At the outset may be noted that there are several ways of studying and tackling a problem. There is no single perfect design. As such, the researcher should not wait until he arrives at a unique and perfect research design. Research designs have been classified by various authors in different ways. Different types of research designs have emerged on account of the different perspectives from which a research study can be viewed. However, a frequently used classification system is to group research designs under three broad – exploratory, descriptive and causal.
Exploratory Research: In the case of exploratory research, the focus is on the discovery of ideas. In a business where sales have been declining for the past few months, the management may conduct a quick study to find out what could be the possible explanations – the sales might have declined on account of a number of factors, such as the deterioration in the quality of the product, increased competition, inadequate or ineffective advertising, lack of efficient and trained salesmen or use of the wrong channels of distribution. In such a case an exploratory study may be conducted to find the most likely cause.
An exploratory study is generally based on the secondary data that are readily available. It does not have a formal and rigid design as the researcher may have a change his focus or direction, depending on the availability of new ideas and relationships among variables. An exploratory study is in the nature of a preliminary investigation wherein the researcher himself is not sufficiently knowledgeable and is, therefore, unable to frame detailed research questions.
Since the objective of exploratory research is to generate new ideas, respondents should be given sufficient freedom to express themselves. Sometimes a group of respondents is brought together and a focus group interview is held. Such an interview may be very helpful provided respondents shake off their initial inhibition and participate in the discussion without any reservations. The interviewer should refrain from interfering in the flow of the interview as long as it does not sidetrack the main issue. The interviewer should allow the participants to discuss the issue fully and should intervene only when the feels that some important aspects in the discussion are likely to be left out by the group.
Some persons hold the view that all small studies are exploratory in nature, but this is not true. The fact is that an exploratory study uses a different approach to the problem than the conclusive study. It is not the size of the report that is important, but the type of research design which is relevant.
Sometimes, such studies may be based on the detailed case analysis of a few firms or individuals. An in-depth analysis of cases may reveal new relationships and give some fresh ideas on the subject of inquiry. The findings emerging from case studies should not be regarded a conclusive, but suggestive. Further, no generalisations should be made on the basis of the in-depth investigation of a few individuals or firms as the findings are based on special characteristics or peculiarities of a particular case.
Descriptive Studies: Descriptive studies are undertaken in many circumstances. When the researcher is interested in knowing the characteristics of certain groups such as age, sex, educational level, occupation or income, a descriptive study may be necessary. Other cases when a descriptive study could be taken up are when he is interested in knowing the proportion of people in a given population who have behaved in a particular manner. The objective of such a study is to answer the “who, what, when, where, and how” of the subject under investigation.
There is a general feeling that descriptive studies are factual and are very simple. This not necessarily true Descriptive studies can be complex, demanding a high degree of scientific skill on the part of the researcher.
Descriptive studies are well-structured. As was mentioned earlier, an exploratory study needs to be flexible in its approach, but a descriptive study, in contrast, tends to be rigid and its approach cannot be changed every now and then. It is, therefore, necessary that the researcher gives sufficient thought to framing research questions and deciding the types of data to be collected and the procedure to be used for this purpose. If he is not careful in the initial stages, he may find that either the data collected are inadequate or the procedure used is cumbersome and expensive.
Descriptive studies can be divided into two broad categories – cross-sectional and longitudinal. Of the two, the former type of study is more frequently used.
Cross-sectional studies: A cross-sectional study is concerned with a sample of elements from a given population. Thus, it may deal with households, dealers, retail stores, or other entitles. Data on a number of characteristics from the sample elements are collected and analysed. Cross-sectional studies are of two types – field studies and surveys. Although the distinction between them is not clear-cut, there are some practical differences which need different techniques and skills.
Field studies are ex-post-facto scientific inquiries that aim at finding the relations and inter-relations among variables in a real setting. Such studies are done in life situations like communities, schools, factories, organizations, and institutions.
