Skip to main content

A methodological proposal for a strategic design investigation

Abstract

This article presents the decisions that are presented in the transition from theoretical to methodological, as a means to establish coherence and validity in an investigation that addresses strategic design’s contribution to organizational transformations. A coherent methodological proposal is presented between the ontological posture (intersubjectivity), epistemological posture (pragmatism), and research method (mixed) required to address the object of research in strategic design, and to consistently select the various techniques and procedures required. This proposal is pertinent to respond to the research question of what the role fo strategic design might be, as related to organizational transformation, to the extent that it provides competencies (human capital), processes (structural capital), and a relationship model (relational capital).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Aaltio, I., & Heilmann, P. (2010). Case study as a methodological approach: From locality to understanding the essence. Encyclopedia of case study research

  2. Aguilera, R.M.: Identity and differentiation between method and Methodology. Polit. Stud. (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0185-1616(13)71440-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alatinga, K.A., Williams, J.J.: Mixed methods research for health policy development in Africa: the case of identifying very poor households for health insurance premium exemptions in Ghana. J. Mixed Methods Res. 13(1), 69–84 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816665056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Barrera, M. D. M. (2012). Qualitative research: Thematic analysis for the treatment of information from the approach of social phenomenology. Universitas Humanística, 74 (74). https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/univhumanistica/article/view/3648

  5. Berger, P., Luckmann, T.: The social construction of reality. Buenos Aires: Amorrortu (1993). https://doi.org/10.2307/3466656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business Research Methods (4th Edition). Cambridge, United Kingdom; New York, NY, United States of America: OUP Oxford

  7. Bunge, M. (2009). Scientific research. México: Siglo XXI Editores

  8. Butterfield, L.D., Borgen, W.A., Amundson, N.E., Maglio, A.-S.T.: Fifty years of the critical incident technique: 1954–2004 and beyond. Qual. Res. 5(4), 475–497 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen, H.T.: A theory-driven evaluation perspective on mixed methods research. Res. Sch. 13(1), 75–83 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Creswell, J.W., Hanson, W.E., Clark Plano, V.L., Morales, A.: Qualitative research designs: selection and implementation. Couns. Psychol. 35(2), 236–264 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L.: Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428108318066

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Creswell, J.W., Tashakkori, A.: Developing publishable mixed methods manuscripts. J. Mixed Methods Res. 1(2), 107–111 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806298644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cross, N.: Design research: a disciplined conversation. Des. Issues 15(2), 5–10 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2307/1511837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Doyle, L., Brady, A., Byrne, G.: An overview of mixed methods research. J. Res. Nurs. 14(2), 175–185 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987108093962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Eisenhardt, K.M.: Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14(4), 532–550 (1989). https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Escobar-Pérez, J., Cuervo-Martínez, Á.: Content validity and expert judgment: an approach to its use. Adv. Meas. 6(1), 27–36 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Faerna, Á. M (1996) Introduction to the pragmatist theory of knowledge. (Vol. 33)

  18. Fetters, M.B., Molina-Azorin, J.F.: New requirements to include the methodological contribution in articles published in the journal of mixed methods research. J. Mixed Methods Res. 13(2), 138–142 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689819834753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fetters, M.D.: Six equations to help conceptualize the field of mixed methods. J. Mixed Methods Res. 12(3), 262–267 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Flanagan, J.C.: The critical incident technique. Psychol. Bull. 51(4), 327–358 (1954). https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Franco, C. de, & Josefina, Y. (2009). Validez y confiabilidad de los instrumentos de investigación para la recolección de datos. Revista Ciencias de la Educación, 19(32), 228–247. http://riuc.bc.uc.edu.ve/handle/123456789/1949

  22. Galicia, L., Balderrama, J., Edel, R., Galicia, L.: Content validity by expert judgment: proposal of a virtual tool. Opening 9(2), 42–53 (2017). https://doi.org/10.18381/ap.v9n2.993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Garcia, D., Gluesing, J.C.: Qualitative research methods in international organizational change research. J. Organ. Chang. Manag. 26(2), 423–444 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1108/09534811311328416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Goldkuhl,: Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 21(2), 135–146 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of qualitative research, 2

