Discussion and Evaluation, Essay Example

The researcher followed the beliefs that the best procedure was doing a qualitative study for those construction industries within a 50 miles radius of the researcher’s residence. This was a manageable study involving some travel but also allowing the researcher to return to his or her home base each evening for evaluative purposes.  For purposes of remaining anonymous the three construction firms have simply been identified as Firm 1 (F1), Firm 2 (F2) and Firm 3 (F3). All of these firms have approximately the same number of employees: F1=60 employees, F2=68 employees,  and F3=72 employees. The employees are identified only as being in the construction trades and not identified by the jobs they do. For example, electricians were not identified as being separate entities from the rest of the firm.

Qualitative studies can be difficult at best.   While a novice merely prepares and distributes a questionnaire and awaits answers, Janesick (2010) suggests going deeper with the participants based on the questionnaire. Janesick believes that the questionnaire is only the starting point. Therefore, without disturbing the work environment too much, the qualitative researcher needs to be able to look for relationships and/or problems that may exist, and that can’t or won’t be part of the questionnaire. Miles and Huberman (1994) observed that qualitative observation is better when the researcher has some personal knowledge about the industry he is surveying. Additional answers, while removing as much bias as possible is done, not through questionnaires, but through person-to-person interviews with different employees who are taking part in the qualitative process. The answers to these interviews, like the primary data gathered from questionnaires, needs to be sorted and coded into workable answers which allows the researcher to create a case study from the findings. Kosner (2006) observed that a case study can be prepared because, unless the owner of the firm is paying for solutions to problems that are part of his business, the researcher is only “borrowing personnel” for completion of a personal study.

Hseich and Shannon (2005) believe in a strict coding pattern. Their research differs from Janesick because Janesick lets the researcher’s mind guide the project. Janesick recognizes that truths and biases come with every study. There are some concepts that researchers will recognize to be a truth and other preconceived ideas which will appear in any qualitative work. Janesick encourages researchers to develop their studies around what they believe to be true. Hseich and Shannon believe strongly in following some kind of blueprint. Just as and architect builds a home based on a predesigned blueprint, Hseich and Shannon believe that reliable research comes from starting with a predesigned blueprint.  Although there is practicality in both designs the researcher chose Janesick, knowing that a better study will come from “allowing the chip to fall where they may.”

Padgett (2004) and Creswell (2008) believe in mixed methods.  Their research designs call for the typical qualitative questionnaire and quantitative methods such as frequency distributions and the use of an Anova (analysis of variances)—measuring means to determine if the researcher has really proven his or her research, or if the null hypothesis is present, suggesting there is no difference.  The null hypothesis is not a symbol of unsuccessful research. It merely proves there in no difference between different research procedures.  This being the case it says to researchers that they would be better off examining other issues.

Assorted researchers (Janesick, 2010), Padgett (2004), and Miles and Huberman (1994) went into heavy detail about how a good high quality research project is conducted. They agreed that spending time having participants answering questionnaires and doing interviews while visiting job sites can be expensive and time consuming. Adult students engaged in this kind of research don’t often have financial resources available for these projects to take inordinate amounts of time. This research is usually singly-owned and not conducted by a team. Qualitative research is a time consuming project but it is comfortable (as opposed to quantitative studies) for individuals who don’t have a broad knowledge of statistics.

In a practical world in job sites where the researcher can easily travel to the job site, qualitative research is ideal. For numerous other businesses which have similarity to each other but are out of reach with the researcher’s budget, quantitative studies will fulfill the researcher’s needs. At the beginning of this document the researcher identified three construction companies that are in close proximity to each other and close to where the researcher resides. Comparing these through qualitative research may be time consuming but manageable in terms of personal finances. Given time to expand this project the researcher has identified five more construction firms in different parts of the United States: F4-F9. Qualitative research is impractical in these companies, primarily because of their distance from the researcher’s locale and the researcher’s lack of fiscal resources. Miles and Huberman (1994) observed that a complete research project at a single company could take more than a year using mixed methods. Since most student research considers multiple companies it is unlikely due, in part, to a lack of fiscal resources that such projects reach their maximum capacity. However, like most major companies they have published information about their buildings, their products, items they have added to their product line, and items they have deleted from their manufacturing processes. Using this already printed material combined with accurate Internet research, the burden of doing quantitative studies can be alleviated without actually going to the job site. The strongest research does not come from using one method or another, but from using multiple research-based activities on a single site (Miles and Huberman).

An Analysis of Firms 1, 2, and 3

These three firms are in close proximity to the student. Following the principles laid out by Janesick (2010) and Padgett (2004) the researcher sent letters of inquiry to the heads of each of these firms asking permission to conduct research, first, at their headquarters, and second, to be allowed to visit certain construction sites to complete the research. The researcher has created a blueprint, a questionnaire which will be completed through initial interviews of randomly selected participating employees. The design of the experiment may have to be changed as the questionnaire progresses. To decide issues not answered by the questionnaire, after limited coding has been completed, there may have to be a second, or even a third round of interviews.

