Evaluating Methods used for Establishing Quality

Evaluating Methods used for Establishing Quality
Methods of establishing quality are some of the most important aspects of research. They are normally viewed as integral to the validity of a research project and help to prove that whoever carried out a particular research took time to plan and implement whatever he or she had formulated before embarking on a research project (Creswell, 2007). In this paper, we will focus on a particular study (a doctoral study) and examine whether the person who conducted the study made good use of the various methods that can be used to establish quality in any work of research. In order to do this, we will employ the use of three different but very crucial evaluation criteria. These include whether the methods of establishing quality were appropriately used, whether all aspects of the methods for establishing quality were described or justified sufficiently, and whether the author should have used additional methods to establish quality.
Evaluation
a) Were the methods for establishing quality used appropriately for the qualitative tradition or research design (e.g., case study, ethnography, grounded theory, etc.)? Why or why not?
After reading the article keenly and going through each and every detail, I am convinced that the methods of establishing quality were used appropriately in this qualitative research paper. For instance, there is evidence in the article that the author has employed a survey in order to collect data and to validate claims when carrying out the research. In order to validate this claim, I looked at the paper carefully, and in the methodology section it is clear that a survey is being used. For example, at the beginning of the methodology section it is said that the study was performed as a survey containing six formulated questions about the key areas, the causes and the CP of corporate vulnerability in companies’ upstream and downstream supply chains (Svensson, 2004).
b) Were all aspects of the methods for establishing quality described or justified sufficiently? If not, what could have the author said and why? If sufficient, explain why you think so.
I think that all aspects of the methods for establishing quality were described or justified sufficiently. This is because all the aspects of surveys (the method used in this case) have been elaborated on in great detail. For instance, the author has covered the research (survey) questions, content analysis and a discussion of the empirical findings. All these have been accompanied by well elaborated and illustrated examples.
c) Do you think the author should have used additional methods to establish quality? If so, what other methods would you recommend and specifically why should they have been used in this particular study? If not, why not? This includes the methods of establishing quality as well as how they were conducted or implemented.
I am of the view that the author should not have used additional methods to establish quality. This is because he has picked just one method and effectively used it to establish sufficient quality in his paper. I think that the degree of effectiveness achieved with one method does not warrant any other(s).
References
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry amp. research design: choosing among five approaches
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Svensson, G. (2004). Key areas, causes and contingency planning of corporate vulnerability in
supply chains: a qualitative approach, International Journal of Physical Distribution and
Logistics Management, Vol.34 No.9, pp.728-748.