Abstract
Chapter 6 explains the research design. It presents the qualitative exploratory research approach via multiple research methods which is adopted to investigate the responsible stakeholder management practices of leading pharmaceutical companies in the UK and Germany. Using this approach, the data were primarily collected from senior executives in the target countries.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The word ‘responsible’ is employed in this book as an adjective in the sense of being accountable. It is assumed to mean to be responsible compared with the closely related noun ‘responsibility’, which is inferred to imply the obligation or duty to have a responsibility.
- 2.
Please refer to Chap. 5 for further details.
- 3.
For an overview of further definitions for the key terms employed in this study, please refer to the glossary section of this book or to Chap. 2 for a more detailed explanation.
- 4.
For further details, please refer to the subsequent section on contextual issues in the research study below, as well as the misconceptions and misunderstandings section in Chap. 2.
- 5.
For clarification, the term ‘CSR’ is employed here and throughout this chapter for brevity purposes. It is intended to signify the concept of responsible management (as defined in Chap. 2) within a corporate sustainable stakeholder relationship setting.
- 6.
For clarification, the stance adopted here acknowledges the global competition facing pharmaceutical decision-makers. This causes a ‘no excuses’ operating environment where the bottom line is paramount. As previously established in the misconceptions and misunderstandings section of Chap. 2, this assumes that businesses by definition exist to generate wealth to continue their survival and that this value creation is a prerequisite to its ultimate distribution among its shareholders. To survive in the long term, the pharmaceutical industry, as any other business, needs to concern itself alongside share prices and balance sheets with respecting the interests of all its stakeholders. This approach is simply interpreted as ‘good business’ because to behave otherwise would endanger its licence to operate and thereby ultimately, its long-term success (O’Riordan, 2010, pp. 113–114).
- 7.
Please refer to Chap. 4 for further details.
- 8.
Grant and Jordan (2015, p. 22) point out how a pragmatic perspective in a competitive labour market recognises how failing to take employees into account incurs the costs of high employee turnover. Similarly, firms which disregard the interests of their suppliers find themselves at a disadvantage relative to competitors with more responsive policies.
- 9.
A crucial premise in this approach is the intention to progress the concept of responsible management and individual accountability out of the normative realm of subjective values or beliefs (morals and ethics) and into the scientific sphere of empirical testing (Küpper, 2011, pp. 140–144). In line with the scientific empirical or value-neutral approach to business proposed by Weber (1917, 1988), this approach aims to identify and empirically validate the most optimal outcomes for both business and society based on measurable criteria (e.g. Homann & Lütge, 2005) without the burden of a normative stance (O’Riordan & Fairbrass, 2016, p. 34; O’Riordan & Zmuda, 2015, p. 486).
- 10.
Please refer to the misconceptions and misunderstandings section of Chap. 2 for further details.
- 11.
For clarification, although the research is flexible in design, its outcomes can be used to support the existence of particular mechanisms in the area under study (Robson, 2004, p. 65). Furthermore, despite the fact that the unit of analysis is the company, the qualitative leaning focuses on individual managers (including their perceptions, worries, feelings). Accordingly, the research approach could be interpreted as individualistic.
- 12.
For further details on the research assumptions, please refer to the subsequent separate section below addressing this theme.
- 13.
For clarification, as the research focuses on internal management aspects, external stakeholders are not included in this enquiry.
- 14.
For clarification, the IMS is the recognised as the leading provider of business intelligence and strategic consulting services for the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries.
- 15.
For clarification, the sample size choices presented in the following sections are based on the sample strategy approach established in the previous section. This entire approach is subsequently critically examined and justified in Chap. 8 in the Data Trustworthiness section.
- 16.
For clarification, the companies do not represent the leading companies by rank in each country but rather companies which are leading in both countries. This approach is based on the wish to compare divergences between the stakeholder approaches of companies operating in both countries. As a result, important (generic) companies in Germany, such as Ratiopharm (rank 3), Kohl Medical AG (rank 7), Stada (rank 13), and Emra-Med (rank 17), were omitted because they do not operate in the UK. Based on the same logic, however, Reckitt Benckiser, which is ranked 14th in the UK but 55th in Germany, was included because it operates in both countries.
