MICHAEL DEMPSEY - Cranfield University

Positivists believe that reality is ‘objective and singular, apart from the
researcher’ (Cresswell 1994); phenomenologists see it as ‘socially
constructed and only understood by examining the perceptions of the
human actors’ (Hussey and Hussey 1997:49). It is a projection of
human imagination. These are ontological assumptions. From an
epistemological point of view, positivists believe that they can discover
reality by using value free methods of inquiry which resemble those of
the natural sciences. They are concerned with the study of objects
which existed before they commenced their studies and will remain
when their studies have been completed, and with the interrelationship
between those objects. At the other end of the continuum,
phenomenologists believe that the values held by researchers ’help to
determine what are recognised as facts and the interpretations which
are drawn from them’. (Hussey and Hussey 1997:49). Research is thus
value-laden.
My own philosophical journey has been long and troubled. At the start,
I assumed that I would be conducting a positivist study, probably for
three reasons. First, within trade unions, research conclusions often
require numbers. It would be no good going into some trade union
general secretaries, invariably male and used to counting the number
of members who supported him, and explaining the socially
constructed nature of trade union management; even less to try to
undertake cognitive mapping. Secondly, physical space and physical
structure, then central to the research, are observable realities. Thirdly,
the Centre at Cranfield of which I am a member is located within a
group which has a positivist tradition.
A proximity to positivism was suggested when, as part of the Cranfield
Research Methods course, my learning style was examined and the
conclusion was that I was, very strongly, a converger. Dominant
characteristics of this type were abstract conceptualisation and active
experimentation. The greatest strength of the type was the practical
application of ideas and people falling into this category were said to be
happiest using hypothetico-deductive reasoning. I recognised myself
from this analysis. I consequently said in my First Review paper that I
could not at that time see anything which suggested that the research I
was proposing could not be effectively undertaken from a critical
rationalist perspective.
Nevertheless, I remained troubled because I was not really convinced
by my own rationalisation. Although Popper was a critic of positivism,
many people who call themselves positivists use hypothetico-deductive
methodology and the approach is, on the continuum I described above,
very close to positivism. My approach was becoming more qualitative
the more I developed it. I was proposing semi-structured interviews
which would reveal a great deal about the managerial activities
undertaken by trade union managers and the reasons why they
approached the role in the way that they did. Whilst the union
structures within which they worked – the biennial conference in PCS,
55