Marketing Research

The textbook defines observation research is the systematic process of recording patterns of occurrences or behaviors without questioning or normally communicating with the people involved. Additionally, we define observational research as a blanket term for a variety of techniques that are used to gather important data pertaining to optimizing market share in both the business to consumer and business to business world. Information for observation research must be repetitive, frequent, or in some way predictable in order for observing techniques to be successful.

We discuss several categories of observational marketing research including: (1) Naturalistic situations, (2) contrived situations, (3) human observation, (4) Machine observation, and (5) direct and indirect observation. Observational research for marketing purposes has roots in experimental psychology. Famous experiments on conformity from the psychology lab can either directly or indirectly apply to marketing research that is done today. Three examples discussed are as follows: * “Study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison. (1973) * “Environmental and Social Correlates of Physical Activity in Neighborhood Parks: An observational Study in Tampa and Chicago”. (2008) * “An Observational Method for Tim Use Research: Lessons Learned from the Middletown Media Studies”. (2009) The biggest advantage of observation research is that researchers can see how people actually behave rather than having to rely on what they say they did, which eliminates many biasing factors.

Also, some forms of data are more quickly and accurately gathered by observation. The primary disadvantage of this type of research can only examine the behavior and physical characteristics of research participants. The researcher learns nothing about motives, attitudes, intentions, or feelings. People watching or objects can take the form of ethnographic research, mystery shopping, one-way mirror observations, shopper pattern and behavior studies.

For our hands-on project, we conduct a disguised observation where we monitored shoppers in two Wal-Mart stores without them knowing they were being watched. The study was designed to analyze consumer buying behavior based on gender, age, number of people shopping together, and brand name vs. store brand. Two products, soup and laundry detergent, were chosen to observe consumers in order to perform our observational research study.

Heineken International boasts one of the world’s largest and most profitable portfolios of beer brands. Its presence is felt in 71 countries, in all regions of the world and it employs close to 70,000 people worldwide. Since its first year of brewing in 1864, Heineken has still kept its passion for creating the best craft beer and introducing a “beer culture” to Holland as Gerard Heineken initially intended. Heineken sells, markets and owns over 250 brands.

The specific brand that I will be planning for this market plan is the main brand which is Heineken. The main demographic group target are males between the age of 23-35 years old. The annual income for this group may start at $40,000 or higher. This group will be single and with no children. The target group will be educated with a college degree or some college experience. This group will also be young working professionals. This group lives in the continental USA and are mostly city dwellers.

This group is usually on the go, always has somewhere to be and enjoys fun social activities. They are always willing to try new things but maintain a sense of brand loyalty. This group likes a comfortable and exciting lifestyle, they are willing to pay a little more to get a better quality product. This group wants to be seen with the best, they like the nicer things in life; everything they do is a reflection of who they believe to be.

The more events this group attends, the more opportunities they will have to repeat the purchase of the product and develop a stronger brand loyalty. This group will be defined by some of the behaviors that make them a great fit for the specific target group. This group likes to be in the know, they like to know the facts as to why the product they pick is the best fit for them. This group will defend their purchase decision over any circumstance thus creating a form of word of mouth referral for the brand they consume.

They have a strong can-do attitude and will stick with their choice of brand if ever confronted with a similar product. I decided to target this specific audience because they have more disposable income and no responsibilities of taking care of a family or spouse. They will use the product more than anyone else and will stick with it. This target group will revive the “beer culture” that Gerard Heineken envisioned more than 150 years ago. By targeting this young group, the brand will create a customer lifetime value investment for years to come.

Air Asia’s quirky means of promotion has certainly helped make the airline a household name. Yet, barely eight years ago when it began operations, Air Asia had just two planes and a host of obstacles – Sars and the Sept 11 terrorist attacks included that preventing it from taking off. Today, the Malaysia-based budget airline boasts a fleet of 80 aircraft that ply over 122 routes, with 480 flights to more than 65 destinations daily. Group CEO Tony Fernandes has been instrumental in building the Air Asia brand. Known for its strong marketing and branding culture, Air Asia was recognized as one of Malaysia’s 30 Most Valuable Brands in 2008, and also made it to US-based business magazine Fast Company’s top 50 list of most innovative companies in the world last year. Their goal is to “continue to be the lowest cost airline in every market we serve”

Positioning Air Asia has considerate advantages over other airlines in many ways. Firstly, its experience of being in this industry for long time contributes to the already established service standard, operational expertise, infrastructure readiness, as well as bargaining power with suppliers. According to the survey done by www.lowcostairline.org, the travelers ranked Air Asia as number 8 of their most favorite low cost airlines. Secondly, Shin Corp, local partner, is very powerful business entity as it has highly diversified portfolio and many strategic business units in media industry. This gives Air Asia the competitive edge in terms of creating awareness of the brand and budget airline industry as a whole.

