whereas the

proposition is more tentative and liable to change during the research

process. This will be discussed further in a later chapter. Symmetry is

used rather imprecisely here, but is akin to vulnerability or brittleness. A

symmetrical hypothesis is one which illuminates or adds to knowledge

whether the evidence proves or disproves it. Symmetrical hypotheses are

supple, and are characterised by open-ended research questions. The best

hypotheses yield insights even if the data analysis is only partly

conclusive.

4.5.4 The Symmetrical Hypothesis

Consider for instance the hypothesis that the creation and implementation

of the new Quality Assurance System within a department will change

the way in which people view their role at work. This is related to a

research question about the creation and implementation of QA systems

and their effectiveness in a tightly defined boundary of a single

department. The question and hypothesis could be tightened further using

a time boundary, either now or during the progress of the research.

The testing of this hypothesis will probably yield useful knowledge about

whether the QA system is adjudged to have made an influence or not, or

indeed if it is shown to be only partly influential. Even if people in the

department are not very familiar with the QA system when questioned,

this is a finding in relation to the influence it has on them. The

unfamiliarity can be explored further for its causes for instance does


17/34


4-17

the unfamiliarity originate in the creation or implementation of the QA

system, or both? Were changes made which improved the situation, and

how and why did people change their views of their role?

The hypothesis is supple and can adapt to changes, even extremecircumstances such as a redesign of the QA system, or its complete

withdrawal from the department. Perhaps the impact of removing a QA

system would be as illuminating as its installation. It would certainly be

novel research and its analysis appears to have the potential to make a

meaningful contribution to the research field and practice.

By deliberately including the dual issues of creation and implementation,

extra scope is given for exploring the nature of quality assurance in

operation and managing the change process. If the study produces too

much data, you can focus on that which emerges as the more relevant as

the research progresses is it predominantly a creation or

implementation phenomenon, or the interface/ continuity between both?

If the access to data proves to be shallower than anticipated, perhaps

expanding the boundary to include two departments would be valuable. It

is an extreme case where the research question produces no findings of

value. Importantly, the research question and hypothesis are supple and

therefore controllable.

4.5.5 The Asymmetrical Hypothesis

In contrast, the hypothesis that all surveyors are negligent at some time in

their professional activities is asymmetrical or brittle. The research will

yield little knowledge if all the surveyors who are approached refuse to

comment on negligence, or respond by denying that they are ever

negligent or have ever found incidents of third party negligence.Incredible data or no data at all leaves the researcher with an unanswered

hypothesis and very little obvious scope to adapt the research.

Furthermore, continued access to the data sample may have been

jeopardised. The research is forseeably unachievable, and in its current

form the project will probably be valueless.


18/34


4-18

The research question could be adapted so that it is concerned with the

broader and more symmetrical issue of professional performance and the

definition of and consistency of quality standards in the surveying

profession. An alternative supple hypothesis about what professionals

believe constitutes the minima of professional practice, perhaps analysed

against the researchers hypothetical model of minimum standards or

performance parameters would have allowed the grey areas over

professional competence and negligence to be illuminated or explored in

a more subtle manner. The hypothetical model of professional standards

could be derived from the literature and/or experience of the researcher,

and would form the terms of reference for the collection and analysis of

the data. If the model turns out to be inadequate, it can be altered

according to the evidence of the data. Furthermore, if there really does

turn out to be little or no evidence of negligence, the research would still

produce a valuable output by defining more clearly where professionals

consider the boundaries of professional competence lie. Symmetry and

flexibility replace rigidity and asymmetry.

Similarly, the hypothesis that Partnering will cease to be an issue if an

upturn in the construction industry occurs is risky since it is a hostage to

the general fortunes of the industry. Interviewees may be reluctant to

admit that their company is not in upturn, also the hypothesis is time-

bound. At the time of writing (1997), partnering continues to be a highlypopular claim by most construction companies, yet its definition and

evaluation is still the subject of uncertainty. Research conducted now

would require you to include defining the term or making an assumption.

