An Overflight Over Research

  • Aline DreschEmail author
  • Daniel Pacheco Lacerda
  • José Antônio Valle AntunesJr


This chapter presents the concepts of traditional science and Design Science. It further presents the concepts and types of research that relate to the theme of this book. Later, the types of research methods commonly used by authors in the field of management are presented, including the concept of the work method and the techniques used for gathering and analyzing data. In closing, considerations are provided regarding the trajectory of science and the forms and types of knowledge production.


Focus Group Research Method Scientific Method Knowledge Production Computational Simulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Amaratunga, D., et al. (2002). Quantitative and qualitative research in the built environment: Application of “mixed’’ research approach. Work Study, 51(1), 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ander-Egg, E. (1976). Introducion a las técnicas de investigación social [Introduction to the techniques of social investigation] (5th ed.). Buenos Aires: Editorial Hvmanitas.Google Scholar
  3. Andrade, L. A., et al. (2006). Pensamento Sistêmico: Caderno de Campo [Systemic Thought: Field Notes]. Porto Alegre: Bookman.Google Scholar
  4. Bardin, L. (1993). L’analyse de contenu [Content Analysis]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France Le Psychologue.Google Scholar
  5. Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., & Mead, M. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Quarterly, n. September, 369–387.Google Scholar
  6. Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. C., & Williams, J. M. (2008). The craft of research (3rd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bunge, M. (1980). Epistemologia [Epistemology]. São Paulo: TA Queiroz Editora Ltda.Google Scholar
  8. Burgoyne, J., & James, K. T. (2006). Towards best or better practice in corporate leadership development: Operational issues in mode 2 and design science research. British Journal of Management, 17(4), 303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Camerer, C. (1985). Redirecting research in business policy and strategy introduction: The state of the art. Strategic Management Journal, 6(March 1983), 1–15.Google Scholar
  10. Capelle, M. C. A., Melo, M. C. O. L., & Gonçalves, C. A. (2003). Análise de conteúdo e análise de discurso nas ciências sociais [Content analysis and discourse analysis in social sciences]. Revista Eletrônica de Adiministração da UFLA, 5(1).Google Scholar
  11. Caregnato, R. C. A., & Mutti, R. (2006). Pesquisa qualitativa: análise de discurso [Qualitative research: discourse analysis]. Texto Contexto Enferm, 15(4), 679–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cauchick Miguel, P. A. (2007, April). Estudo de caso na engenharia de produção: estruturação e recomendações para sua condução [Case study in production engineering: Structure and recommendations for conducting one]. Produção, 17(1), 216–229.Google Scholar
  13. Cauchick Miguel, P. A.; Ho, L. L. Levantamento Tipo Survey. [Survey] In Campus, E. (Ed.). Metodologia de Pesquisa em Engenharia de Produção e Gestão de Operações (2. ed., pp. 75–102). Rio de Janeiro: [s.n.].Google Scholar
  14. Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What is this thing called science? (3rd ed.). Sidney: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Coughlan, P., & Coughlan, D. (2002). Action research for operations management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(2), 220–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., & van Aken, J. E. (2008, 1 March). Developing design propositions through research synthesis. Organization Studies, 29(3), 393–413.Google Scholar
  17. Dicicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40(4), 314–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dubé, L., & Paré, G. (2003). Rigor in information systems positivist case research: current practices, tre. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 597–635.Google Scholar
  19. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.Google Scholar
  20. Ellram, L. M. (1996). The use of the case study method misconceptions related to the use. Journal of Business Logistics, 17(2), 93–138.Google Scholar
  21. Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against method. New York: New Left Books.Google Scholar
  22. Forza, C. (2002). Survey research in operations management: A process-based perspective. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(2), 152–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gibbons, M., et al. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. UK: Sage Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  24. Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2012). An introduction to systematic reviews. London: Sage Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  25. Hair Jr J. F. et al. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7. ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Hegenberg, L. (1969). Explicações Científicas: Introdução à filosofia da ciência [Scientific Explanations: Introduction to the philosophy of science]. São Paulo: Editora Herder.Google Scholar