Product Strategy Air Asia provides a good service to their customer in order to attract their customer to come back after first time travel with Air Asia. First, Air Asia provide a service that pay attention to customer’s safety. It partnering with the world’s most renowned maintenance providers and complying with the world airline operation to ensure every plane in safety condition that can look after customer safety. Air Asia also uses Streamline Operations to make sure that processes are as simple as possible. It cans faster the service that provides to customer. It also provides a no seat assignment service to customer. So that, customer can freely finds their seat that comfortable for themselves. In additional, Air Asia also has provided an in-flight magazine to customer. It can take away their customer bored when in the plane. This is the first in-fight magazine that had provided by an airline in Malaysia. So, services are also important factors that that causes Air Asia so successful. Read another article “SWOT Airasia”

Pricing AirAsia is using randomized pricing strategy to increase the market demand and profit maximize. This strategy enable AirAsia varies its price from time to time, even more accurately is from day to day. Indirectly, this strategy is giving surprise for customer for each time of promotion, and the customer cannot learn from experience on the lowest price charge in the market. As a result, this influence the customer to pay attention on the price every minute, just to get the desired price they want.

Distribution Strategy AirAsia has implemented Computer Reservation System (CRS). AirAsia has used Open Skies to centralize customer data and this has helped AirAsia to track booking and the schedule of flight activities in real. Open Skies booking system which provided by Navitaire performed almost flawlessly on every single occasion and it managed to handle the most demanding requirements of AirAsia’s flight booking operations. On the other hand, on July 2010, AirAsia has successfully completed the implementation of its new reservation system which called New Skies. This booking system has replaced the previous system, Open Skies. Furthermore, this New Skies gives the customers a new experience as well as providing a greater convenience and generate more savings for the customers.

Marketing Communication Strategy AirAsia, the leading low cost airline in Asia, intends to develop its route map to Africa and new European destinations in the future. Currently AirAsia has succeeded in providing low cost flight services in areas with limited connectivity and high fares, especially in Asia. It also launched new services about travel products and membership service, such as AirAsia Go Holiday and BIG loyalty program. In order to eliminate risk and increase efficiency, AirAsia also collaborated with Expedia, Malaysian Airline System (MAS) and Japan’s All Nippon Airways. To gain further increases in net sale, AirAsia has introduced new flight routes and planned to spread its coverage to new places in Africa and Europe. There are opportunities and challenges for this market development strategy. The global context, especially political chaos and economic crisis, can be a threat to its development. On the other hand, its market strategy, communication campaign and technological improvement would aid to grasp this opportunity.

Marketing Research

To remain the best company, Airasia provide and had a researched about smart cards that can be issued compatible with the prevailing ticketless booking. AirAsia can issue two kinds of smart cards. The first for the ordinary travelers offering rewards when topped and offering a value which is greater than the purchase price. For example: A card of 5000 may be worth 5500 and should be allowed to use by the person and his family having the same family name as the cardholder. The second one would be for frequent flyers offering unlimited travel. This smart card should be prices carefully for example at 15000 and the owner of the card can fly as many times as he wants over the specified period of time. Budget :

Air Asia is one of the world’s first long-haul budget airlines and offers cheap flights from London to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur is an Air Asia hub, so even if you’re destination is Hong Kong and Macau, Thailand, Australia and beyond, flying into Malaysia with Air Asia and connecting, can still be cheaper than flying with traditional airlines. The Air Asia arm that operates the airlines long-haul flights is actually Air Asia X, although when booking you’ll see no difference between Air Asia and Air Asia X. Flying from London to Kuala Lumpur, one way tickets can be purchased for as low as £190, including all taxes. This is the economy promo price. Standard prices seem to come in around the £220 -£250, with taxes included. This is excellent value for money, and even if you have to shell out another £50 to connect regionally, you’ll still be saving money. Control :

Earlier this year Fernandes moved over 20 personnel to Jakarta and set up a planning office. This move has been criticised and he continues to get knocked for making that decision. “People still think I have left Malaysia because of the (failed) share swap between MAS and AirAsia,” he says. He handed the reins of the Malaysian operations, something he has been very passionate about because he founded and set up AirAsia Malaysia, to Aireen Omar. Though he says he has handed the reins, those in the know claim the he is very much in control of the day-to-day operations.