Field studies have their strengths and weaknesses. One major strength is that they are close to real life, and they cannot be criticised on the ground that they are remote from real settings or are artificial. Field studies are more socially significant than other types of study. While investigating the behaviour and preferences of people, many other related issues, though not so obvious, also get answered. Thus, studies of this type have considerable social significance. Further, in real settings, variables exert their influence fully and, as such, the strength of variables is another advantage of field studies. Field studies are also strong in their heuristic quality. As an in-depth study of a few typical situations is made, many new questions crop up. Thus, additional hypotheses emerge during the course of investigation.
Field studies are also subject to certain weaknesses. Such studies are scientifically inferior to laboratory and field experiments. One of their major weaknesses is their ex-post facto character. As a result, interrelations among variables are weaker than they are in laboratory experiments. As there are several variables affecting the response of interest, such studies find it difficult to isolate their effects on account of there being almost no control on the variables. Another weakness is the lack of precision in the measurement of variables. This limitation arises on account of the greater complexity of field situations. Finally, such studies have practical problems in respect of feasibility, cost, sampling, and time. For instance, they are likely to take more time and involve a greater cost. The researcher has to look into these problems and satisfy himself that the proposed study is feasible and that sufficient time and money are available to him to undertake the study. In no case should he rush into a field study without examining these problems otherwise he may find himself in serious difficulties at a later stage.
Another type of cross-sectional study is survey research. A major strength of survey research is its wide scope. Detailed information can be obtained from a sample of a large population. Besides, it is economical as more information can be collected per unit of cost. Also, it is obvious that a sample survey needs less time than census inquiry.
Despite these advantages of survey research, it is subject to certain limitations. Generally, survey research does not penetrate below the surface as more emphasis is given to the extent of information sought rather than to an in-depth analysis. Another disadvantage is that survey research demands more time and more money, especially when it is conducted on a large scale. It may take months before a single hypothesis can be tested, because testing can be taken up only when the entire research process from the formulation of the problem through sample design, collection of data, and their tabulation is complete. These steps need quite some time. Another limitation of survey research is that the interview may make the respondent alert and cautious and he may not answer the questions in a natural manner. Such answers will make the survey invalid. Finally, survey research needs a good deal of knowledge on the part of the researcher. He must know the technicalities of sampling, the method of constructing questionnaires, interviewing the respondents, editing, coding and tabulation of data and the statistical techniques to analysis data. It is rare to find a single individual possessing knowledge and experience in all these diverse fields.
Longitudinal Studies: Longitudinal studies are based on panel data and panel methods. A panel is a sample of respondents who are interviewed and then reinterviewed from time to time. Generally, panel data relate to the repeated measurements of the same variables. Each family included in the panel, records its purchases of a number of products at regular intervals, say, weekly monthly or quarterly. Over a period of time, such data will reflect changes in the buying behaviour of families.
There are several advantages of using panel data: First, such data enable the researcher to undertake detailed analysis. Thus, one can determine the characteristics of individuals who have changed brands and those who have not. This may help the firm in identifying the segment of the population on which promotional effort should be focused. Another advantage of the panel is that more comprehensive data could be obtained as individuals or families included in the panel are those who have accepted to provide data periodically. As panel members are willing persons, more data can be collected. Yet another advantage is that panel data have been found to be more accurate than data collected through surveys. Finally, costs of data collection through panels are generally lower than through personal interviews. A large proportion of the costs of the panel are fixed cost such as expenditure incurred on the recruitment, training and maintaining of panel members while the variable cost of collecting data from them may be moderate, particularly as the response rate will be extremely high.
There are certain limitations of panel data: A major criticism of panels is that they may not be representative samples. Since panel members are expected to put in some effort in furnishing data to the research organisation, some persons chosen in the original sample may refuse to serve on panels. This may distort the representative character of the original sample. To minimise refusals of this type, many organizations pay some money to panel members. This poses another issue – Does this payment attract a particular type of panel member? Another limitation is that panel members may report wrong data. Ordinarily, panel members are expected to act with a sense of responsibility and supply accurate information. However, this may not be the case when panels are not well maintained. Moreover, after the initial attraction of membership of a panel has faded, members may lose interest in this task and may not fully cooperate with the research organisation. This will affect the quality of information. Sometimes, panel members may deliberately give wrong information to show off their status, annoyance over periodical reporting or repeated interviews.
