Critique of the journal article: Help-Seeking And Help-Giving as an Organizational Routine: Continual Engagement in Innovative Work
A TEMPLATE FOR READING AND EVALUATING RESEARCH
Description Evaluation – strengths and limitations Redesign options to address negative evaluations (where appropriate)
PART A. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY.
The aims, research questions and/or hypotheses
In your own words, explain the purpose of the study, and the RQs of the study. (you can use Cresswell’s (2009) template to help with this if you wish)
Does the paper primarily aim to investigate:
a. processes or structures;
b. subjective experiences or meanings?
Identify the research strategy(ies) used to answer the research questions (you can use Blaikie’s typology for this – or other if you wish – strategy depends on research question):
a. Inductive
b. Deductive
c. Retroductive
d. Abductive
Identify:
a. The main theoretical constructs that are investigated.
Aim
This research paper aims at studying how help giving and help seeking occurs in innovative organizations over time in the context of what the researchers’ term as helping behaviour.
The aim of the research has been developed from the gap in literature concerning helping behaviour.
Theoretical constructs
In the research, the main theoretical construct that was investigated was the helping behaviour in innovative organizations and how they can affect the performance of that organization over time (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014.
Research question
Grodal, Nelson, and Siino (2014) espouse that the main research question drawn by the authors was singular, which was ‘how does the helping behaviour unfold in organizations that do innovative work?’
The research question precisely presented the research gap, which was also clearly and adequately defined in the study. On the previous studies that focused on help giving, most scholars usually emphasized on how cultural frames and perceptions affected the helping behaviours of individuals. The authors provided examples of good distinctive cultures of Indians and Americans (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014). However, the research failed to identify how the helping behaviour could unfold beyond the initial consent. The research question has helped to understand this gap.
Research strategy
The researchers in this study made use of the inductive research strategy (Creswell, 2012).
Ethnocentric research has also been used. The research is oriented towards studying the helping behaviour, which involves shared practices and meanings. It encompasses studying the help giving culture within innovative organizations. The research questions and observations are all related to sharing the meanings of the helping behaviour among the employees at AdvanteQ How clear, specific and understandable are the aims, RQs, purposes?
The aim is clearly stated and is closely linked to the research question. The main objective of the study was to analyse, monitor, track and unpack the existence of the complex ‘tango’ between help givers and help seekers over a long period within the organizational contexts (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014). However, the different complex ‘tangos’ have not been clearly identified by the researchers.
The components of helping behaviour (help giving and help seeking) have been provided though not precisely defined. The helping behaviour consists of help seeking and help giving. The paper also examined the views that helping behaviour is an independent process that involved emotional and cognitive engagement through the help giver and help seeker(s) alike. In addition, the paper set to examine the view that the helping behaviour can help in intertwining several help-givers through extended encounters. Lastly, the paper set to determine how helping behaviour within an organizational context could form routines and coordination and how the results could be generalized even if in situations and organizations where it was not a routine.
In this regard, the research question seems to be an open-ended question. The question is a descriptive question meaning that the authors used the inductive approach in their research. However, the research provides a step by step process that illustrates how the helping behaviour should unfold in the organizations (Bernard & Ryan, 2009).
The use of Inductive research was justified because from the research questions, it was clear that the research was aiming at addressing a gap in the help-giving behaviour in most organizations. Corbin and Strauss (2014) argue that this method is important in answering the research questions that address the existing gap in the literature about a certain topic
Are the RQs, able to be written more clearly?
The authors might have done better by providing more precise definitions of what help seeking, help giving, and innovative organizations were. In this regard, Snelgrove (2014) explains that the readers could have easily discerned what concepts they are dealing with in the research.
The contributions of this paper is to elaborate on the help-giving behaviour and its contributions to the performance of an organization by looking at how the helping behaviour process unfolds in innovative technological organizations over frame or long period (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014).
The methodological fit is well developed. There is a well-worked connection between the research question, the literature review and prior work, as well as the research design (Flick, 2009). In addition, the research significantly contributed to the existing literature. The research question is itself an open-ended question. From the prior work on helping behaviour, gaps have been identified and addressed
PART B. THE RESEARCH DESIGN
Categorise and briefly describe the research design.
1. Categorise the design: Note that more than one of the following may apply.
• Focus groups;
• Depth Interview design
• Case study design
• Q-methodology
• Observational methods
• Critical Incident Technique
• Cross-sectional?
• Longitudinal?
