Old vs new research paradigms

The term paradigm was first brought into everyday use by Thomas Kuhn in the 1960s. It refers to a self-consistent set of ideas and beliefs that act as a filter, influencing how we, as a society, perceive and make sense of things. It can be expressed simply as ‘seeing what you believe’, rather than the usual ‘believing what you see’.

A paradigm shift happens when there is a change in basic assumptions within the prevailing worldview that supports a particular theory. According to Kuhn, when there is sufficient dissatisfaction with a current paradigm, the discipline is thrown into a state of crisis. During this crisis, new ideas, perhaps ones previously discarded, are tried.

Eventually a new paradigm is formed, which gains its own new followers, and an intellectual battle takes place between the followers of the new paradigm and the ‘hold-outs of the old paradigm’. A classic example is the change from the historical assumption that we live in a flat world to the current belief that the world is round.

Pendulum swings

Arguably qualitative research is going through a similar paradigm shift as we challenge whether the Newtonian – or classical – research paradigm is the most useful way of understanding, explaining and developing qualitative research practice. We are discovering that qualitative research which, within a commercial context, has grown up as a craft and developed largely through trial and error and the magpie activity of borrowing ideas from a range of disciplines, can now be linked to sound theoretical principles rooted in the complexity sciences.

Like all paradigm shifts this change has been characterised by confusion and conflict, as clients and researchers alike swing back and forth between these different paradigms. This has been going on for a long time but I feel that we are finally coming to some denouement. I hope this will result in qualitative research finally being judged on its own terms.

Some practical tips for ‘emergency’ inquiry

Curiosity, openness, an engagement with the problem is important. Emergent inquiry is not prescriptive; each problem requires its own approach.

Shaping the research question is central to the process; it will inevitably influence the outcome. Can you persuade clients to set up workshops to explore the inquiry? Can you invite different stakeholders?

Encourage a view that knowledge is an evolving process, not a ‘thing’.

Remember, strategy as well as learning can be emergent.

Trust your emotional learning in a research situation but be reflective, rigorous and disciplined about ‘emotional’ content in just the same way as you are with ‘intellectual’ content.

Our role is to facilitate the creation of knowledge not to solve the client’s problem. Think of ways to create a climate of ‘learning’ within client organisations
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT >>