Research is an action that individuals embark on to acknowledge more regarding the environment as well as the effect individuals have upon it. Research is categorized in several dissimilar systems .They include scientific, applied, academic, and fundamental and applied, among others. Conversely, none of these categories alters the most significant characteristic of research which is discovery. Research involves incongruity, criticism, casual and mistake. In the issue researched on deals with internally auditing bad practises in a subsidiary of an international company in which I am intern these entire four feature abundantly. Among the greatest attractions concerning accounting and financial research in relation to those who undertake it is that it intersects numerous confines. As in this case it entails an ethical issue that is why it brings world outlooks into piercing conflict and it is tangled to the inconsistencies of the indeterminate social and value organizations.
A preliminary point in attempting to comprehend the gathering of information for research tenacities is that there are two comprehensive methods. These include quantitative and qualitative research. Historically, the initial research form was instigated from the natural sciences including chemistry, biology, geology and physics and was focused on investigating matters which individuals could observe and measure. These observations and measurements are usually done quantitatively and re-done by other similar minded researchers. This procedure is denoted as quantitative research. As years passed, researchers undertaking the social sciences like anthropology, psychology, and sociology, among others emerged. They were particularly involved in learning human behaviour as well as the social world occupied by human beings (Duffy, 2000). They established growing difficulty attempting to elucidate human behaviour in basically quantifiable terms. Dimensions tell individuals how frequently or how many individuals act in a definite way however they do not sufficiently answer the query “why?” Research which endeavours to increase our understanding of why matters are the manner they are within the social world and why individual act in the the manner they do is referred as qualitative research. The issue at hand involves basically human behaviour. Therefore it is difficult to neither quantify data nor use primary data on it.
In addition, Quantitative research is generally denied via the expressions empiricism and positivism in that it originates from the scientific method employed in the physical sciences. As much as the research methodology is an objective, formal systematic process wherein numerical data findings it is not appropriate for this kind of research. It may define, assess, and scrutinize cause and effect relationships, employing a deductive procedure of information accomplishment. This is predominantly difficult in researching this matter.
On the other hand, qualitative research varies from qualitative methods as it develops philosophies inductively. There is no unambiguous purpose to count or measure the conclusions, which are as a replacement for defines in the language engaged throughout the research procedure. A qualitative approach is employed as an omnibus for reviewing the empirical world from the viewpoint of the matter, not the investigator.
The purpose of this qualitative research is to define definite characteristics of bad practises in a subsidiary of an international company, with an outlook to elucidation the subject of the bad practises. This is so since the methodology is also labelled as phenomenology as well as an idealistic and humanistic method (Hinton, 1990).This historic basis, which is not that of the physical science sphere, has been quoted as one of the great flaws of qualitative research.
However, as it regards methodology, the research procedures employed in the quantitative methodology embrace correlational, descriptive, quasi-experimental and experimental research. However, even if the strength of these methods is that true experiments and quasi-experiments offer adequate information regarding the connection between the variables under study to allow forecast and control over imminent consequences, this method is not relevant to this kind of research.
In a twist, this very strength can also be contended to be the flaw of the quantitative method, particularly where organizational study is concerned as in this case. The methodology discharges the involvements of the person as inconsequential and deems human beings as simply countering and reacting to the environment. This results in complications in organizational research, since organization employs a holistic outlook of individuals and their environment and, according to Benoliel (2005), quantitative methods do not allow this method. Thereby showing why it is difficult to employ this tactic on this research.
On the other hand, the qualitative approach embraces approaches like ethnography as well as grounded theory research (Bockmon and Rieman, 2007). The forte of the approach used lies in the detail that it possess a holistic emphasis, permitting for suppleness and the accomplishment of a profounder, more lawful comprehension of the subject than could be accomplished via a more inflexible method (Baruch, 2001). It similarly permits subjects to bring up problems and matters which the researcher might not have encompassed in a designed research proposal, tallying to the eminence of data collected. A flaw of qualitative approach is the conceivable effect of the researchers’ manifestation on the individuals they are studying. As hitherto emphasized, the affiliation between the investigator and members may essentially misrepresent findings.
The use of secondary data is as well better than primary data in this case. It is easier to use the sources already existence in the subsidiary company to get information on the bad practises than to start afresh. Doing an audit entails looking at the accounts books and so on to conclude on this. In addition, the time and cost is reduced when employing secondary data than primary data.
Bibliography
1. Baruch, G. 2001. Moral tales. Journal of Sociology, 3, 3, 275-296.
2. Benoliel, J.Q. 2005. Advancing qualitative approaches. Western Journal of Research, 7, 2, 1-8.
3. Bockmon, D.F., & Rieman, D.J. 2007. Qualitative versus quantitative research. Holistic Practice, 2, 1, 71-75.
4. Bryman, A. 1988. Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge.
5. Burns, N., & Grove, S.K. 1987. The practice of research, conduct, critique, and utilization. Philadelphia: Saunders.
6. Campell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. 1963.Experimental and quasi-experimental design for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
7. Cormack, D.S. 1991.The research process. Black Scientific: Oxford.
8. Corner, J. 1991. In search of more complete answers to research questions: Quantitative versus qualitative research methods is there a way forward? Journal of Research, 16, 3, 718-727.
9. Duffy , M.E. 1985. Designing research the qualitative –quantitative debate. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 11, 3, 225-232.
10. Duffy , M.E. 2000. Methodological triangulation a vehicle for merging quantitative and qualitative methods. Image, 19, 3, 130-133.
11. Gould, D. 1985. Isolation procedure. Researching Time, 81, 7, 47-50.
12. Hinton, A. 2007. Resracg awareness; the ethnographic perspective. Ashford: Southampton.
