Advanc Business Research 2222

CHAPTER No. 1INTRODUCTION

T0THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

FOR RESEARCH IN MANUFACTURINGORGANIZATION

1.1 WHAT IS RESEARCH

Research is a systematic inquiry to describe, explain, predict and control the observed

phenomenon. Research involves inductive and deductive methods (Babbie, 1998).

Inductive methods analyze the observed phenomenon and identify the general principles,

structures, or processes underlying the phenomenon observed; deductive methods verify

the hypothesized principles through observations. The purposes are different: one is to

develop explanations, and the other is to test the validity of the explanations. Research is

a systematic inquiry that investigates hypotheses, suggests new interpretations of data or

texts, and poses new questions for future research to explore.

Research consists of:

Asking a question that nobody has asked before;

Doing the necessary work to find the answer; and

Communicating the knowledge you have acquired to a larger audience

1.2 THE SCIENTIFIC DEFINITION:

The strict definition of scientific research is performing a methodical study in order to

prove a hypothesis or answer a specific question. Finding a definitive answer is the

central goal of any experimental process. Research must be systematic and follow a series

of steps and a rigid standard protocol. These rules are broadly similar but may vary

slightly between the different fields of science. Scientific research must be organized and

undergo planning, including performing literature reviews of past research and evaluating

what questions need to be answered. Any type of ‘real’ research, whether scientific,

economic or historical, requires some kind of interpretation and an opinion from the

researcher. This opinion is the underlying principle, or question, that establishes the

nature and type of experiment. The scientific definition of research generally states that a

variable must be manipulated, although case studies and purely observational science do

not always comply with this norm.

1.3 VARIABLE

Characteristics or attributes of an object, individual or organization that can be measured

or observed, and that varies among those objects or individuals being studied (Creswell

2002). They possess values and levels (the dimensions on which they vary) (Sommery

1 Theoretical Framework for a Research in Manufacturing Organization

1997). “The concepts that are of interest in a study become the variable variables for s

investigation (Ary 1985).” There different Kinds of Variables:

1.4 KINDS OF RESEARCH

There are different kinds of research depending on the nature of its purpose Following are

the types of research.

1.4.1 QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Qualitative research is research dealing with phenomena that are difficult or impossible to

quantify mathematically, such as beliefs, meanings, attributes, and symbols

Qualitative researchers aim to gather an in-depth understanding of human behavior and

the reasons that govern such behavior.

1.4.2 QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Quantitative research refers to the systematic empirical investigation of any phenomena

via statistical, mathematical or computational techniques. The objective of quantitative

research is to develop and employ mathematical models, theories and/or hypothesis

pertaining to phenomena.Quantitative research is generally made using scientific

methods, which can include:

The generation of models, theories and hypothesis

The development of instruments and methods for measurement

Experimental control and manipulation of variables research

Collection of empirical data

Modeling and analysis of

Evaluation of results

1.5 KINDS OF RESEARCH BY PURPOSE:

1.5.1 APPLIED RESEARCH:

Applies research refers to scientific study and research that seeks to solve practical

problems. Applied research is used to find solutions to everyday problems, cure illness,

and develop innovative technologies, rather than to acquire knowledge for knowledge’s

sake. For example, applied researchers may investigate ways to:

Improve agricultural crop production

Treat or cure a specific disease


Improve the energy efficiency of homes, offices, or modes of transportation.

1.5.3 BASIC RESEARCH:

Basic (aka fundamental or pure) research is driven by a scientist’s curiosity or interest in

a scientific question. The main motivation is to expand man’s knowledge, not to create or

invent something. There is no obvious commercial value to the discoveries that result

from basic research. For example, basic science investigations probe for answers to

questions such as:

1. How did the universe begin?

2. What are protons, neutrons, and electrons composed of?

3. How do slime molds reproduce?

4. What is the specific genetic code of the fruit fly?

1.5.4 DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH:

Descriptive research refers to research that provides an accurate portrayal of

characteristics of a particular individual, situation, or group. Descriptive research,also

known as statistical research. These studies are a means of discovering new meaning

describing what exists, determining the frequency with which something occurs, and

categorizing information. In short descriptive research deals with everything that can be

counted and studied, which has an impact of the lives of the people it deals with.

1.5.5 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

A conceptual framework is an analytical tool with several variations and contexts. It is

used to make conceptual distinctions and organize ideas. Strong conceptual frameworks

capture something real and do this in a way that is easy to remember and apply. For

example, used the metaphor of a “Fox” and a “Hedgehog” to make conceptual

distinctions in how important philosophers and authors view the world. Berlin describes

hedgehogs as those who use a single idea or organizing principle to view the world

(examples given include Dante, Pascal, Dostoevsky, Plato, Ibsen and Hegel). Foxes, on

the other hand, incorporate a type of pluralism and view the world through multiple,

sometimes conflicting, lenses (examples include Goethe, Joyce, Shakespeare, Aristotle,

Herodotus, Molière, Anderson, Balzac). Economistss use the conceptual framework of

“supply” and “demand” to distinguish between the behavior and incentive systems of

firms and consumers. Like many conceptual frameworks, supply and demand can be


presented through visual or graphical representations Conceptual frameworks are

particularly useful as organizing devices in empirical research.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_framework)

1.6 DEVELOPING THE FRAMEWORK

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical framework:

1. Examine your thesis title and research problem. The research problem anchors

your entire study and forms the basis from which you construct your theoretical

framework.

2. Brainstorm about what you consider to be the key variables in your research.

Answer the question, "What factors contribute to the presumed effect?"

3. Review related literature to find how scholars have addressed your research

question.

4. List the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your study. Group these

variables into independent and dependent categories.

5. Review key social science theories that are introduced to you in your course

readings and choose the theory that can best explain the relationships between the

key variables.

6. Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point out their

relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on

specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint [framework] that the researcher will

take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered. It also facilitates the

understanding of concepts and variables according to given definitions and builds new

knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions.

1.7 PURPOSE

Think of theories as the conceptual basis for understanding, analyzing, and designing

ways to investigate relationships within social systems. To that end, the following roles

served by a theory can help guide the development of your framework.

Means by which new research data can be interpreted and coded for future use,

Response to new problems that have no previously identified solutions strategy,

Means for identifying and defining research problems,


Means for prescribing or evaluating solutions to research problems,

Ways of discerning certain facts among the accumulated knowledge that are

important and which facts are not,

Means of giving old data new interpretations and new meaning,

Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical

research questions that need to be answered to maximize understanding of the

issue.

Means of providing members of a professional discipline with a common

language and a frame of reference for defining the boundaries of their profession,

and

Means to guide and inform research so that it can, in turn, guide research efforts

and improve professional practice.

(http://libguides.usc.edu/c.php?g=235034&p=1561763)

1.8 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

A theoretical framework is a collection of interrelated concepts, like a theory but not

necessarily so well worked-out. A theoretical framework guides your research,

determining what things you will measure, and what statistical relationships you will look

for. Theoretical frameworks are obviously critical in deductive, theory-testing sorts of

studies (see Kinds of Research for more information). In those kinds of studies, the

theoretical framework must be very specific and well-thought out. Surprisingly,

theoretical frameworks are also important in exploratory studies, where you really don't

know much about what is going on, and are trying to learn more. There are two reasons

why theoretical frameworks are important here. First, no matter how little you think you

know about a topic, and how unbiased you think you are, it is impossible for a human

being not to have preconceived notions, even if they are of a very general nature. For

example, some people fundamentally believe that people are basically lazy and

untrustworthy, and you have keep your wits about you to avoid being conned. These

fundamental beliefs about human nature affect how you look things when doing

personnel research. In this sense, you are always being guided by a theoretical

framework, but you don't know it. Not knowing what your real framework is can be a

problem. The framework tends to guide what you notice in an organization, and what you


don't notice. In other words, you don't even notice things that don't fit your framework!

We can never completely get around this problem, but we can reduce the problem

considerably by simply making our implicit framework explicit. Once it is explicit, we

can deliberately consider other frameworks, and try to see the organizational situation

through different lenses.

(http://www.statisticssolutions.com/theoretical-framework/)

1.9 THEPRETICAL FRAMEWORK AND FORMULATION OF A

RESEARCH PLAN

A brief history of action research and how this research design has evolved into a widely

used educational research model. As the focus of my research is how I go about

improving my principal’s role to improve students’ literacy, I will describe why other

research models did not provide me with a framework to conduct an analysis of my daily

work in context while I sought answers to the problems our school posed. It was this

realization that led me to construct an action research model, in which my professional

readings, reflections and critical conversations became meaningful to me as I embarked

on creating my own living educational theory about my principal ship. I will define

“living educational theory” as developed by Whitehead and I will outline why this

theoretical framework provides both the necessary conceptual grounding and validation

process required for my study. In reviewing my ethical stance, I will examine how the

experiences of other leaders in a practitioner research role assisted me in safeguarding

against any perceived misuse of power caused when a principal collects data from her

staff. These discussions close with my rationale for choosing to conceptually frame my

action research design with living educational theory. It is my contribution to living

educational theory that adds knowledge about educational leadership to the field of

education. I will conclude this chapter with a discussion on how I incorporated action

research methodology into my study’s research plan and I will explain my plan’s

evolution in the field.

1.9.1EVOLUTION OF ACTION RESEARCH

As professionals in the fields of social sciences and the humanities began to inquire into

their own practices, research methodologies designed for the pure sciences began to fit

less well and a new research paradigm was sought (Carr & Kemmis, 1986).


1.9.2 THE ORIGINS OF ACTION RESEARCH

Among the early explorers was Kurt Lewin, commonly accepted as the ‘father’ of action

research, who sought a new methodology for his investigations. The term ‘action

research’ first appeared in his early works around 1934, and evolved during his practical

social experiments and research, now referred to as the Iowa studies, during World War

II. Lewin found that people do change (take action) when they experience the need to

change (reflect) and will adopt new behaviours (new action) based on their values.

Lewin’s (1951) field theory is based on the proposition that our behaviour is purposeful

and influenced not just by the physical constructs surrounding us but also by the

psychological ones that occur in our minds as we make sense of situations in which we

find ourselves. Given the depth of my new challenges in leading a very difficult school, I

related very well to both of these constructs as I tried to make sense of my role in my new

surroundings. It is however, the psychological constructs that fuelled my inquiry and my

search for an appropriate research model.

1.9.3 INFLUENCE OF INTERNATIONAL ACTION RESEARCHERS

Since its origins in the 1930’s, action research has become a worldwide research

methodology with theorists in the United Kingdom (Elliott, Lomax, McNiff, Whitehead),

in the U.S. (Argyris, Mills, Stenhouse) and in Australia (Carr, Kemmis) whose work has

shaped and refined it. Lewin’s (1951) notion of taking informed action led to Argyris’

(1974) double loop learning theory that also examines the governing variables in

situational contexts, which Schon’s (1983) work later refined in his theory of reflection-

in-action – think, act and reflect. Out of the foundation works of Lewin, Argyris and

Schon, other researchers began conducting action research studies. The rationale for using

action research resulted from the participant’s desire to learn about one’s practice in its

natural social context through collective self-reflective inquiry with a view to improving

practice and as a means of obtaining new knowledge (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1982,

1985). In linking action and research to generate reflective action to change human


behaviour, action researchers create a ‘double burden’ of both finding new knowledge

and creating positive change (Argyris & Schon, 1991).