- 17.
Further details on these codes, which comprise visibility, terminology employed, projects /activities, codes of conduct in use, stakeholder references, and stakeholder communication/dialogue , are available in the glossary section of this book.
- 18.
These codes were applied in the other methods employed in this research design and explained in greater detail in Chap. 2, as well as in the glossary section of this book.
- 19.
For further details, please refer to O’Riordan (2010, pp. 491–493).
- 20.
Under varying labels in addition to CSR, such as social responsibility, corporate responsibility , sustainability, etc.
- 21.
For clarification, an unstructured interview approach is rejected because it is deemed overly informal, with limited ability for the researcher to guide the conversation. Essentially, this rationale is based on the danger that it could lead to difficulties in comparing results and accordingly issues with data reliability, interpretation, and analysis. Instead, more structured discussions which focus on clear and efficient use of time and prearranged topics are deemed more appropriate for the target group in question. However, as the survey approach employs a structured questionnaire, a less structured method is deemed of greater value. In allowing a more flexible, in-depth response, the assumption is that this would help to balance out the disadvantages of the questionnaire method. Consequently, the semi-structured questionnaire is the preferred approach as a flexible ‘middle way’.
- 22.
Presented in previous sections and repeatedly adopted as the standard approach to analyse the data from each research instrument.
- 23.
Board Member, Managing Director Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust & CSR Directors/Associates EMEA.
- 24.
For clarification, the findings presented here were obtained solely for the purpose of scientific research and are entirely free from any form of financial obligation, support, or expectations of any similar effect or means.
- 25.
For further details on this in-depth interview approach, please refer to O’Riordan and Zmuda (2015).
- 26.
For further details, please refer to the various framework versions presented in subsequent chapters of this book.
References
Acutt, J. N., Medina-Ross, V., & O’Riordan, T. (2004). Perspectives on corporate social responsibility in the chemical sector: A comparative analysis of the Mexican and South African cases. Natural Resources Forum, 28, 302–316.
Agranoff, R., & Radin, B. A. (1991). The comparative case study approach in public administration. In J. L. Perry (Ed.), Research in public administration (Vol. 1, pp. 203–231). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Aguilar, F. J. (1967). Scanning the business environment. New York: Macmillan.
Andler, N. (2011). Tools for project management, workshops and consulting: A must-have compendium of essential tools and techniques. Erlangen: Publicis Publishing.
Barnes, D. (2001). Research methods for the empirical investigation of the process of formation of operations strategy. International Journal of Production and Operations Management, 21(8), 1076–1095.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
Barney, J. B., & Hesterly, W. S. (2012). Strategic management and competitive advantage: Concepts and cases. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Bell, J. (2003). Doing your research project: A guide for first-time researchers in education and social science (3rd ed.). Berkshire: Open University Press.
Bhaskar, R. (1989). Reclaiming reality: A critical introduction to philosophy. London: Verso.
Biggs, D. (2010). Management consulting. A guide for students. Hampshire: Cengage.
Blaikie, N. (1993). Approaches to social enquiry. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Blaikie, N. (2000). Designing social research. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Blalock, H. M. (1982). Conceptualisation and measurement in the social sciences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Blum-Kusterer, M., & Hussain, S. S. (2001). Innovation and corporate sustainability: An investigation into the process of change in the pharmaceuticals industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 10(5), 300–316.
Brammer, S., & Pavelin, S. (2004). Building a good reputation. European Management Journal, 22(6), 704–713.
Bryman, A. (1989). Research methods and organisational studies. London: Unwin Hyman.
Bryman, A. (2001). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2007). Business research methods (revised edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.
Castka, P., Balzarova, M. A., Bamber, C. J., & Sharpet, J. M. (2004). How can SMEs effectively implement the CSR agenda? A UK case study perspective. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 11, 140–149.
Chapple, W., & Moon, J. (2005). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Asia: A seven country study of CSR website reporting. Business and Society, 44(4), 415–441.
Clark, C. (2000). Differences between public relations and corporate social responsibility: An analysis. Public Relations Review, 26(3), 363–80.