However, the researcher reading this workbook in the year 2000 may be

immediately aware that the partnering phenomenon evolved into another

concept and would be therefore be unresearchable for a variety of

currently unforeseen reasons.

A less vulnerable hypothesis would be that attitudes to creating

formalised relationships between contractors and their clients are

influenced by professional expectations and beliefs about a range of

issues including the economic fortunes of the UK construction industry

generally this is answerable in a recession or boom, is not company

specific, and could yield insights irrespective of the contemporary

fortunes of the industry. If an upturn arrives fortuitously for the


19/34


4-19

researcher then this can be explored through the data collection by

searching for trends in changing attitudes. Overall, it is a more open-

ended research question and hypothesis.

Activity

Create a series of symmetrical and asymmetrical hypotheses for your

current research question using the guidelines in the above section.

Indicate which you think are strong, or weak. Which is the best one and

why?

Record your answer here;

4.5.6 Generating Research Questions

There are several useful techniques for generating research questions and

selecting the most practical. Bear in mind that the research question is a

tool for deliberately focusing the research from a range of potential issues


20/34


4-20

which are directly or indirectly relevant to a single research problem

which is directly relevant.

The section below features four questioning techniques to generate

and/or evaluate research questions: Brainstorming, De Bonos Six HatMethod, the Who, Why, What, Where, When and How Technique , and

SWOT Analysis. The brainstorming exercise requires a group to be really

effective, the others can be done individually but are better done in pairs

with a colleague prompting you.

Use allthe techniques, in the order in which they appearto:

a) systematically open up your research topic and research questionissues (Brainstorming and De Bonos Six Hat Method)

b) define the specific objectives and controlling parameters for the entire

context of the research project (Who, ...)

c) refine the design of the research topic and research question back

down to a focused, informed and rounded decision made on the basis

of coincident strength and opportunity (SWOT Analysis).

Used properly, these exercises will show you how to make a robustresearch topic and research question selection. Expect this exercise to

take a little while if done properly, and reflect on the decision before

moving on to the next part of the research process.

4.5.7 Brainstorming

Brainstorming can be a useful starting point if you have a group available

to you. The process operates by the generation of unevaluated lists (the

brainstorming), followed by their analysis and clarification to produce a

collection of ideas for rejection or uptake.

The key rules of brainstorming are that, during the generation phase, any

perspective or issue related to the research problem can be raised, all of


21/34


4-21

which are recorded by the person who takes the facilitating or chairing

role. This person also ensures that everyone has the chance to participate

and that no issues are pursued during the brainstorming session.

Immediately after this all the emergent points are discussed by the group

in rotation to allow their categorisation, and to look for cross-overs and

opportunities for solving the research problem, and eventually to make a

selection of options by rejection or uptake. This technique was originated

by Edward de Bono.

Activity

If you can arrange a group meeting about your research with colleagues

at work or other IGDS students, organise a Brainstorming session on

your research question.

Review the Brainstorming session to systematically open up your

research topic and research question issues.

4.5.8 De Bonos Six Hat Method

This technique appears to be used primarily as a business problem-

solving device, but I have applied it successfully in groups and

individually for the design and critique of research questions. De Bono

outlines it in the context of an application in his essay on improving

democracy Thinking Hats on, Pleasein the Independent (1994).

The technique revolves around the problem being viewed, in turn, from

six different perspectives. Each perspective is considered in isolation

from the others, and is denoted by metaphorically (or physically) wearing

a different coloured hat. Hence:

The white hat corresponds to information availability and requirements.

This could relate to information source issues, literature appraisal and the

identification of gaps in the information. It could also be extended to

explore data availability and requirement issues.


22/34


4-22

The black hat represents caution and the assessment of risks. This is

useful for taking a realistic view of the problems in achieving the

research goals, or accessing the literature, other information or data. It

could also be used to critically explore issues such as the risks to

methodological success or to proving/ disproving the hypothesis.