Marketing Organization AirAsia is the world most leading low cost carrier airline now as their name had earned a lot of recognition worldwide because consumer as their TOP priority with the tagline of “Now Everyone Can Fly”, AirAsia has made flying affordable for more than 61million guest. AirAsia started their business in year 2001 with only MYR1.00 with the partnership with Tune Air Sdn Bhd and AirAsia was remodeled into a low cost carrier by January 2002 where their mission is to make air travel much more affordable for Malaysians took flight. Valued at MYR2.3 billion, AirAsia is today award winning and the largest low cost carrier in Asia. From a two aircraft operation of Boeing 737-300, AirAsia currently boasts a fleet of 78 aircraft that flies to over 60 domestic and international destinations. The airline has carried, thus far, over 61 million guests since its first day of operation. Low fares is AirAsia’s philosophy where it has sparked a revolution in travel as more and more people from all walks of life are now able to fly for the first time. AirAsia’s success has taken flight through the continued confidence of our guests who prefer a no frills, hasselfree, low fare and convenient option in air travel. Figure 1.0 is the organization’s structure of Airasia.

1.0 Explanation of Focus group research

Focus group is small group selected from a wide population and sampled. Very common in marketing research and based open discussion to collect opinions or emotional response to a subject or area. Focus group is a form of qualitative research.

2.0 Advantages of focus group research

In the marketing, focus groups are seen as an important tool for acquiring feedback. Main advantages for Zazen by choosing this tool are:

More accurate information (Opinions or ideas can be refined by the group).
Focus group interviews are more interesting than standard interviews, what cause longer and more revealing answers.
Naturalness of the answers is greater in a focus group, because the questions are directed at a group rather than individuals.
3.0 Disadvantages of focus group research

Focus group research has also some disadvantages, making different qualitative research techniques more effective.

Preparing focus group question is a complicated task.
The responses in the interview are can be different what make the analyze very difficult, or it may be no response what can be a serious problem as well.
Focus groups are generally more expensive than other interview alternatives.
Skilled moderator are difficult to find and very expensive.
4.0 Suitability of Focus Group research for Companies information

The ZAZEN Company wish to know what is its brand image amongst current customers. Is the ecological and ethical image a major selling point for the brand?

Focus group research will allow ZAZEN to find out the answers for those questions. This kind of research contain: synergism, snowballing, stimulation, security, spontaneity and speed which allow to generate more views, information, express their ideas and expose their feelings. People feel comfortable, their responses are spontaneous and reflecting an accurate idea of their views. It is difficult to make marketing research interesting for people, encourage them to respond or avoid self-selection bias in this type of survey, however data collection and analysis in focus group proceed relatively quickly what makes it more than suitable to meet the company’s information needs.

5.0 Explanation of the chosen research comparison

Depth interviewing, is also known as unstructured interviewing and is a type of interview where researchers select information in order to achieve a holistic understanding of the situation.

It is also used to explore interesting areas for further investigation. This type of interview involves asking people open-ended questions, and often involves qualitative data, so it’s called qualitative interviewing.

6.0 Advantages of research comparison

Depth interview research is perfect for Zazen company to investigate personal, and confidential information which are unable to cover in a group format.

It is also the best method for pre-testing, where individual interpretations and responses are wanted.

Depth interviews are also ideal for researching people with busy lifestyles or living abroad. Because 90% of Zazen revenue is coming from US and Japan online sales it is a better choice than focus group

7.0 Disadvantages of research comparison

The disadvantage of Depth interview research is that the respondent may feel uncomfortable and scared, because of the very private atmosphere. Many people are less willing to open in a small group opposite to group interview where atmosphere is relaxed.