Collier, A. (1994). Critical realism: An introduction to Roy Bhaskar’s philosophy. London: Verso.
Denzin, N. K. (1988). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Easterby-Smith, M. P. V., Thorpe, R., & Jackson, P. (2008). Management research. London: Sage.
Eisenführ, F., Weber, M., & Langer, T. (2010). Rational decision making. Heidelberg: Springer.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.
Eland-Goossensen, M. A., Van, D. G. L. A. M., Vollemans, E. C., Hendriks, V. M., & Garretsen, H. F. L. (1997). Snowball sampling applied to opiate addicts outside the treatment system. Addiction Research, 5(4), 317–330.
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone.
Etter, J. F., & Perneger, T. V. (2000). Snowball sampling by mail. International Epidemiological Association. International Journal of Epidemiology, 29, 43–48.
Fairbrass, J., O’Riordan, L., & Mirza, H. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Differing definitions and practices? University of Bradford Conference Paper for Business, Society and Environment (BSE) Conference, Leeds, UK.
Fama, E., & Jensen, M. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(6), 301–325.
Fombrun, C. J., & Nevins, M. D. (2004). The advice business: Essential tools and models for management consulting (pp. 75–240). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & Nachmias, D. (1996). Research methods in the social sciences (5th ed.). London: Arnold Publications.
Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence versus forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Gold, R. L. (1958). Roles in sociological fieldwork. Social Forces, 36, 217–23.
Goodmann, L. A. (1960). Snowball sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 32, 140–170.
Grant, R. M., & Jordan, J. (2015). Foundations of strategy (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Habisch, A., Jonker, J., Wegner, M., & Schmidpeter, R. (Eds.). (2005). Corporate social responsibility. Berlin: Springer.
Haniffa, R. M., & Cooke, T. E. (2005). The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24(5), 391–430.
Hodgson, I. (2004). Module 3: Philosophy of research in social sciences and humanities. Lecture notes. University of Bradford.
Homann, K., & Lütge, C. (2005). Einführung in die Wirtschaftsethik [Introduction to Business Ethics]. Münster: Lit-Verlag.
House, E. R. (1991). Realism in research. Educational Researcher, 20(6), 2–9.
Hungenberg, H. (2010). Problemlösung und Kommunikation: Vorgehensweisen und Techniken [Problem solving and communication: Procedures and techniques] (3rd ed.). Munich: Oldenbourg.
IMS. (2006). Official sales data for the pharmaceutical industry. Accessed February 2006, from http://www.imshealth.com.
Johnson & Johnson. (2014). The J&J corporate citizenship trust. Accessed January 2014, from http://www.jjcct.org/who-we-are/.
Knox, S., & Maklan, S. (2004). Corporate social responsibility: Moving beyond investment towards measuring outcomes. European Management Journal, 22(5), 508–516.
Küpper, H. U. (2011). Unternehmensethik: Hintergründe, Konzepte, und Anwendungsbereiche [Business ethics: Background, concepts, and applications]. Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel.
Laux, H., Gillenkirch, R. M., & Schenk-Mathes, H. Y. (2012). Entscheidungstheorie [Decision making theory] (8th ed.). Wiesbaden: Springer-Gabler.
Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. (2003). Nature of corporate responsibilities: Perspectives from American, French, and German consumers. Journal of Business Research, 56, 55–67.
Mancias, P. T., & Secord, P. F. (1983). Implications for psychology of the new philosophy of science. American Psychologist, 38(4), 399–413.
Marshall, C. R., & Rossmann, G. B. (1989). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McDonough, W., & Braungart, M. (2002). Design for the triple top line: New tools for sustainable commerce. Corporate Environmental Strategy, 9(3), 251–258. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1066-7938(02)00069-6.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Miller, W. L., & Crabtree, B. F. (1992). Primary care research: A multimethod typology and qualitative roadmap. In B. F. Crabtree & W. L. Miller (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (1st ed., pp. 3–28). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publication.
Minto, B. (2009). The pyramid principle: Logic in writing and thinking (3rd ed.). Harlow: Pearson.
Mirvis, P., & Seashore, S. (1982). Creating ethical relationships in organisational research. In J. Siever (Ed.), The ethics of social research, surveys, and experiments (pp. 79–104). New York: Springer Verlag.