• Other?
• Combination of above?
a. .
The focus of the research was both contemporary and historical because the researchers used both observations and archival data in their analysis.
As already stated, the research uses the inductive research strategy (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014
Direct observations were done on the AdvanteQ team members for a period of between 1 and 5 hours daily.
The research also made use of in-depth semi-structured interviews. The total semi-structured interviews were 32. Interviews are important for several reasons.
Longitudinal research designs were also used. During the first visit, the researchers interviewed employees. When they left, they also interviewed the same employees.
The archival data was obtained from the organizational charts, product documentation, and team meeting memos.
Advantages of observation
The use of observations has some advantages. Firstly, it helps in obtaining data that can be used to analyses and understand the behaviours of different individuals. Secondly, it helps in obtaining original data that has not been diluted or manipulated in any way. Lastly, it helps in reducing overdependence on respondents who might present biases. It provides first hand and primary data.
Disadvantages of observation
However, Zachariadis, Scott, and Barrett (2013) suggest that observations may present the following problems that include being prone to observer baseness and selectivity. Secondly, it is susceptible to the overgeneralization of some aspects. Lastly, one can easily and inappropriately jump into illogical reasoning.
Zachariadis, Scott & Barrett (2013) explain that interviews are important in obtaining thorough knowledge from respondents of the organization such as team leaders.
The method also provides an opportunity to collect a large size of data from a large number of people such as the 30,000 employees of AdvanteQ. The use of interviews, especially the informal interviews, helps in guaranteeing interviewee confidentially. Subsequently, it helps in creating a positive atmosphere for the employees of AdvanteQ and the researchers.
However, the authors should be careful when they use interviews because it is time-consuming and may be presented with certain biases. The interviewees may decide to present some biases as they respond to the questions. In addition, the information gathered may require a lot of evaluation.
Mason and Ide (2014) explain that longitudinal designs are important because they help in obtaining data from people as they respond to changes in the environment after a long period of time.
Secondary data is useful as it saves time, is easily accessible, and cost effective. However, the authors should have realized that data collected from archives may inappropriate the conclusions. In addition, the data might lack quality (Ritchie, Lewis, Nicholls, & Ormston, 2013).
How well is the research design aligned to the stated research purpose? Would a different /adapted design be better? If so, what changes do you suggest and why?
According to the study, the use of observation by the researchers was dully appropriate.
The authors should have realized that the use of direct observation was error prone to such biases that include employee facial expressions and environmental distortions. All these factors could create inaccuracies during direct observation.
Alternatively, the authors could have attempted the use of artificial environments where observations could have been enhanced by enabling observation of accurate data. Such an environment could have also been ideal for the frequent occurrence of helping behaviours.
The authors’ use of observation, interviews, and archival data present challenges and biases. The readers of this paper may question the validity of the data used (Richey & Klein, 2014). Moreover, the researchers did not state whether the interviews used were formal or informal. Informal interviews tend to be associated with biasness because the respondents may fear victimization. It means that the researchers should have provided the correct timing for the data collection through the interviews.
Moreover, the authors could have developed a pilot or feasibility study that would be used in validating the interview schedules. Additionally, the feasibility study could have been used to formulate more research questions (Pratt, 2009).
PART C.
Data collection.
Summarise the data collection approach (es) and procedure(s).
How complete were descriptions of data collection procedures? Was there any obvious information missing?
How systematic were data collection procedures? Were protocols for data collections provided, e.g., interview protocols?
How was data recorded? E.g., audio recording; note taking; multiple observers or one observer?
Was data collection and analysis cyclical or ‘one-shot’. Was this appropriate?
Were changes in data collection procedures described and justified eg, changes in the interview protocol as a result of initial analysis?
Bearing in mind the previous discussion, were data collection procedures appropriate, and appropriately implemented, for the research purposes?
In summary, how dependable were data collection methods?
Data collection through observations took approximately 184 hours. A total of 59 sites were visited and each day, a researcher took between 1 to 5 hours of observation (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014).
The data was collected through direct observations, brief semi-structured interviews, and the use of archival data.
The research was divided into three parts. The first consisted of three phases.
The collection process started by the researchers visiting the AdvanteQ Company, interacting with employees, dividing the volunteers into teams, as well as closely observing their interactions with fellow employees and others outside the organization (Grodal, Nelson, & Siino, 2014).
The helping interactions were recorded and analysed and finally, the teams were compared and contrasted so that any existing discrepancies could be noted.