  27. Hume, D. (1999). An enquiry concerning human understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kuhn, T. S. (1967). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. Lacerda, D. P., Caulliraux, H. M., & Spiegel, T. (2014). Revealing factors affecting strategy implementation in HEIs – a case study in a Brazilian university. International Journal of Management in Education, 8(1), 54–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lakatos, I. (1970). Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lakatos, I. (1977). The methodology of scientific research programmes: Philosophical papers (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Mangan, J., Lalwani, C., & Gardner, B. (2004). Combining quantitative and qualitative methodologies in logistics research. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 34(7), 565–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15, 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mentzer, J. T., & Flint, D. J. (1997). Validity in logistics research. Journal of Business Logistics, 18(I), 199–217.Google Scholar
  35. Minayo, M. C. S. (1996). O Desafio do Conhecimento [The Challenge of Knowledge] (4. ed.). São Paulo-Rio de Janeiro: Hucitec-Abrasco.Google Scholar
  36. Morabito Neto, R., & Pureza, V. (2012). Modelagem e Simulação [Modeling and Simulation]. In: Metodologia de Pesquisa em Engenharia de Produção e Gestão de Operações (2. ed., pp. 169–198). Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Campus, 2012.Google Scholar
  37. Morandi, M. I. W. M. et al. (2013). Foreseeing iron ore prices using system thinking and scenario planning. Systemic Practice and Action Research, n. Janeiro, 1–20.Google Scholar
  38. Pandza, K., & Thorpe, R. (2010). Management as design, but what kind of design? An appraisal of the design science analogy for management. British Journal of Management, 21(1), 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pidd, M. (1998). Modelagem Empresarial: Ferramentas para tomada de decisão [Business Modeling: tools for decision-making]. Porto Alegre: Artes Médicas.Google Scholar
  40. Plummer-D’amato, P. (2008). Focus group methodology Part 1: Considerations for design. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 15(2), 69–73.Google Scholar
  41. Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  42. Popper, K. (1979). Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. Gloucestershire: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  43. Popper, K. (2005). The logic of scientific discovery. UK: Taylor & Francis e-Library.Google Scholar
  44. Rodrigues, L. H. (2006). As Abordagens Hard e Soft [Hard and Soft Approaches]. In: Pensamento SistêmicoCaderno de Campo (pp. 81–85). Porto Alegre: Bookman.Google Scholar
  45. Romme, A. G. L. (2003). Making a difference: Organization as design. Organization Science, 14(5), 558–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research methods for business students (6th ed.). London: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
  47. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday.Google Scholar
  48. Shareef, R. (2007). Want better business theories? Maybe Karl Popper has the answer. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(2), 272–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  50. Starkey, K., Madan, P. (2001). Bridging the relevance gap: Aligning stakeholders in the future of management research. British Journal of Management, 12(Special Issue), S3–S26.Google Scholar
  51. Sun, L., & Mushi, C. J. (2010). Case-based analysis in user requirements modeling for knowledge construction. Information and Software Technology, 52(7), 770–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Thiollent, M. (1985). Uses of knowledge: Some methodological alternatives. In: Speciale Uitgave van Systemica Tijdsschrift van de Systeemgroep Nederland (pp. 115–124). Holanda: Delft University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Thiollent, M. (2009). Metodologia da Pesquisa-Ação [Methodology of Action research] (17th ed.). São Paulo: Cortez.Google Scholar
  54. van Aken, J. E. (2004). Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: The quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 219–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. van Aken, J. E. (2005). Management research as a design science: Articulating the research products of mode 2 knowledge production in management. British Journal of Management, 16(1), 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Werneck, V. R. (2006). Sobre o processo de construção do conhecimento: o papel do ensino e da pesquisa [On the process of knowledge construction: the role of teaching and research]. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 14(51), 173–196Google Scholar
  57. Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar

Suggested Reading

  1. Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. C., & Williams, J. M. (2008). The craft of research. 3. ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What Is this thing called science? (3rd. ed.) Sidney: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Michigan: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Hegenberg, L. (1969). Explicações Científicas: introdução à filosofia da ciência [Scientific Explanations: Introduction to the philosophy of science]. São Paulo: Editora HerderGoogle Scholar
  5. Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd. ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aline Dresch
    • 1
    Email author
  • Daniel Pacheco Lacerda
    • 1
  • José Antônio Valle AntunesJr
    • 2
  1. 1.GMAP | UNISINOSPorto Alegre/RSBrazil
  2. 2.UNISINOSPorto Alegre/RSBrazil

Personalised recommendations