A well skilled interviewer can overcome this problem, by establishing the good rapport and trust.

8.0 Suitability of research comparison

Zazen company have to know if the ecological and ethical image (“Soil association” approval, fair trade, not tested on animals, herbal/folk-remedy ingredients.) is a major selling point for the brand

Information like, how customers see Zazen, and what they would like to improve are wanted as well.

Depth interview research can be done online allowing Zazen company to avoid high cost of travelling to US and Japan. It will help ass well to reach those who are unlikely to attend a focus group because of their social status(senior businesspeople or doctors,), or cannot practically attend. (solo parents)

9.0 Conclusion

Depth interviewing is widely used in many kind of different researches and is generally regarded as a powerful tool in extracting data with qualitative nature. Depth interview research has also the different features of being an open situation, and is using techniques such as probing.

Focus group research is paying a particular attention on “the interaction and group dynamics”. That type of research can be an empowering process for participants, and an exciting challenge for all researchers as well because of its more interesting than other research methods nature and naturalness of the answears.

Both research techniques are suitable to answer the Zazen’s questions, however because of the fact that responders are in US and Japan, Depth interview research will be a better solution. Is easier to carry on even on the distance, able to be run online and collect the information, focus group is unable to collect. It will be definitely the more extensive marketing research, but to ensure success, researchers should be sensitive to individuals situations and be flexible in different interviewing circumstances.

To carry on focus group research abroad will be necessary to send well skilled and professional interviewers, what will effect in very high cost of the task. Inevitable will be as well employing some extra staff to organize accommodation, transport etc.

With no doubts the recommended form of qualitative research is Depth Interview. Is cheaper, more suitable for this particular case, and will gain more interesting data.

Discuss the main differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches to data collection and analysis in management research. Your answer should make reference to the philosophical assumptions which underpin these methodological approaches. Introduction Whenever a decision is made to undertake a piece of research a method for conducting the study is required. In scientific research the techniques typically used for data collection and analysis are those which allow the evaluation of data to test a predetermined hypothesis (Zikmund, 2000).

An example of this is a laboratory-based experiment where the researcher can be in full control of all the variables involved and can therefore be sure that any change in the phenomena under investigation is a direct result of an identified and controlled stimulus. In marketing research however, which is usually reliant on some aspect of human influence, it has been proposed that such a uniform, rigid approach is not appropriate: “There is never a single, perfect research design that is the best for all marketing research projects, or even a specific type of marketing research task. (Malhotra and Birks, 2000: p. 70) The aim of this assignment is to critically evaluate the quantitative and qualitative approaches to research, specifically focusing on the marketing perspective. To do this, consideration is firstly given to the basic differences between the qualitative and quantitative approaches, considering the seemingly opposing theoretical paradigms from which they have originated. Subsequently the development of the marketing discipline is examined with a specific focus on how and why different research methods have been employed in the field. Attention is Page 1 of 1 iven to the need for marketing to address both the issue of verifying existing hypotheses, and the requirement to develop new theory. As there appears to be no ideal research method for use in marketing it would seem that what is important is being critically aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the approaches available. Finally, therefore, the notion of pluralism, or methodological triangulation, is explored as such an approach is often used to exploit the strengths and minimise weaknesses in research design through the combination of two or more research methods, often from opposing theoretical paradigms.

Basic differences between quantitative and qualitative research Qualitative research can be defined as: “…the collection, analysis and interpretation of data that cannot be meaningfully quantified, that is, summarised in the form of numbers. ” (Parasuraman et al, 2004: p. 195) Whereas quantitative research can be defined as: “…the collection of data that involves larger, more representative respondent samples and the numerical calculation of results. ” (Parasuraman et al, 2004: p. 195)

Historically it has been considered that science based disciplines such as mathematics and physics are especially suited to quantitative research methods. Such methods are considered to be objective and lead to numerical, absolute outcomes, which can be verified through repetition and further testing (Zikmund, 2000); in other words the knowledge is external to the knower (Milliken, 2001), and therefore is available be found by whoever conducts the necessary research (Cunningham, 1999).