Data was collected through note taking, and a total of 602 single spaces notes were collected. The data collection and analysis was cyclical. The researchers used at least more than 50 interactions twice a day (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014).
From the critical analysis, it is evident that the author did not provide how the various stakeholders (the team members, the AdvanteQ employees, and others) influenced the social processes of helping behaviour and data collection.
The researchers also solely relied on note taking as the major form of recording data. This was dangerous because as DePoy and Gitlin (2013) suggest, note taking may prevent respondents from fully giving their responses for fear of confidentiality and sensitivity. Such respondents may not like being recorded
The use of cyclical data collection was important in this study based on the fact that the survey was done over a long period. However, the authors have failed to determine the exact period of data collection and analysis.
In such cases, instead of taking direct notes, the authors should delay note taking albeit after the interview or observation ends. However, even this strategy poses a danger as the interviewer might forget important information.
To collect more data, the researchers may decide to use video recording (Huber & Runstein, 2013; Nimnoi & Rao, 2013). This strategy is good because it helps in efficient data management, and increases convenience. In addition, the data collected is abundant without any observer biasness. To avoid the biasness of the observers, Merriam (2014) suggests that the use of reliability checks should be recommended
PART D. SAMPLING STRATEGY
1. Was a target population specified? Can a target population be inferred?
2. Describe the overall sampling strategy. How was the sample chosen? If possible, label the strategy (e.g., random sampling, maximum variation sampling, homogenous sampling, extreme case sampling, revelatory case sampling, convenience sampling etc). Was this appropriate for the study?
3. What was the final sample size? Was a response rate provided? How can it be calculated from the information provided? Show how, or what information is lacking. Is this size sufficient for the research?
4. Why was that sample size used? If claims of saturation were made, were they of data saturation, or of analytical or theoretical saturation? What claims were made or evidence provided that saturation was reached?
5. Was theoretical sampling used to saturate categories emerging from a first phase of the research. If so, in what specific ways was it theoretical or purposeful? How relevant to the purposes of the study was the sampling?
The target population was well specified. The researchers decided to use the 3000 employees at AdvanteQ because it is a technological company, and hence innovative organization (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014).
The paper then focused on the teams that were developed 12 months before the actual research started.
In the study, cluster sampling was done (Levy & Lemeshow, 2013). The teams were grouped based on their geographical area. The geographical areas were the various AdvanteQ sites in southern California, Silicon Valley, India, and Massachusetts.
For the purpose of this study, the sample size of 3000 AdvanteQ employees was justified.
There were no claims of saturation
The target population was clearly provided as various teams were well suited for the helping behavior analysis. However, the authors failed to give reasons why they used teams when their initial research question was not meant for a specific team. The engineers at AdvanteQ were chosen because their work involved constant coordination where workers would most of the times encounter newly surfaced problems and issues. These prompted them to ask their colleagues for help.
The research failed to note the clear dates when the study took place (Di Francesco, Das, & Anastasi, 2011). The researchers should have dated their research.
The use of cluster sampling should have been supplemented with other forms of sampling such as random sampling (O’Reilly & Parker, 2012). Random sampling helps in bringing credibility to the collected sample size. The targeted population was also credible as it could be easily inferred. For the purpose of this study, the sample size of 3000 AdvanteQ employees was justified.
PART E.
Data Analysis.
Describe the procedures used to analyse the data.
How complete were descriptions of data collection procedures?
Was there any obvious information missing?
How systematic were data analysis procedures?
Were protocols for data analysis provided?
Were themes, concepts and codes/categories derived from the data or derived from existing theory?
Is it clear how these were derived?
How systematically were these applied?
Did data analysis cycle with data collection? Were subsequent changes to themes, concepts or codes described and justified?
In summary, how dependable were data analysis procedures?
The data analysis section was subdivided into three parts.
The first part was divided into three phases. The first phase involved classifying the specific statements and actions into moves. The moves were then categorized and analysed. Phase two comprised the identification of the various components of the 189 interactions (Grodal, Nelson, & Siino, 2014). Phase three involved the generalization of specific segments in terms of the roles they played during the interactions. The regularities in the patterns of interaction were then examined.
The second part examined the moves during the interactions that created emotional and cognitive engagement.
The last part of data analysis was the contrasting and comparing of the work context of the interactions (Grodal, Nelson, & Siino, 2014).