Questionnaire for Qualitative Evaluation

1. How many contracts for a complete building have come to the company in the last six months?
2. How many contracts have been filled for partial services (remodeling, new fixtures, etc.)?
3. How many years have you been employed by the construction firm?
4. Do you think it’s fair the way the firm assigns certain individuals to specific projects?
5. In your opinion, which kinds of services are sustaining your firm during this current recession?
6. Are work activities governed by collective agreements setting rates of pay, vacation pay, etc.?
7. Is training and supervision done by the firm or by a senior supervisor assigned to the job site?
8. Are employees paid according to a standard pay or rate scale?
9. Have you experienced any depleted hours since most of the United States is not at full production?
10. What kinds of jobs are you working on?

Expectations:

The researcher is asking these questions at-random. Every participant will be asked the same question which will be transcribed from a tape recorder and then coded into various themes. Therefore, the expectations may change but they have been created merely to predict the outcomes of this study.

1. The first question asked about contracts in the last six months. Every newspaper in the United States has talked about a slowdown in the housing market. Therefore, if contracts are coming in to the company they are coming in for something other than a full construction commitment—possibly for remodeling. Therefore, the question seeks to inquire of employees how much they know about their company’s business, in addition to the specific tasks they were hired to do.
2. The second question is merely an extension of the first question. Assuming that business is not coming in for full construction, how much business is coming in for smaller jobs such as remodeling?
3. This is a personal question regarding longevity. Regardless of product most companies aim at longevity. It is expensive and time consuming to continually train new employees. The best way to maintain market stability is to retain employees. Mature, well-trained employees can be an asset to the company while newer employees are generally unprepared for maintaining a predetermined level of productivity.
4. The discussion should center on the way employees are assigned to specific projects. Generally, employees with the greatest experience and expertise should be assigned to the major projects while those employees with minimal experience should be assigned to smaller projects. However, even the smallest project is entitled to be supervised by a knowledgeable employee who will guarantee the job has been done correctly, thus guaranteeing a satisfied customer and future references.
5. Research suggests that larger construction firms who have been in control of excess funds have helped mortgage holders of large debt reduce their payments, making it easier for consumers to retain their properties. Additional research suggests that remodeling and making homes energy efficient is being sold to stem the revenue lost from reduced home sales. Because happy employees are usually well-formed employees this question is designed to help them understand where the revenues are coming from.
6. Most construction firms hire union employees. At least in the United States, although unions have been charged with driving up wages, most construction firms will not hire anybody who is not a part of a labor union. Question six asks whether certain wage commitments come as a result of the collective bargaining process. A company which gets along with the collective bargaining process is indeed honorable. Likewise, a company which has the forethought to honor and/or increase wage commitments without collective bargaining will certainly be thought of as a staple in the working community. Although few companies may say so, the researcher has always thought “what’s good for human resource development is good in the consumer marketplace.” A company will not be known for its greediness but for its ability to get along with the working class.
7. This question seeks information about supervision. A company cannot survive with bosses who sit in suits and ties in air conditioned office while laborers toil in their daily tasks. In-between those two planes of the company’s hierarchy there need to be supervisors (middle managers) who are capable of carrying out the visions of their bosses while using the working laborer to complete the task at-hand.
8. This question inquires about pay scale. It is similar, although not identical, to the information sought in question six. Individuals who specialize in human resources know that employee loyalty can be correlated directly to one’s paycheck. There may be some employees who are dissatisfied with their paycheck, their union, or working for their organization; these employees may be better off seeking employment elsewhere, especially if their actions cause negativity in the company or if their actions cause customers to seek other builders. However, for those employees who are otherwise satisfied with their paycheck not getting paid in a timely manner can cause widespread dissatisfaction.
9. This question presumes that the employee recognizes that the United States is experiencing a recession. It also brings thought to the employee that the company he or she is working for is struggling to stay afloat. Remaining in business helps the company to hold on to its market share. It also helps the employee to maintain a standard of living which is always better than unemployment. Employees should recognize that their actions and the actions of their company as a whole complement each other.
10. This is a generalized question asking the employee what kinds of jobs he or she has been working on. Jobs which require skilled workers should be given to those people possessing skills. Jobs which can easily be done by novices should be given to that level of tradesman. If at all possible the companies involved should segregate jobs according to workers’ skills. Employees who find themselves bored may stay on the job because they need the paycheck but their work will be below satisfaction.

Normally, the questionnaire and any documentation supporting the questionnaire would be the last section of the research paper; the section would follow the reference section and would be in the appendix. For the purpose of this document they have been included in the research analysis. Miles and Huberman (1994), Padgett (2004), and Janesick (2010) support the notion that although the questionnaire should be free from bias it is also the beginning of the blueprint for further research. The researcher needs to start out with some kind of vision about how things are or in what order they should be. The actual answers to the questionnaire may vary, and freeing one’s study from bias means that different answers may mean different categories and different coding. But again, the blueprint has to start somewhere. Kosner (2006) noted that before he started his study he blueprinted the issues, and then changed them according to the responses he got to his questionnaire.

References

Creswell, J. (2008). Research design: Qualitative quantitative, and mixed methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

Hseich, H., & Shannon, S. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15(9): 1277-1288.

Janesick, V. (2010). Stretching exercises for the mind. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.

Kosner, J. (2006). Leadership perspective that facilitate school improvement: An ethnographic case study of a public elementary school principal’s leadership role. New York, NY: University Microfiche Incorporated.

Miles, M. & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

Padgett, D. (2004). Qualitative and mixed methods in evaluation. Chapter appearing in Program Evaluation by David Royse, Bruce Thyer, and Deborah Padgett. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.