Rooke-Kagioglou2007
| Rooke-Kagioglou2007 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Rooke-Kagioglou2007 |
| Author(s) | John Alfred Rooke, Mike Kagioglou |
| Title | Criteria for evaluating research: the unique adequacy requirement of methods |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Ethnomethodology, Unique adequacy requirement, Research methods, methodology, culture, grounded theory, total quality management |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2007 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Construction Management and Economics |
| Volume | 25 |
| Number | 9 |
| Pages | 979–987 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/01446190701268855 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The Unique Adequacy requirement of methods (UA) is proposed as a means of evaluating research in construction management. UA addresses the problems stemming from the significance of conscious action in constituting human organization. These may be summarized as: first, that objectivity is a problematic concept in such studies; second, that the determination of meaning is their primary goal; and third, that formal procedures, whether as methods of research or explanation, have significant limitations. The UA requirement has two forms: the weak form demands that the researcher is competent in the research setting; the strong form, that research reports use only concepts originating within the research setting. The consequences of applying these criteria are explored with reference to recent research reports in construction management, including: a questionnaire survey of cultural difference; an exercise in grounded theorizing; a case study of the implementation of a quality management initiative. It is concluded that the UA requirement is a viable tool for evaluating and guiding research. Emphasis is placed on the importance of maintaining a principled distinction between empirical research and theory building.
Notes