This view of natural science can be considered to fit within the positivist paradigm, where a paradigm can be thought of as theoretical framework for looking at a situation and a basis upon which phenomena can be analysed and interpreted Page 2 of 2 (Gill and Johnson, 2002). Kuhn (1970) supports the need for paradigms on the basis that they bind disciplines together, and without them there would be no valid position from which to undertake research. Deshpande (1983) suggests that the acceptance of a particular theoretical aradigm is typically followed by a choice of a specific set of research methods that appear to fit within it. This is perhaps exemplified by the significant use of laboratory experiments in pure scientific disciplines. Within the social sciences however there has been a long-standing debate surrounding which philosophical standpoint, or paradigm, it is appropriate for research methods to be derived from (Milliken, 2001). Cohen et al (2000) consider there to be two major, apparently contradictory, views relating to how research should be conducted within social science.

The first aligns social science with natural science and therefore implies that research in the field should be directed towards the search for universal laws which regulate individual social behaviour. The second focuses on the human element of social science research, with recognition of the notion that people are not inanimate objects and therefore cannot be treated as such. Aligning social science with natural science arguably implies that data collection and analysis is best performed from a positivist standpoint.

As research methods favoured by positivists tend towards those reliant on quantification (Gill and Johnson, 2002), it would follow that in management research the focus should be on quantitative research methods. Research conducted from the positivist viewpoint is usually considered to be reductionist in nature, and is often termed hypothetico-deductive, as it aims to derive a result in relation to a predefined hypothesis (Zikmund, 2000).

Conversely, an approach to research which embraces human individuality and places emphasis on how people perceive and give meaning to their own Page 3 of 3 socially created world, can be considered constructivist (Hunt, 1994), and phenomenological (Gill and Johnson, 2002). The focus from this standpoint is therefore on understanding, interpreting and building theory rather than objectively testing, deducing and verifying an existing hypothesis. Such an approach can be considered inductive in nature and therefore favours the adoption of qualitative research methods. ollows: “…the most telling and fundamental distinction between the paradigms is on the dimension of verification versus discovery…quantitative methods have been developed most directly for the task of verifying or confirming theories and…qualitative methods were purposely developed for the task of discovering or generating theories. ” (Reichardt and Cook, 1979: cited in Deshpande, 1983: p. 105) This can be explained further as At the extreme of the inductive spectrum lies the concept of grounded theory developed by Glaser and Strauss (1967).

Here the researcher builds theory based entirely on the data obtained in a particular study without the influence of predetermined knowledge or preconceived hypotheses. Taking deduction to the extreme hypotheses can only ever be tested, raising the question of how it is possible to obtain a hypothesis in the first place. This presents a number of dilemmas with regard to research in the field of management, including whether it is more appropriate to test existing hypotheses or to develop new theory.

The theory-testing versus theory-generation debate is particularly significant in the field of marketing as, due to the relative youth of the discipline, marketers are faced with the challenge of both obtaining and maintaining respect and credibility for the work that has been done so far (Bartels, 1983); and continuing to generate theory needed to develop a coherent, holistic body of knowledge which will clear up marketing’s existing “theory mess” (Gummesson, 2002: p. 349). Page 4 of 4

Development of research in the field of marketing The discipline of marketing, which came about as a departure from economics not long after 1900, originally had no identity of its own. There was no predetermined framework for its development, nor any real expectation of what it should, or could, become (Bartels, 1983). The way the discipline started to develop however led to a belief that it had “…meritorious scientific character” (Bartels, 1983: p. 34), which subsequently influenced ideas about the way in which credible research in the field should be conducted.

Consequently approaches to research in marketing have historically been dominated by deductive processes (Hyde, 2000). Milliken (2001) supports this with the observation that within the marketing literature there has been little attention paid to qualitative research. If marketing was universally accepted to be akin to a pure science then this may be an acceptable situation. It has been suggested however that, rather than being a science, marketing is actually an art which belongs both to the world of business and the school of humanities (Halliday, 1999).

It was noted by Deshpande (1983) that in the early 1980s there were only four major textbooks dealing with the metatheoretical issues in marketing, and it can therefore be understood that “…self conscious reflection on theory construction in marketing is of fairly recent origin. ” (p. 104). Peter (1982), supported by Deshpande (1983), argues that the dominant philosophical approach applied in marketing is that of logical empiricism. Such a positivist approach forces a “…search for causality and the assumption of determinism” (Hunt, 1994: p. 7), which directs those conducting marketing research towards hypotheticodeductive methods for the verification of existing theories rather than development of new ones. Page 5 of 5 Goulding (1999) suggests that the popularity of the positivist paradigm may be down to the more transparent rules which it projects with regard to the basis of hypotheses and their testing, resulting in a clearer picture of what is accepted to be known and what remains unknown or untested.