1.9.4 ACTION RESEARCH IN EDUCATION

Given this construct of action research, I believe that this research model is well suited for

educators who are continuously asked by society to act in context while afforded little

tolerance for error. Action research conditions the researcher to be reflective but always

with the view of taking informed action (praxis) to answer the research question – to ‘do

something about it’ (McNiff, Lomax, & Whitehead, 1996). Its methodology is not to test

ideas by trial and error but to take deliberate action that is pre-determined to minimize

error. It is therefore not surprising that many educators have chosen to conduct research

through their own action research studies – beginning with Stephen Corey, the first

researcher to use action research in education in the 1950s. Lewin’s (1951) work provides

a practical foundation and framework for educational research, as it defines action

research as being a process that gives “credence to the development of powers of

reflective thought, discussion, decision and action by ordinary people participating in

collective research on ‘private troubles’ they have in common” (Adelman, 1993).

Educators need to make regular informed decisions about their practice and student

outcomes to enhance learning, and this work necessitates collective research in the field

to inform practice (Mills, 2003).

1.10 METHODOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS OF ACTION

RESEARCH

Action research is very subjective as its methodology is defined by the individual

researcher, so it is difficult to provide a philosophical framework to encompass all action

research studies. Educators do not conduct action research according to only one design

model and presently, there are three main current schools of thought in action research

(Mills, 2003): American, with its roots in the progressive education movement as

conceptualized by John Dewey (Noffke, 1994); British, with a basis in curriculum reform

and increased professionalism in teaching (Elliott, 1991; Stenhouse, 1975); and


Australian with a move towards collaborative curriculum planning (Kemmis, 1993). Out

of these movements, three methodological applications of action research have evolved:

• ‘Critical’ action research, also known as emancipatory action research, which draws

from critical theory (Mills, 2003) and from postmodernism (Carr & Kemmis, 1986) and

in which there is a shared democratic commitment to seek new knowledge and to break

away from traditional bureaucratic traditions for reform and social improvement (Carr &

Kemmis, 1986);

1.10.1 THEORETICAL FRAMING OF ACTION RESEARCH

Today, for action research in education, the over-arching theoretical frame, or what

Creswell (1998) refers to as an ideological perspective, is postmodernism. This frame

emphasizes that a truth can be socially constructed by a particular group coming to know

and understand natural human experiences in context. Stringer (1996) argues that

elements of postmodernism, with its ability to deconstruct knowledge and to create

transformative elements, allows action researchers to ‘critically inspect’ and explore

social dimensions of their practices and then to reflect on possible transformations to their

practice. This viewpoint implies a more universal application to action research than

implied by Mills (2003). Quigley and Kuhne (1997) cite the work of Habermas (1970)

and his assertion that knowledge can be socially constructed through technical, practical

and emancipatory interests. It is the intent of the researcher in context that frames the

action research leading directly to practical change.

(http://www.actionresearch.net/living/marianlothian/mlphdch3.pdf)

1.11 THE TYPES OF RESEARCH FRAMEWORKS

1.11.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

A theoretical framework guides research activities by its reliance on a formal theory; that

is, a theory that has been developed by using an established, coherent explanation of

certain sorts of phenomena and relationships Piaget’s theory of intellectual development

and Vygotsky’s theory of socio-historical constructivism are two prominent theories used

in the study of children’s learning. At the stage in the research process in which specific

research questions are determined, these questions would be rephrased in terms of the


formal theory that has been chosen. Then, relevant data are gathered, and the findings are

used to support, extend, or modify the theory.

1.11.2 PRACTICAL FRAMEWORKS

This kind of framework is not informed by formal theory but by the accumulated practice

knowledge of practitioners and administrators, the findings of previous research, and

often the viewpoints offered by public opinion. Research questions are derived from this

knowledge base and research results are used to support, extend, or revise the practice

(Scriven, 1986) A practical framework guides research by using “what works” in the

experience of doing something by those directly involved in it.