  26. Hamui-Sutton, A., & Varela-Ruiz, M. (2013). La técnica de grupos focales. Investigación en educación médica, 2(5), 55–60. http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S200750572013000100009&script=sci_abstract&tlng=en

  27. Hanson, W.E., Creswell, J.W., Clark, V.L.P., Petska, K.S., Creswell, J.D.: Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. J. couns. psychol. 52(2), 224 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Harari, Y.N.: From animals to gods. Brief history of humanity. Penguin Random House Grupo Editorial, Bogotá (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Johnson, R.B., Christensen, L.: Educational research: quantitative, qualitative and mixed approaches, 4th edn. SAGE Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, California (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J.: Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educ. Res. 33(7), 14–26 (2004). https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson, P., Clark, M.: Business and management research methodologies, 1st edn. SAGE Publications Ltd., London (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lafuente López, R. (2001). About analysis and representation of documents. Investigación Bibliotecológica, 15(30), 163–193. http://148.202.167.116:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/1378

  33. Larrinaga, O.V., Rodríguez, J.L.: Case studies as a scientific research methodology in business management and economics: an application to internationalization. Eur. Res. Bus. Manag. Econ. 16(3), 31–52 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Martínez, P.C.: The case study method Methodological strategy of scientific research. Sci. J. Thought Manag. 20(29), 165–193 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Maxwell, J.: Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harv. Educ. Rev. 62(3), 279–301 (1992). https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.62.3.8323320856251826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Morgan, D.L.: Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. J. Mixed Methods Res. 1(1), 48–76 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906292462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Olivera, J., Braun, M., & Roussos, A. (2011). Instruments for the evaluation of empathy in psychotherapy. http://repositorio.ub.edu.ar/handle/123456789/2767

  38. Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Johnson, R.B.: The validity issue in mixed research. Res. Sch. 13(1), 48–63 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ortí, A.: The openness and the qualitative structural approach: The semi-direct open interview and group discussion. Methods and techniques of investigation. Editorial Alliance, Madrid (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Pole, K. (2009). Design of mixed methodologies. A review of the strategies to combine quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Renglones, 60(marzo-agosto), 37–42 https://rei.iteso.mx/handle/11117/252

  41. Ponti, F. (2001). The creative company: methodologies for the development of innovation in organizations. España: Ed. Granica

  42. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A.: Research methods for business students, 6th edn. Pearson Education Limited, Edinburgh gate, Harlow, England (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Schütz, A. (1972). Phenomenology of the social world: Introduction to comprehensive sociology. Buenos Aires: Paidós

  44. Stake, R.E.: The art of case study research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Stake, R.E.: Qualitative Case Studies. In: The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3rd edn., pp. 443–466. Sage Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks, CA (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Tashakkori, A., Creswell, J.W.: Publisher: exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. J. Mixed Methods Res. 1(3), 207–211 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807302814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C.: Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. SAGE (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tirri, K., Koro-Ljungberg, M.: Critical incidents in the lives of women endowed with Finnish scientists. J. Second. Gift. Educ. 13(4), 151–163 (2002). https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2002-379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Turner, S.F., Cardinal, L.B., Burton, R.M.: Research design for mixed methods: a triangulation-based framework and roadmap. Organ. Res. Methods 20(2), 243–267 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115610808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Valladares, L. (2011). The competences in scientific education. Tensions from epistemological pragmatism. Educational Profiles, 33(132), 158–182. http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S0185-26982011000200010&script=sci_arttext&tlng=pt

  51. Van Teijlingen, E.R., Hundley, V.: The importance of pilot studies. J. Adv. Nurs. 34(3), 289–295 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01757.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Yin, R.K.: Discovering the Future of the Case Study. Method Eval. Res. Eval. Pract. 15(3), 283–290 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409401500309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). sage.

Download references

Funding

This study was not funded.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Carmenza Gallego Giraldo or Gregorio Calderón Hernández.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Giraldo, C.G., Hernández, G.C. A methodological proposal for a strategic design investigation. Qual Quant (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01256-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Strategic design
  • Research methodology
  • Research paradigms
  • Organizational transformation