Whilst wearing the yellow hat the researcher considers the benefits,

values and feasibility of the research question. In commercially driven, or

problem-solving research, this may be a useful hat to commence with.

The green hat signifies creativity and energy, so could be used to explore

the originality of the research, also novel ways of approaching the

research question, the collection of data, and/ or the application of

methodologies and/ or findings. It is concerned with new possibilities.

The blue hat corresponds to the organisation of the thinking process, so is

best used for looking at the operational and strategic design of the

research process.

The red hat addresses feelings, such as intuitive feelings about the

research, its probable findings, needs, and the researchers likes and

dislikes about the content and process as proposed.

Clearly, the hats need to be interpreted loosely for maximum benefit; the

value lies in addressing the research question from several perspectives

in isolation. There is no particular order for considering the different

perspectives, and they can be revisited if you like. Once all six

perspectives have been considered the results are compared and cross-

correlated to identify the opportunities and threats for each possible

research question.

Activity

Use De Bonos Six Hat Method to systematically open up your research

topic and research question issues. Record your comments in the boxes

on the following pages. The technique depends on rigorously thinking

about a single perspective at a time. You may take the hats in any order,

but once you have selected a particular hat you should not change to

another hat until you have completed your written comments on that

page:


23/34


4-23

Wear the yellow hat and consider the benefits, values and feasibility of

the research topic and the research question. Do not change to another hat

until you have completed your comments on this page.

Wear the green hat and consider the creativity, energy, and originality

which your research will bring to the research topic and the research

question. What creativity can you build into your research question, your

hypothesis, and the methodology of collecting your data? Do not change

to another hat until you have completed your comments on this page.

Wear the red hat and consider your feelings about the research. Include

your intuitive feelings about the needs for the work, and your likes and

dislikes about the field, the existing works, and your proposed research

question. Do not change to another hat until you have completed your

comments on this page.

Wear the white hat and consider the balance between the availability and

requirements of data. What data is available to you, and in what form

does it appear? Is it qualitative or quantitative? Are there access issues?

Do not change to another hat until you have completed your comments

on this page.


24/34


4-24

Wear the black hat and consider the risks and requirements for caution in

undertaking the research. Looking at the research project realistically,

what are the potential blockers to answering the research question, for

testing the hypothesis, for accessing and interpreting the data? Is your

research question or hypothesis weak in any way which could be

resolved? Consider any identified risks which you are unwilling to

continue with. Do not change to another hat until you have completed

your comments on this page.

Wear the blue hat and consider the thinking process which is required to

design and conduct the research. What is required to answer the research

question, to test the hypothesis, to collect the data? What steps do you

have to take in order to process the research? If you can encapsulate your

conceptual thoughts about the topic, do so here as well. Do not change to

another hat until you have completed your comments on this page.

Start this page only when you have worn all six hats.

If you have any other thoughts about any of the hats you may go back to

the pages and include them now.

Now gather together your summarised thoughts to systematically open up

your research topic and research question issues. Consider:

does your research topic need altering?

does your research question need altering?

is your hypothesis strong?


25/34


4-25

is the process clear and of an acceptable level of risk?

How do you plan to move forward from here? Produce a set of

recommendations for progressing the research.

4.5.9 Who, Why, What, Where, When And How?

This technique is similar to the De Bonos Six Hat Method, and can be

used as a check on the proposed research question(s) before finalising

their selection and design. Used carefully, it can be extended to assist

with focusing the entire research design. It operates by splitting the

research problem down into a series of justifications, such as those

detailed below.

In addition to defining the research question, with some imagination this

technique can be applied to selecting information sources, defining the

research methodology, even for identifying the terms of reference for the

design of the methodology or analysis of the research data. The use of the

technique can generate the basis of a written research proposal, a

document which combines the justification of what research is to be done

with a pragmatic review of how it will be achieved. Example questions to

ask might include:

Who are the immediate and ultimate customers for the research, who will

benefit?

is funding the research (and what are their priorities and terms)?

are the other stakeholders (and what are their obligations and

priorities)?

will do the research (who else will assist, manage, or facilitate)?

else could be doing similar research (collaborators orcompetitors)?

will be required to contribute to the research (will they, and

how)?

could deliberately or unwittingly block the research (the

gatekeepers)? may be sensitive to the output?