1.11.3 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS

A conceptual framework is an argument that the concepts chosen for investigation, and

any anticipated relationships among them, will be appropriate and useful given the

research problem under investigation. Like theoretical frameworks, conceptual

frameworks are based on previous research, but conceptual frameworks are built from an

array of current and possibly far-ranging sources. The framework used may be based on

different theories and various aspects of practitioner knowledge, depending on what the

researcher can argue will be relevant and important to address about a research problem.

(http://e-library.math4teaching.com/what-are-the-types-of-research-frameworks/)

1.12 FORMATING THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL

FRAMEWORKS OF MANUFACTURING ORGANIZATION

Set of related statements that describe or explain phenomena in a systematic way. A

broad abstract characterization of phenomena. A generalization that presents a systematic

explanation about the relationships among phenomena. Its writings include terms such as

proposition, postulate, premise, axiom, law, principle. A set of interrelated constructs

(concepts), definitions, and propositions that present a systematic view of phenomena by

specifying relations among variables, with the purpose of explaining and predicting the

phenomena. It is a statements of relationship between two variables, one acting as the

independent variable, another as the dependent variable. Examples: Theory of Planned

Behavior

Proposition: behaviour that is volitional is determined by people’s intention to

perform the behaviour. Intention to perform or not perform behaviour is


determined by 3 factors: attitudes toward the behaviour, subjective norms, and

perceive self-control. The relative importance of the 3 factors in influencing

intention varies across behaviours and situations.

1.13 TYPES OF THEORIES:

1. Descriptive- describes or presents a phenomenon. It explains why an event is

associated with another event or what causes an event to happen

2. Grand theory (Macrotheory) describes the large segments of the human

experience

3. Middle-range theory- more specific to certain phenomena

4. Borrowed- non-nursing models used by nurse researchers

5. Shared- when the appropriateness of a borrowed theory for nursing is confirmed

6. Grounded data-driven explanations that account for the phenomena under study

through inductive processes

1.14 DISTINCT FEATURES OF THEORY:

Concept- the building block of theory; a word picture or mental idea of a phenomenon,

and a word or term that symbolizes certain aspect of reality Concrete: the human brain;

abstract: intelligence Construct used to specify a phenomenon or a situation that cannot

be directly observed but needs to be inferred by certain concrete or less abstract indicators

of phenomenon. It can be ascertained only by using certain observable and measureable

procedures

Construct: physical health; inferred: assessment

Proposition- a statement or assertion of a relationship between concepts

Theories or generalizations founded on empirical data are sources of propositional

statements

What is a theoretical framework- it presents a theory that explains why a problem

under study exists and explains the connection between certain factors and the

problem

Concepts presented are usually abstract and expressed in general terms

1.15 FUNCTIONS OF THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK IN

RESEARCH:


It provides the general framework which can guide the data analysis

It identifies the variable to be measures

It explains why one variable can possibly affect another or why the independent

variable can possibly influence the dependent variable

It limits the scope of data relevant to the framework by focusing on specific

variables

It stipulates. In analyzing and interpreting data

Not all research studies need a theoretical framework, but correlational and casual

studies do.

1.16 CONCEPTUAL MODELS (CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS OR

CONCEPTUAL SCHEMES)

Represents a less formal attempt in organizing phenomena than theories. It deals with

abstractions (concepts) that are assembled by virtue of their relevance to a common

theme It broadly presents understanding of the phenomenon of interest and reflects

the assumptions and philosophic views of the model’s designer Example: Orem’s

self-care model, Swanson’s theory of caring

1.17 SCHEMATIC AND STATISTICAL MODELS

Schematic models- are common in both qualitative and quantitative research,

represent phenomena graphically

Statistical model- are playing a growing role in quantitative studies. Use symbols

to express quantitatively the nature of relationships among variables. Few

relationships in the behavioral sciences.