O’Riordan, L. (2006). CSR and stakeholder dialogue: Theory, concepts, and models for the pharmaceutical industry. MRES Dissertation, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.
O’Riordan, L. (2010). Perspectives on corporate social responsibility (CSR): Corporate approaches to stakeholder engagement in the pharmaceutical industry in the UK and Germany. PhD Thesis, Bradford University School of Management, Bradford, UK.
O’Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2008). CSR—Theories, models and concepts in stakeholder dialogue—A model for decision-makers in the pharmaceutical industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 754–758.
O’Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2014). Managing stakeholder engagement: A new conceptual framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(1), 121–145.
O’Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2016). Responsible stakeholder engagement: A comparison of corporate approaches in the UK and German pharmaceutical industry. In L. O’Riordan, & P. Zmuda (Eds.), FOM KCC KompetenzCentrum für corporate social responsibility der FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management (Band 2).
O’Riordan, L., & Zmuda, P. (2015). Conceptual framework for CR management: A critical review of sustainable business practice based on a case study of a leading transnational corporation. In L. O’Riordan, P. Zmuda, & S. Heinemann (Eds.), New perspectives on corporate social responsibility: Locating the missing link (pp. 473–504). Wiesbaden: Springer.
Payne, G., & Payne, J. (2004). Key concepts in social research. London: Sage.
Pedersen, E. R., & Neergaard, P. (2008). From periphery to centre: How CSR is integrated in mainstream performance management frameworks. Measuring Business Excellence, 12(1), 4–12.
Phillips, E., & Pugh, D. (2003). How to get a PhD: A handbook for students and their supervisors (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.
Punch, K. F. (1998). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage.
Rasiel, E. M., & Friga, P. N. (2001). The McKinsey mind: Understanding and implementing the problem-solving tools and management techniques of the world’s top strategic consulting firm. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reynolds, P. D. (1971). A primer in theory construction. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
Robson, C. (2004). Real world research (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Sanger, J. (Ed.). (1996). The complete observer? A field research guide to observation. London: Falmer Press.
Sayer, A. (2000). Realism and social science. London: Sage.
Schostak, J. F. (2002). Understanding, designing and conducting research in education. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Sheu, S. J., Wei, I. L., Chen, C. H., Yu, S., & Tang, F. I. (2008). Using snowball samoling method with nurses to understand medication administration errors. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(4), 559–569. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.02048.x.
Silverman, D. (2005). Doing qualitative research (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Smith, M. J. (2003). Social science. The Open University, London: Sage.
Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tsang, E. W. K., & Kwan, K. M. (1999). Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 24(5), 759–780.
Warner, J. P., Wright, L., Blanchard, M., & King, M. (2003). The psychological health and quality of life of older lesbians and gay men: A snowball sampling pilot survey. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 18, 754–55.
Weber, M. (1917). Der Sinn der »Wertfreiheit« der soziologischen und ökonomischen Wissenschaften (The meaning of value neutrality in the social and economic sciences] in collected papers on Wissenschaftslehre [Business Studies] (pp. 489–540). First published in 1922.
Weber, M. (1988). Die ‘Objektivität’ sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpolitischer Erkenntnis [The objectivity of understanding on social science and politics] in collected papers on Wissenschaftslehre [Business Studies]. Tübingen: Johannes Winckelmann.
Welford, R. (2004). Corporate social responsibility in Europe and Asia: Critical elements and best practice. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 13, 31–48.
Welford, R. (2005). Corporate social responsibility in Europe, North America and Asia. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 17, 33–52.
Wickham, L., & Wilcock, J. (2012). Management consulting. Delivering an effective project (4th ed.). Harlow: Pearson.
Woodward, D., Edwards, P., & Birkin, F. (2001). Some evidence on executives: Views of corporate social responsibility. British Accounting Review, 33, 357–397.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd edn). Applied social research methods series (Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
O’Riordan, L. (2017). Research Design: Building a Methodology to Fill the Identified Gaps. In: Managing Sustainable Stakeholder Relationships. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50240-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50240-3_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50239-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50240-3
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)