As marketing is a relatively young discipline, quantitative methods have therefore been regularly favoured over qualitative methods in an attempt to establish credibility and respectability (Bartels, 1983). Bass (1993) unreservedly supports quantitative research and the scientific view of marketing, on the basis of the need to make general laws and principles which can be widely applied. To emphasise his position further Bass (1993) repeatedly refers to the discipline as not as “marketing” but as “marketing science”.

Despite this apparent favouritism of qualitative research, for establishing integrity and credence, it has been suggested that marketing as a discipline has failed to develop a coherent theoretical foundation due to the inappropriate selection and use of methods within the framework of logical empiricism (Leone and Schultz, 1980). criticises how qualitative research is implemented. Gummesson (2001) also He questions whether or not it is ppropriate to make a jump from a subjective answer given by a person, perhaps in the form of a questionnaire response, to hard facts about the population being studied, and furthermore if a model being selected for use in marketing research can be an appropriate proxy for the particular situation being studied. Gummesson (2001) instead advocates an interactive approach to research in marketing based on “…a humanistic, hermeneutic and phenomenological paradigm. (p. 40). Deshpande (1983) is in agreement with this and proposes that, rather that the incorrectly using quantitative research methods, the shortfall in theory development in the field may lie in the inappropriate adoption of a quantitative paradigm where a qualitative one would be more appropriate: “If we ignore the qualitative paradigm, we also by definition exclude the principal systematic means of theory generation. ” (Deshpande, 1983: p. 106) Page 6 of 6

The dominance of logical empiricism in marketing has therefore been seen as potentially detrimental to the discipline, because the successful development of an appropriate holistic and sound body of theory is necessary for the credibility of the field in both management and academe (Bartels, 1983). Hunt (1994) however observes that scholars in the field of marketing, particularly those reviewing papers for publication in academic journals, may themselves be responsible for the lack of theory generation by being over critical when reviewing the work of those who attempt to make an original contribution.

According to Gummesson (2001) this behaviour reinforces the belief that to build a publications record, and a respectable reputation, marketers are being encouraged to test existing theory using quantitative methods rather than generate theory through qualitative investigation. This, it has been suggested, has resulted in there being no development in general management marketing theory over recent decades, leaving marketing as an array of disjointed theories and ideas founded on arguably obsolete principles Gummesson (2001).

The lack of credibility given to qualitative research techniques in marketing from the academic perspective does however appear somewhat ironic given that such methods are widely adopted in marketing research in industry (Deshpande, 1983). Although it may appear that qualitative marketing research is a relatively recent revelation, Deshpande (1983) argues that this is not the case. He observes that there was significant interest in the topic in the 1950s and 1960s.

In the early 1980s, Fern (1982) suggested that the reason one specific qualitative technique, focus groups, had failed to gain prominence was a lack of empirical testing, which would allow the theory development necessary to acquire credibility. In other words a qualitative technique struggled to generate recognition because it could not satisfy the positivistic evaluation criteria needed to do so. This is perhaps indicative of the historical power of positivism in marketing academia in determining what can be accepted as credible Page 7 of 7 nd what cannot, regardless of whether or not techniques are accepted in the commercial environment. Malhotra and Peterson (2001) suggest that for marketing to move forward in the twenty-first century it is necessary to bridge the gap between the academic and commercial positions. There is evidence of increasing acceptance of qualitative methods in marketing research, especially in managing research as the marketplace evolves. For example Kozinetz (2002) developed “netnography” as a technique for gaining insight into online communities based on a combination of the principles of ethnography and focus groups.

Quantitative techniques it would appear still have their place in marketing research too, despite the criticisms levelled at them. The SERVQUAL questionnaire for example, originally developed by Parasuraman et al (1988), relies on the collection of data which can be statistically manipulated to determine levels of service quality. Notwithstanding the substantial criticism it has received (see Buttle, 1996), it is still being used in marketing research today (see e. g. DeMoranville and Bienstock, 2003).

