The baby and the bathwater: research methods in construction management

Chau Kwong Wing, John Raftery and Anthony Walker

Construction Management and Economics, 1998, vol. 16, issue 1, 99-104

Abstract: This note is written in response to Seymour, D., Crook, D. and Rooke, J. (1997) Construction Management and Economics, 15 (1), 117-19. We argue against their narrow focus on the interpretative approach. Also, Seymour et al. are incorrect in implying that the 'rationalist approach' is necessarily quantitative. Our contention is that the choice of research approach in construction management depends on the nature of the problem. However, whatever choice of approach is adopted, it is important that the problem and associated key concepts are defined clearly and that the methods used, underlying assumptions and limitations are transparent and defensible. It is difficult to argue in favour of any single approach based purely on epistemological grounds as what constitutes knowledge is still an unsolved philosophical issue. Since construction management is a practical subject, we suggest that the choice of approach should be a pragmatic one: the approach that is likely to generate practical solutions should be adopted. Seymour et al.'s suggestion serves only to limit our choice of research tools. Furthermore, a lot of the research issues in construction management are practical problems which involve generalization of experience and formulation of hypothesis that can generate empirically testable implications. For problems of this nature, testability of hypothesis and reproducibility of results are important, and the naturalist approach (which is labelled 'rationalist paradigm' in Seymour et al.) of discovering causal relationship is more likely to produce general practical solutions. However, this does not deny the value of the interpretative approach, as it may be more suitable for certain types of problem. Moreover, in practice, an understanding of human behaviour 'from within' often provides useful insights for formulation of empirically testable hypotheses, despite the philosophical incompatibility of the interpretative and naturalist approaches.

Keywords: Epistemology; Interpretative Approach; Research Methods (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1998
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/014461998372637 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:16:y:1998:i:1:p:99-104

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RCME20

DOI: 10.1080/014461998372637

Access Statistics for this article

Construction Management and Economics is currently edited by Will Hughes

More articles in Construction Management and Economics from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().