Characteristics of Good Research

Good research generates dependable data that are derived by professionally conducted practices and that can be used reliably for decision-making. In contrast, poor research is carelessly planned and conducted, resulting in data that a manager can’t use to reduce his or her decision-making risks. Good research follows the standards of the scientific method: systematic, empirically based procedures for generating replicable research.

Characteristics of a Good Research

Following are the characteristics of a good research for managerial decisions:

• Purpose clearly defined
• Research process detailed
• Research design thoroughly planned
• High ethical standards applied
• Limitations frankly revealed
• Analysis adequate for decision maker’s needs
• Findings presented unambiguously
• Conclusions justified
• Researcher’s experience reflected

Purpose clearly defined

The purpose of the business research, the problem involved or the decision to be made should be clearly defined and sharply delineated in terms as unambiguous as possible. Getting this in writing is valuable even in instances where the same person serves as researcher and decision-maker. The statement of the decision problem should include its scope, its limitations, and the precise meanings of all words and terms significant to the research.

Failure of the researcher to do this adequately may raise legitimate doubts in the minds of research report readers as to whether the researcher has sufficient understanding of the problem to make a sound proposal attacking it. This characteristic is comparable to developing a strategic plan for achieving an objective before developing a tactical plan or an action map.

Research process detailed

The research procedures used should be described in sufficient detail to permit another researcher to repeat the research. Except when secrecy is imposed, research reports should reveal with candor the sources of data and the means by which they were obtained.

Omission of significant procedural details makes it difficult or impossible to estimate the validity and reliability of the data and justifiably weakens the confidence of the reader in the research itself as well as any recommendations based on the research. This characteristic is comparable to developing a tactical plan.

Research design thoroughly planned

The procedural design of the research should be carefully planned to yield results that are as objective as possible. When a sampling of the population is involved, the report should include evidence concerning the degree of representativeness of the sample. A survey of opinions or recollections ought not to be used when more reliable evidence is available from documentary sources or by direct observation.

Bibliographic searches should be as thorough and complete as possible. Experiments should have satisfactory controls. Direct observations should be recorded in writing as soon as possible after the event. Efforts should be made to minimize the influence of personal bias in selecting and recording data. This characteristic is comparable to developing detailed action plans for each tactic.

High ethical standards applied

Researchers often work independently and have significant latitude in designing and executing research projects. A research design that includes safeguards against causing mental or physical harm to participants and makes data integrity a first priority should be highly valued. Ethical issues in research reflect important moral concerns about the practice of responsible behavior in society.

Researchers frequently find themselves precariously balancing the rights of their subjects against the scientific dictates of their chosen method. When this occurs, they have a responsibility to guard the welfare of the participants in the studies and also the organizations to which they belong, their clients, their colleagues, and themselves.

Careful consideration must be given to those research situations in which there is a possibility of physical or psychological harm, exploitation, invasion of privacy, and/or loss of dignity. The research need must be weighed against the potential for adverse effects. Typically, you can redesign a study, but sometimes you cannot. The researcher should be prepared for this dilemma.

Limitations frankly revealed

The researcher should report, with complete frankness, flaws in procedural design and estimate their effect on the findings. There are very few perfect research designs. Some of the imperfections may have little effect on the validity and reliability of the data; others may invalidate them entirely.

A competent researcher should be sensitive to the effects of imperfect design. The researcher’s experience in analyzing data should provide a basis for estimating the influence of design flaws. As a decision- maker, you should question the value of research where no limitations are reported.

Analysis adequate for decision maker’s needs

Analysis of the data should be extensive enough to reveal its significance, what managers call “insights.” The methods of analysis used should be appropriate. The extent to which this criterion is met is frequently a good measure of the competence of the researcher. Adequate analysis of the data is the most difficult phase of research for the novice.

The validity and reliability of data should be checked carefully. The data should be classified in ways that assist the researcher in reaching pertinent conclusions and clearly reveal the findings that have led to those conclusions. When statistical methods are used, the probability of error should be estimated and the criteria of statistical significance applied.

Findings presented unambiguously

Some evidence of the competence and integrity of the researcher may be found in the report itself. For example, language that is restrained, clear and precise; assertions that are carefully drawn and hedged with appropriate reservations; and an apparent effort to achieve maximum objectivity tend to leave a favorable impression of the researcher with the decision-maker.

Generalizations that outrun the evidence on which they are based, exaggerations, and unnecessary verbiage tend to leave an unfavorable impression. Such reports are not valuable to managers wading through the minefields of organizational decision-making. Presentation of data should be comprehensive, easily understood by the decision- maker and organized so that the decision-maker can readily locate critical findings.

Conclusions justified

Conclusions should be limited to those for which the data provide an adequate basis. Researchers are often tempted to broaden the basis of induction by including personal experiences and their interpretations data not subject to the controls under which the research data were gathered. Equally undesirable is the all-too-frequent practice of drawing conclusions from a study of a limited population and applying them universally.

Researchers also may be tempted to rely too heavily on data collected in a prior study and use it in the interpretation of a new study. Such practice sometimes occurs among research specialists who confine their work to clients in a small industry. These actions tend to decrease the objectivity of the research and weaken readers’ confidence in the findings. Good researchers always specify the conditions under which their conclusions seem to be valid.

Researcher’s experience reflected

Greater confidence in the research is warranted if the researcher is experienced, has a good reputation in research, and is a person of integrity. Were it possible for the reader of a research report to obtain sufficient information about the researcher, this criterion perhaps would be one of the best bases for judging the degree of confidence a piece of research warrants and the value of any decision based upon it. For this reason the research report should contain information about the qualifications of the researcher.

Good business research has an inherent value only to the extent that it helps management make better decisions that help achieve organizational goals. Interesting information about consumers, employees, competitors or the environment may be pleasant to have, but its value is limited if the information cannot be applied to a critical decision.

If a study does not help management select more effective, more efficient, less risky or more profitable alternatives than otherwise would be the case, its use should be questioned. Alternatively, management may have insufficient resources (time, money or skill) to conduct an appropriate study or may face a low level of risk associated with the decision at hand.

In these situations, it is valid to avoid business research and its associated costs in time and money. Business research finds its justification in the contribution it makes to the decision-makers task and to the bottom line.