What it would consequently appear important to recognise is that both quantitative and qualitative methods have their place in marketing research; neither is sufficient on its own, and there is potentially for significant advances to be made if marketing researchers acknowledge this (Deshpande, 1983). Triangulation and methodological pluralism There is a place in marketing research for both qualitative and quantitative research. There is also a significant risk that overly staunch advocates of a single paradigm will forego the quality of their research by valuing the methodological choice above the aim of the particular

Page 8 of 8 study (Bartels, 1983). From a marketing research perspective the importance therefore lies in recognition of the relative advantages and disadvantages of both the qualitative and quantitative research and the understanding of the strengths and weakness of particular methods. Cahill (1996) supports this with the recognition that qualitative and quantitative techniques can be complementary, and Milliken (2001) suggests that the reality of a real research situation demands compromise between the seemingly opposed philosophical standpoints on which the methods are based.

Combining qualitative and quantitative methods presents the researcher with an opportunity to compensate for the weakness in each approach. (Deshpande, 1983), and within the field of marketing there appears to be a significant move towards combining qualitative and quantitative research methods (Milliken, 2001). Perry (1998) emphasises the benefit of case study methodology in marketing and suggests that there is no need to consider induction and deduction to be mutually exclusive when selecting a research method.

He emphasises that realism is the most appropriate paradigm from which to undertake marketing research as it allows the building of new theory whilst incorporating existing knowledge. Strength in method combination does not necessarily have to include qualitative and quantitative approaches. Hall and Rist (1999) present a marketing study based on the triangulation of purely qualitative research methods including focus groups, observation and document examination.

They argue that doing this eliminates the risks of relying on a single method and therefore enhances research quality and strengthens the credibility of qualitative techniques. Page 9 of 9 Methodological pluralism, whilst appearing to offer reconciliation between opposing theoretical paradigms in relation to research method choice, does itself introduce debate and criticism. Gill and Johnson (2002) for example note that embracing realism can be seen as accepting positivism at the cost of phenomenology as it may involve the …operationalization and measurement of social reality (stimuli) and action (response)…” (p. 170). Consequently, combining research methods can itself become part of the argument rather than a solution. Conclusion The decision of whether to adopt qualitative or quantitative methods in management research historically appears to be based on the philosophical assumptions upheld by the individual researcher or the discipline in which he or she is working.

A paradigmatic dichotomy between positivism and phenomenology (or constructivism) would seem to have resulted in a situation where, in some instances, the research methodology choice is deemed more significant than the subject of the particular study. Marketing is a relatively young discipline within the field of management and, as such, is faced with the challenge of obtaining and maintaining credibility.

To do this it has been proposed that it needs to both test existing theory and generate new theory, however the processes required to achieve these two goals can be seem to stem from diametrically opposed paradigms: theory-testing being achievable through deductive methods; and theory generation relying on an inductive approach. This incommensurability has however been challenged with the assertion that what is important is selecting an appropriate methodology for a particular study, rather than fitting a

Page 10 of 10 study to a method. Methodological triangulation has been suggested as a means of achieving this, with a move towards a paradigm of realism where the relative advantages and disadvantages of a number of research methods can be embraced. Whilst at face value this approach may appear to offer a compromise offering the best practical solution to the methodological choice dispute, it also introduces criticism of its own which, in turn fuels the debate further.

The general aim of this discussion, to consider the differences between qualitative and quantitative research methods, has itself been conducted from an ostensibly positivistic standpoint. In fact any discussion, comparison or assessment of research methods is arguably starting from a predetermined premise that an objective evaluation is being undertaken (Gill and Johnson, 2002), and can therefore be seen to be embracing positivist ideals.

