How Intense Competition Creates Opportunities for Advancements in Mobile Communication

HOW INTENSE COMPETITION CREATES OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVANCEMENTS IN MOBILE COMMUNICATION AND MOBILE COMPUTING INFRASTRUCTURE IN DOMINICA: A CASE STUDY OF DIGICEL DOMINICA VERSUS CABLE & WIRELESS

Chapter 3: Methodology

3.1. Introduction and Chapter Overview

The purpose of this study is to analyze how intense competition creates opportunities for advancements in mobile communication and mobile computing infrastructure in Dominica. It is a case study of Digicel Dominica and Cable & Wireless FLOW Dominica, two organizations operating in the Dominican telecommunication sector. In Chapter 2 above, the author provided a review of literature existing in the field of competition and mobile communication in the Caribbean, with special focus on the Dominica. Background information on the two case studies, Digicel Dominica and Cable & Wireless FLOW Dominica, was also provided. The aim of this chapter was to identify the status of existing information in this field, as well as identify gaps in knowledge that may be addressed with findings from the current study. A review of the theoretical framework that will inform this study was also provided in Chapter 2.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

In the current Chapter 3, the author will provide information on the methodology that was used to collect and analyze the data used in this study. The current study will utilize a mixed method research approach, where data from primary and secondary sources will be used. In addition, the research will combine both quantitative and qualitative research methods. In this chapter, the justification for these research strategies will be provided. In addition, research limitations as far as the methodology adopted is concerned will also be provided and delimitations highlighted. Finally, the author will highlight the ethical considerations informing the current study.

3.2. Methodological Design and Research Philosophies

3.2.1. Research paradigm: Ontology

According to Bautista-Zambrana (2015), a researcher can select different research paradigms to guide their study. The main research philosophies used by researchers include ontology and epistemology. When they use the latter, the researcher seeks to address the question of what they know and how they know it with regards to the current study being undertaken (Sanya & Shehab 2013). On their part, a researcher who adopts the ontological paradigm seeks to respond to the question of what is there as far as the research being undertaken is concerned. A selection of either of the two research paradigms is informed by a number of factors, key among them being the nature of the research design and the objectives of the study (Gialdino, 2009).

The current study will adopt an ontological research position. According to Gialdino (2009), this approach is concerned with the fundamental nature of existence. An ontological research paradigm is guided by the assumption that there is no right or wrong answer to a question. The reason is that different people approach a given subject from varying worldviews. Their views of the problem are guided by, among others, their beliefs regarding the reality, their values, as well as research and professional background (Bryman, 2012).

One of the reasons why the researcher adopted the ontological position is the belief that there are no wrong or right answers to the question posed in the study. Different researchers will react variously to the question of how competition creates opportunities for advancements in mobile communication and mobile computing infrastructure in Dominica. Some may agree that competition creates opportunities, while others may disagree (Blaikie, 2010). Based on the justifications provided by the researcher, none of these reactions is right or wrong.

According to Saunders, Lewis, & Thornbill (2012), ontology focuses on the nature of social entities. The focus is another reason why the researcher settled for this position in the current research. Digicel Dominical and Cable & Wireless, which are the primary focus of this study, are business entities. However, they are also social entities considering that the two organizations are operating within the society. Their operations are guided by cultures and other social elements present in the Dominican society (Saunders et al., 2012). As such, ontological research appears to be the position best suited for the current study.

3.2.2. Research philosophy: Pragmatism

A study can be guided by different research philosophies. They include positivism, realism, and interpretivism. For the current research, the researcher will adopt a pragmatist philosophy. According to Wilson (2010), pragmatism research philosophy calls for the adoption of mixed methods of research. The current study will adopt a mixed method research approach, hence the need for adoption of a pragmatist research philosophy. The philosophy is well suited to a combination of both qualitative and quantitative research designs, which will be used in the current study.

According to Morgan (2014) and Biesta (2010), one of the major challenges associated with a pragmatic research approach is the fact that the researcher may be caught up in philosophical debates. Entrapment in these debates may make the researcher deviate from the study at hand, affecting the focus of the research in the process (Goldkuhl 2012). The researcher will avoid this conundrum by treating all the research methods adopted in the research equally. Consequently, no single research approach will be treated as superior to the other.

One of the advantages of the pragmatic approach to research is that it affords the researcher the freedom to use a combination of research designs that they feel are best suited to the study being conducted (Collis & Hussey 2014). The researcher in the current study desired the freedom to select the best methods that would provide appropriate data on how intense competition creates opportunities for advancements in mobile communication and mobile computing infrastructure in Dominica. A pragmatist approach will help the researcher to select and combine the methods that are best suited to provide data on this topic (Collis & Hussey 2014).

3.3. Research Reasoning: Deductive

There are two major forms of reasoning that a researcher can use in their study. According to Neuman (2003), the first form of research reasoning is inductive in nature. In this case, the researcher begins from the specifics and proceeds to the general. In other words, the study moves from specific observations and terminates with broader generalizations (Zalaghi 2016). The major aim of this approach is the generation of theories.

The second research reasoning, and which will be adopted for the current study, is the deductive reasoning. In this case, the researcher will move from general observations and end the research with specifics (Zalaghi 2016). The research will adopt a top-down approach, as indicated in the figure below:

The study will begin with a review of theories on how intense competition creates opportunities for advancements in mobile communication and mobile computing infrastructure, especially in Dominica. The researcher will formulate hypotheses based on the review of these theories. Observations will be made on the two organizations selected for this study in order to confirm or "disconfirm" the hypotheses generated (Lodico, Spaulding & Voegtle 2010).

One of the main reasons why a deductive reasoning was selected for this study is that it will help the researcher to identify and explain causal interrelationships between various concepts and variables (Lodico et al. 2010). In addition, the researcher will be able to measure these concepts using quantitative data to test the hypotheses formulated. Finally, a deductive research approach will help the researcher to generalize their findings to other sectors and other companies operating in Dominica and other countries around the world (Lodico et al. 2010).

3.4. Research Strategy and Purpose

3.4.1. Research strategy

According to Collis and Hussey (2014), a researcher should come up with a research strategy to come up with a step by step analysis of how the study will proceed. It is important to note that a research strategy should not be rigid. On the contrary, it should be flexible to accommodate changes and other factors that may be encountered by the researcher in the field.

For the current study, the research strategy will begin by brainstorming, where the researcher will pick the topic to be addressed. The topic will be picked from a list of topics assigned in class. The researcher may also opt to adjust the assigned topic to reflect a specific goal they would want to achieve (Gialdino 2009). Brainstorming will take place during Week 1 of the research. During Week 2, the researcher will conduct preliminary library research on the topic selected. They will generate a number of key words and search terms from the topic, and use them to access materials from the library. Conducting preliminary research will help the researcher to further refine their research topic (Goldkuhl 2012).

During Week 3, the researcher will engage in free-writing. Here, they will note down their thoughts and ideas about the topic, and what they would like to know about the research (Wilson 2010). In Week 4, the researcher will carry out a focused research on intense competition and opportunities for advancements in mobile communication and mobile computing infrastructure. They will carry out in-depth research to come up with a specific topic to be addressed in the study.

In Week 5, the researcher will generate an outline for the research. The outline will be informed by the notes and information gathered during the research conducted from Week 1 to Week 4 (Gialdino 2009). The researcher will refine and revise the outline where necessary. Starting from Week 5, major research on the paper will begin. The notes gathered so far will be organized and re-organized to respond to the resea...