(http://www.informationr.net/ir/17-3/paper526.html#.VT2-pCGqqko)


CHAPTER NO. 2

CASE STUDYON

COCACOLA


2.1 THE COCA-COLA STORY

Coca-Cola was invented by John S. Pemberton in 1886 in Columbus, Georgia,originally

as a coca-wine called Pember tons French Wine Coca. It was initially sold as a patent

medicine for five cents a glass at soda fountains, which were popular inAmerica at the

time thanks to a belief that carbonated water was good for the health. It was re-launched

as a soft drink to counter Prohibition. The first sales were made at Jacobs Pharmacy in

Atlanta, Georgia on May 8, 1886,and for the first eight months only thirteen drinks were

sold each day. Pemberton thenran the first advertisement for the beverage on May 29 of

the same year in the AtlantaJournal. Asa Griggs Candler bought out Pemberton and his

partners in 1887 and began aggressively marketing the product the efficacy of this

concerted advertising campaign would not be realized until much later. By the time of its

50th anniversary, the drink had reached the status of a national symbol. Coca-Cola was

sold in bottles for the first time on March 12, 1894 and cans of Coke first appeared in

1955.The first bottling of Coca-Cola occurred in Vicksburg, Mississippi at the

Biedenharn Candy Company in 1891. Its proprietor was Joseph A. Biedenharn. The

original bottles were Bieden harn bottles, very different from the much later hobble-skirt

design that is now so familiar. As a Candler was tentative about bottling the drink, but the

two entrepreneurs who proposed the idea were so persuasive that Candler signed a

contract giving them control of the procedure. However, the loosely-termed contract

proved to be problematic for the company for decades to come. Legal matters were not

helped by the decision of the bottlers to subcontract to other companies — in effect,

becoming parent bottlers. When the United States entered World War II, Coke was

provided free to American soldiers, as a patriotic drink. The popularity of the drink

exploded in the wake of World War II as American soldiers returned home, more grateful

than ever to partake of a beverage that had become synonymous with the American way

of life.


2.2 BRANDS

Globally, the Coca-Cola Company owns or licenses nearly 450 brands in thenonalcoholic

beverage business. Many of those brands are considered among theworlds most valuable.

Some of these include:-

Carbonated soft drinks

Such as Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Fanta, Sprite and Fresca-

Juices and juice drinks

Such as Minute Maid, Qoo, Fruitopia, Maaza and Bibo-

Sports drinks

Such as PowerAde and Aquarius-

Water products

Such as Aquafina-

Teas

Such as Sokenbicha and Marocha-

Coffee

Such as Georgia coffee, the best-selling noncarbonated beverage in Japan.

16

Theoretical Framework for a Research in Manufacturing Organization

CHAPTER NO. 3

SWOT ANALYSIS

17


3.1 STRENGTHS

World’s Leading Brand Coca-Cola has strong brand recognition across the globe.

The company has a leading brand value and a strong brand portfolio.

Large Scale Of Operations With revenues in excess of $24 billion Coca-Cola has

a large scale of operation. Coca-Cola is the largest manufacturer, distributor and

marketer of non-alcoholic beverage concentrates and syrups in the world.

3.2 WEAKNESSES

Negative Publicity The Coca-Cola Company has been involved in a number of

controversies and law suits related to its relationship with human rights violations

and other perceived unethical practices

Sluggish Performance In North America Coca-Cola‘s performance in North

America was far from robust. North America is Coca-Cola‘s core market

generating about 30% of total revenues during fiscal 2006.Therefore, a strong

performance in North America is important for the company.

In North America the sale of unit cases did not record any growth.

3.3 OPPORTUNITIES

Its acquisitions included Kerry Beverages, (KBL), which was subsequently,

reappointed Coca-Cola China Industries (CCCIL). Coca-Cola acquired a

controlling shareholding in KBL, its bottling joint venture with the Kerry Group,

in Hong Kong.