26/34


4-26

Why does it matter whether the research is done at all?

will this research provide knowledge that is not already available?

should you do the research instead of some other research?

should you do the research instead of some other researcher doing

it?

will the research benefit the customers or industry?

should the research be done this way?

What are you trying to achieve?

information is needed to commence and complete the research?

resources are required to conduct the research?

is the research question?are the major external and internal sensitivities raised by doing

the research?

data is available (what is the critical data)?

assumptions do you have to make in order to start?

risks are there to the data availability

external risks are there to the research project?

is the hypothesis or proposition?

knowledge will this research provide that is not already available?

are the major benefits of doing the research?are the success criteria for the research?

are the major risks to the research?

Where are the gaps in the literature and field knowledge?

should the boundaries of the research lie?

will the expertise come from?

does the critical information reside?

do the major foreseeable problems lie?

will the findings be published (what market)?

When will the research need to be completed by?

will the relevance of the research cease?

should the research start?


27/34


4-27

will the critical knowledge become available, or cease to be

available/ relevant?

will the data commence availability, cease availability, or cease to

be relevant?

How could the design be improved?

can the vulnerability to external knowledge availability be

minimised

can the vulnerability to data availability be minimised?

will the assumptions affect the value/ applicability of the results?

could the research project be made smaller without compromising

its value?

will you know when the research is complete (seriously)?will the output and process be evaluated?

will the results be disseminated (and to whom)?

much work has already been done in this area?

Activity

Use the Who, Why, What, Where, When, and How? technique to review

your research topic and research question. Gather together your

summarised thoughts to define the specific objectives and controlling

parameters for the entire context of the research project.

Record your comments in the boxes on the following pages;

Who are the immediate and ultimate customers for the research, who will

benefit?

is funding the research (and what are their priorities and terms)?are the other stakeholders (and what are their obligations and

priorities)?

will do the research (who else will assist, manage, or facilitate)?

else could be doing similar research (collaborators or

competitors)?


28/34


4-28

will be required to contribute to the research (will they, and

how)?

could deliberately or unwittingly block the research (the

gatekeepers)?

may be sensitive to the output?

Any Other Who Questions?

Why does it matter whether the research is done at all?

will this research provide knowledge that is not already available?

should you do the research instead of some other research?

should you do the research instead of some other researcher doing

it?

will the research benefit the customers or industry?

should the research be done this way?

Any Other Why Questions?

What are you trying to achieve?

information is needed to commence and complete the research?

resources are required to conduct the research?

is the research question?


29/34


4-29

are the major external and internal sensitivities raised by doing

the research?

data is available (what is the critical data)?

assumptions do you have to make in order to start?

risks are there to the data availability

external risks are there to the research project?

is the hypothesis or proposition?

knowledge will this research provide that is not already available?

are the major benefits of doing the research?

are the success criteria for the research?

are the major risks to the research?

Any Other What Questions?

Where are the gaps in the literature and field knowledge?

should the boundaries of the research lie?

will the expertise come from?

does the critical information reside?

do the major foreseeable problems lie?

will the findings be published (what market)?

Any Other Where Questions?


30/34


4-30

When will the research need to be completed by?

will the relevance of the research cease?

should the research start?

will the critical knowledge become available, or cease to be

available/ relevant?

will the data commence availability, cease availability, or cease to

be relevant?

Any Other When Questions?

How could the design be improved?

can the vulnerability to external knowledge availability be

minimisedcan the vulnerability to data availability be minimised?

will the assumptions affect the value/ applicability of the results?

could the research project be made smaller without compromising

its value?

will you know when the research is complete (seriously)?

will the output and process be evaluated?

will the results be disseminated (and to whom)?

much work has already been done in this area?