The timing and duration of the entire process of data analysis has not been clearly discussed (Gelman, Carlin, Stern, & Rubin, 2014; Glaser & Strauss, 2009).
Based on the research, the data analysed were completely and systematically described and analysed.
The use of tables made the analysis more valid and trustworthy. Internal consistency and fit of the analysed data with the research was good.
The authors effectively used the text matrix to record the observed and analysed data.
The research also used an open coding system that is known for producing irrelevant information
The alternative coding system is the selective coding approach.
PART E.
Knowledge claim?
1. what does the authors claim to be true as a result of the application of their method
2. Are conclusions clearly linked back to the evidence within the data?
3. In what ways does the author generalise the conclusions? On what basis are these generalisations justified? (Think about analytic generalisabilty?)
Grodal, Nelson, and Siino (2014) illustrate that although the research has failed to illustrate how help unfolds within an organization, it has helped to illuminate help as a process and routine.
The research has also shown how ostensive helping connects different helping encounters.
The research has also illuminated how helping involves emotional and cognitive-emotional engagements.
Lastly, the researchers have generalized that their work has implications for managers in innovative organizations. This was based on the fact that the advantage is that organizations establish work cultures that provide psychological and rewards safety around the need to seek help from one another (Grodal, Nelson & Siino, 2014.
Strengths
The helping has been moved beyond the yes or no routine to involve more emotional concepts.
The research has also helped extend the existing literature on routines. In addition, we now know that the helping routine is a contextual and collective process.
Failures
The authors have failed to show the link between the research question earlier identified and the conclusions. Instead, the conclusions have been based on the findings of the study, which have also failed to answer the research question how the helping behaviour unfolds in an organization. Therefore, the research objective has not been achieved by the study.
Another failure of the study is that throughout the observation period, the researchers did not respect personal privacy of the employees as they looked into how the employees were replying to their personal messages and emails. The research should have done better by respecting personal privacy.
Conditions for causal claims.
Were causal claims made or inferred? How and how well met are the conditions required for making causal claims (that is, internal validity)?
Alternative explanations for the results (internal validity and threats to internal validity)
What procedures were undertaken to ensure/increase the internal validity of the study? Are other plausible explanations possible?
To increase the internal validity of data, the authors created a conducive relationship with the employees and management at AdvanteQ. They first visited the company one year prior to their research and then established good cordial relationships. The authors also increased the validity of the data collected internally by closely watching the employees from close range. This meant that the employees could not pose with misleading behaviours when the observations were being mad.
References
Bernard, H. R., & Ryan, G. W. (2009). Analysing qualitative data: Systematic approaches. Thousand Oaks: SAGE publications.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
DePoy, E., & Gitlin, L. N. (2013). Introduction to research: Understanding and applying multiple strategies. New York: Elsevier Health Sciences.
Di Francesco, M., Das, S. K., & Anastasi, G. (2011). Data collection in wireless sensor networks with mobile elements: A survey. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks (TOSN), 8(1), 7-15.
Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, NJ: Sage.
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2014). Bayesian data analysis (Vol. 2). Boca Raton FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2009). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Grodal, S., Nelson, A., & Siino, R. (2014). Help-seeking and Help-giving as an Organizational Routine: Continual Engagement in Innovative Work. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), 136-168.
Huber, D. M., & Runstein, R. E. (2013). Modern recording techniques. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Levy, P. S., & Lemeshow, S. (2013). Sampling of populations: methods and applications. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Mason, D. M., & Ide, B. (2014). Adapting qualitative research strategies to technology savvy adolescents. Nurse Researcher, 21(5), 40-45.
Merriam, S. B. (2014). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Nimnoi, R., & Rao, S. S. (2013). Development of digital cultural collections for cultural knowledge centre (Thailand): A data collection method and technique. Trends in Information Management (TRIM), 9(1), 22-37.
O’Reilly, M., & Parker, N. (2012). ‘Unsatisfactory Saturation’: a critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 190-197.
Pratt, M. G. (2009). From the editors: For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 856-862.
Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2014). Design and development research: Methods, strategies, and issues. London: Routledge.
Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (Eds.). (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Thousand Oaks, CL: Sage.
Snelgrove, S. R. (2014). Conducting qualitative longitudinal research using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Nurse Researcher, 22(1), 20-25.
Zachariadis, M., Scott, S., & Barrett, M. (2013). Methodological implications of critical realism for mixed-methods research. Mis Quarterly, 37(3), 855-879.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|