These also give Coca- Cola an opportunity for growth, through new product

launch or greater penetration of existing markets. Stronger international operations

increase the company‘s capacity to penetrate international markets and also gives

it an opportunity to diversity its revenue stream.

18


3.3 THREATS

Coca-Cola competes in the non-alcoholic beverages segment of the commercial

beveragesindustry.

The company faces intense competition in various markets from regional as well

asglobal players.

Also, the company faces competition from various non-alcoholic

sparklingbeverages including juices and nectars and fruit drinks. In many of the

countries in whichCoca-Cola operates, including the US, PepsiCo is one of the

company‘s primary competitors.

In 2006, approximately 83% of its worldwide unit case volumes were produced

anddistributed by bottling partners in which the company did not have any

controlling interests.

As independent companies, its bottling partners, some of whom are publicly

tradedcompanies, make their own business decisions that may not always be in

line with thecompany‘s interests.

19


CONCLUSION

The activity theoretical framework seems to be useful in providing a holistic approach

for the study of information practices in research work. It helps in pointing out the

complex nature of the process where researchers work towards achieving particular

goals. Activity theory helps to understand more deeply the structure of research work.

The most important benefit in using this framework for information science might be

that it puts information practices in their context, as a mediating tool in the research

process, and helps to structure them; thus it highlights important elements which

otherwise might have been missed. It focuses attention on factors like the object and

the hierarchy of activities in the research work. Activity theory shows the true

importance of how the historical development of the domain has affected information

practices and especially the development of the information environment.

The activity system of research work in molecular medicine consists of various

embedded actions and related activities. Research work was presented in this study as

a central activity with education, management and (for example) information services

as neigbour activities. In the research work activity system, the most information

intensive actions were the creation of the research idea, the analysis of the results and

the reporting of results. There also existed other simultaneous activities which had at

least partly differing and sometimes even contradicting objects.

In the hierarchy of activities, information practices belonged to the lower level, i.e., to

actions and operations. From the point of view of researchers, these activities and

operations seemed not to be significant on their own, only in relation to the main

activity. Information practices have their place in the hierarchy of other object

oriented activities of researchers.

20


RECOMMENDATION

It appeared that the activity system of information services did not provide much

support to the researchers when, for example, only a quarter of the researchers used

library-related services as a literature searching tool. This could be an indication of a

contradiction between the separate activity systems of research work in molecular

medicine and information services provided by the library. An explanation for this

could be that the activity system of research work is not understood well enough

when information services are being constructed and that the object of these systems

might be partly contradicting.

Another benefit from the use of the activity theory was that it helped us to understand

that researchers who work in the same domain and even in the same field might have

various objectives and motives because of other simultaneous activities. Every field

also has its own history and context which have an impact on the use of and need for

specific tools. These differences need to be understood and applied when information

services, systems or tools are designed for these actors.

In the end it became obvious that in the light of the activity theory the term user

should be replaced by the term actor in the information environment. According to

activity theory, activities are conscious, motivated and dynamic.

21


Bibliographyhttp://e-library.math4teaching.com/what-are-the-types-of-research-frameworks/. (n.d.). http://e-library.math4teaching.com/what-are-the-types-of-research-frameworks/.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_framework. (n.d.). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_framework.

http://libguides.usc.edu/c.php?g=235034&p=1561763. (n.d.). http://libguides.usc.edu/c.php?g=235034&p=1561763.

http://www.actionresearch.net/living/marianlothian/mlphdch3.pdf. (n.d.). http://www.actionresearch.net/living/marianlothian/mlphdch3.pdf.

http://www.informationr.net/ir/17-3/paper526.html#.VT2-pCGqqko. (n.d.). http://www.informationr.net/ir/17-3/paper526.html#.VT2-pCGqqko.

http://www.statisticssolutions.com/theoretical-framework/. (n.d.). http://www.statisticssolutions.com/theoretical-framework/.

22


Advanc Business Research 2222

Documents

Transcript of Advanc Business Research 2222