Any Other How Questions?


31/34


4-31

Start this page only when you have completed all the sections on Who,

Why, What, Where, When, and How.

Now gather together your summarised thoughts to define the specific

objectives and controlling parameters for the entire context of theresearch project.

Consider, does your research topic need altering? Does your research

question need adjusting again? Is your hypothesis strong? Is the process

clear and of an acceptable level of risk? How do you plan to move

forward from here?

4.6 SWOT Analysis

Another potentially useful evaluative technique is SWOT analysis. This

can be done individually but is better done in pairs or even groups with

one person acting as a facilitator. The group or individual looks at the

research issue from one of four perspectives in rotation: Strengths,

Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.

The more appropriate research opportunities or research questions lie atthe coincidence of strengths and opportunities, and should be selected in

preference to others. Research questions characterised by weaknesses or

threats should be avoided.

Activity

Use the SWOT Analysis Technique to refine the design of the research

topic and research question back down to a focused, informed and

rounded decision made on the basis of coincident strength and

opportunity

Record your comments in the boxes on the following pages. The

technique depends on rigorously thinking about a single perspective at a

time. You should not change to another perspective until you have


32/34


4-32

completed your written comments on the first. If you have completed the

previous exercises, you should find that this is essentially a systematic

refinement and re-presentation of the issues you have raised earlier into a

structured format.

Summarise the Strengths of your Research Topic, Research Question,

and Hypothesis, ranking them where you can:

Summarise the Weaknesses of your Research Topic, Research Question,

and Hypothesis, ranking them where you can:

Summarise the Opportunities for your Research Topic, Research

Question, and Hypothesis, ranking them where you can:

Summarise the Threats to your Research Topic, Research Question, and

Hypothesis, ranking them where you can:

Now review the summarised Strengths and Opportunities together, and

consider whether your research as intended lies within their coincidence.


33/34


4-33

Similarly, combine the summaries of identified Weakness and Threats,

and consider whether your research as intended lies outwith these issues.

Do you need to make any further adjustments? Record any other

comments here, together with your refined research topic, researchquestion, and hypothesis.

Use a mind map if this is helpful.

4.7 Summary

You should now be familiar with the roles and format of a research topic,

a research question, and an hypothesis. You should also understand the

process of research topic selection and how to distinguish between strong

and weak research questions and hypotheses. Having been introduced to

a range of techniques for deriving research questions, you should be able

to apply creativity to the design and evaluation of the remainder of the

research process as you undertake it.

The next stage of the research process involves creating a written

research proposal which will encapsulate your research topic; the

conceptual thoughts you have on it after reading around the subject; the

research question; the hypotheses or propositions which you are starting

with; and the outline design for the remainder of the research process.

This will include methodological issues and the terms of reference for the

collection and analysis of the data to support your studies. This exercise

represents a design freeze for the research, and is dealt with in Chapter 5.


34/34


4.7.1 Personal Feedback Questions

PF 4.1 What distinguishes inductive and deductive approaches to

research?

PF 4.2 Discuss the issues of accessibility and acheiveability

which can surround research questions.

PF 4.3 What is a symmetrical hypothesis and why is it valuable?

4.7.2 Recommended Reading

Buzan, T., 1989. Use Your Head, BBC Publications. ISBN 0-563-20811-

2. Excellent on Mind Maps.

De Bono, E., 1992. Teach your Child How to Think. Penguin ISBN 0-14-

012680-5. Written for the adult, this book gives a thorough contextual

explanation of the concepts of the six hat method (pp 74-100), and many

other approaches to creative thinking. Dont be put off by the title.

De Bono, E., 1994 Thinking Hats on, Please, The Independent, May 2nd

1994. (p15) A brief overview of the Six Hat Method.

De Bono, E. 1990 Lateral Thinking. Penguin. ISBN 0-14-013779-3. This

book offers many different approaches to problem definition and problem

solving which can be applied to research or everyday business issues.

research topics, questions, hypotheses

Documents