Taking into account the amount of attention that has been paid to philosophical approaches to management research; the ambiguities that are apparent; the ongoing search for the most suitable and appropriate means for conducting studies; and the motivation to establish and maintain credibility, it would seem unlikely that end to the debate regarding research methods in management is in sight: “Like the earth being round, thus lacking a natural end, the journey in Methodologyland has no end. You search again and again and again, just as the term says: re-search, re-search, re-search. (Gummesson, 2001: p. 29) Page 11 of 11 References Bartels, R. (1983), “Is marketing defaulting its responsibilities? ”, Journal of Marketing, 47(4), pp. 32-35 Bass, F. M. (1993), “The future of research in marketing: Marketing Science”, Journal of Marketing Research, 30(1), pp. 1-6 Buttle, F. (1996), “SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda”, European Journal of Marketing, 30(1), pp. 8-32 Cahill, D. J. (1996), “When to use qualitative methods: a new approach”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 14(6), pp. 16-20 Cohen, L. , Manion, L. and Morr, K. 2000), Research Methods in Education, 5th Edition, Routledge: London Cunningham, A. C. (1999), “Commentary confessions of a reflective practitioner: meeting the challenges of marketing’s destruction”, European Journal of Marketing, 33(7/8), pp. 685-697 DeMoranville, C. W. and Bienstock, C. C. (2003), “Question order effects in measuring service quality”, International Journal of research in Marketing, 20(3), pp. 217-231 Deshpande, R. (1983), “Paradigms Lost: On theory and method in research in marketing”, Journal of Marketing, 47(4), pp. 101-110 Fern, E. F. 1982), “The use of focus groups for idea generation: the effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality”, Journal of Marketing Research, 19(1), pp. 1-13 Gill, J. and Johnson, P. (2002), Research Methods For Mangers, 3rd Edition, London: SAGE Publications Ltd Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine Publishing Company: Chicago Goulding, C. (1999), “Consumer research, interpretive paradigms and methodological ambiguities”, European Journal of Marketing, 33(9/10), pp. 59-873 Gummesson, E. (2001), “Are current research approaches in marketing leading us astray? ”, Marketing Theory, 1(1), pp. 27-48 Gummesson, E. (2002), “Practical value of adequate marketing management theory”, European Journal of Marketing, 36(3), pp. 325-349 Hall, A. L. and Rist, R. C. (1999), “Integrating multiple qualitative research methods (or avoiding the precariousness of a one-legged stool)”, Psychology & Marketing, 16(4), pp. 291304 Page 12 of 12 Halliday, S. 1999), “I don’t know much about art, but I know what I like: resonance, relevance and illumination as assessment criteria for marketing research and scholarship”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 17(7), pp. 345-362 Hunt, S. D. (1994), “On rethinking marketing: Our discipline, our practice, our methods”, European Journal of Marketing, 28(3), pp. 13-25 Hyde, K. F. (2000), “Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research”, Qualitative Market Research, 3(2), pp. 82-90 Kozinets, R. V. (2002), “The field behind the screen: Using Netnography for marketing research in online communities”, Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), pp. 1-72 Kuhn, T. S. (1970), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd Edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press Leone, R. P. and Schultz, R. L. (1980), “A study of marketing generalizations”, Journal of Marketing, 44(1), pp. 10-18 Malhotra, N. K. and Birks, D. F. (2000), Marketing Research: An Applied Approach, 3rd European Edition, Harlow, England: Financial Times Prentice Hall Malhotra, N. K. and Peterson, M. (2001), “Marketing research in the new millennium: emerging issues and trends”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 19(4), pp. 16-235 Milliken, J. (2001), “Qualitative research and marketing management”, Management Decision, 39(1), pp. 71-77 Parasuraman, A. , Grewal, D. and Krishnan, R. (2004), Maketing Research, Boston, USA: Houghton Mifflin Company Parasuraman, A. , Zeithaml, V. A. and Berry, L. L. (1988), “SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumers perceptions of service quality”, Journal of Retailing, 64(1), pp. 12-40 Perry, C. (1998), “Process of a case study methodology for postgraduate research in marketing”, 32(9/10), pp. 785-802 Peter, J. P. 1982), “Current issues in the philosophy of science: Implications for marketing theory – a panel discussion”, in Marketing Theory: Philosophy of Science Perspectives, Bush, R. F. and Hunt, S. D. (eds. ), Chicago, American Marketing, pp. 11-16 Reichardt, C. S. and Cook, T. D. (1979), “Beyond qualitative versus quantitative methods”, in Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research, Cook, T. D and Reichardt, (eds. ) Beverley Hills, CA: Sage Zikmund, W. G. (2000), Business Research Methods, 6th Edition, Orlando, USA: The Dryden Press, Harcourt College Publishers Page 13 of 13