Please Review And Answer The 3 Questions On Dissertation Top

Please Review And Answer The 3 Questions Dissertation Topic Is Below

Please review and answer the following three questions based on your dissertation topic. The questions pertain to the interpretive frameworks discussed in Creswell and Poth (2018), specifically relating to your planned research.

1. Thinking specifically about your capstone/dissertation research (topic below) which you began working toward in HED 650 (or another planned work if you are not in the higher education program), which interpretive framework most closely aligns to your planned work?

2. Do you see elements of other frameworks as well?

3. What are the implications for your work as a result of the underlying interpretive framework you have identified?

Dissertation Topic: The Impact of Organizational Goals on Organization Behavior — The main focus of this research will be to combine factors from theory of action, phases, and self-determination theory to develop a motivational model that will explain the relationship between organizational goal-setting processes and organizational behavior. The research will be conducted using mixed methods research techniques.

Paper For Above instruction

The exploration of interpretive frameworks in qualitative research provides essential guidance for scholars seeking to understand the underlying assumptions and philosophical orientations that shape their studies. Creswell and Poth (2018) articulate various interpretive frameworks, including interpretivism, constructivism, phenomenology, and others, each offering distinct perspectives on how knowledge is constructed and understood. For a research study examining the impact of organizational goals on organizational behavior, it is crucial to select an interpretive framework that aligns closely with the research purpose, questions, and methods—particularly within a mixed methods approach.

Alignment with Interpretive Frameworks

Considering the dissertation topic—"The Impact of Organizational Goals on Organization Behavior"—the interpretive framework that most closely aligns with this research is constructivism. Constructivism emphasizes the understanding of social phenomena through the subjective meanings that individuals or groups assign to their experiences (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Since the study involves examining the perceptions, motivations, and behaviors of organizational members in relation to goal-setting processes, a constructivist lens facilitates exploring how organizational actors interpret and respond to goals within their specific contexts.

Furthermore, this framework supports the development of a motivational model that incorporates different theories such as the theory of action, phases, and self-determination theory. These theories are rooted in understanding human agency, choices, and perceptions within organizational settings. Using a constructivist approach allows for capturing the nuanced, contextualized meanings that organizational members assign to goal-setting and motivational processes, thus providing rich, in-depth insights aligned with a mixed methods design.

Elements of Other Frameworks

While constructivism is the primary framework, there may be elements of interpretivism embedded within this research. Interpretivism shares the constructivist emphasis on understanding subjective experiences but may differ slightly in its focus on the interpretive process itself—how researchers interpret data (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Given that the research employs mixed methods, there is also an acknowledgment of pragmatism, which emphasizes practical consequences and the utility of research findings in influencing organizational practices (Creswell & Poth, 2018).

Moreover, elements of critical realism could also be involved, especially if the study explores the underlying structures or mechanisms influencing organizational behavior—beyond simply interpreting perceptions—thus allowing for a layered understanding of how organizational goals influence behavior via contextual factors.

Implications of the Selected Framework

The choice of a constructivist framework has significant implications for the research. It underscores the importance of capturing participants’ subjective perspectives and highlights the interpretive nature of data collection and analysis. Qualitative methods such as interviews and focus groups will enable in-depth exploration of employees’ perceptions and experiences, aligning with constructivist tenets (Creswell & Poth, 2018). At the same time, quantitative components—such as surveys measuring motivation or organizational outcomes—must be designed to reflect and respect participants’ contextualized understandings.

Additionally, operationalizing the theoretical constructs—like self-determination theory—within a constructivist paradigm requires researchers to remain reflexive about how their interpretations influence data analysis. It also calls for transparency in how subjective meanings are constructed and understood during data interpretation. This approach fosters a more holistic understanding of how organizational goals influence behavior, emphasizing the contextual and experiential nature of human motivation within organizations.

Conclusion

In sum, a constructivist interpretive framework most closely aligns with the dissertation research on organizational goals and behavior, given its focus on understanding subjective meanings within organizational contexts. Recognizing elements of interpretivism, pragmatism, and critical realism can enrich this framework, providing a comprehensive understanding of how organizational goals shape behavior from multiple perspectives. The implications include adopting qualitative methods that honor participant voices, maintaining reflexivity, and designing research instruments that capture the richness of social meanings—ultimately contributing to a nuanced, practical, and theoretically grounded understanding of motivation in organizational settings.

References

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Grix, J. (2010). The Foundations of Research. The Foundations of Research, 1–15.

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. SAGE Publications.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education (8th ed.). Routledge.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Jackson, P. (2018). Management & Business Research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications.

Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., & Bala, H. (2013). "Bridging the Qualitative-Quantitative Divide: Guidelines for Conducting Mixed Methods Research in Information Systems," MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 21–54.