Ma. Arlyn Q.

Hernandez CommRES
BA Communiction III-A

The Positivist Paradigm

The origin of positivist views are usually credited to Descarte. Others have traced these
beliefs back to Galileo. Both share the following beliefs about the nature of knowing and
reality.

Assumptions and beliefs of the Positivist Paradigm:

realist ontology - assumes that there are real world objects apart from the human
knower. In other words, there is an objective reality.

representational epistemology - assumes people can know this reality and use symbols
to accurately describe and explain this objective reality.

By positing a reality separate from our knowlege of it (separation of subject and object), the
positivist paradigm provides an objective reality against which researchers can compare their
claims and ascertain truth.

Prediction and control - assumes that there are general patterns of cause and effect that
can be used as a basis for predicting and controlling natural phenomenon. The goal is to
discover these patterns.

Empirical verification - assumes that we can rely on our perceptions of the world to
provide us with accurate data.

Research has been assumed to be value-free; if strict methodological protocol is

followed, research will be free of subjective bias and objectivity will be achieved.

Methodology

Positivist approaches rely heavily on experimental and manipulative methods.

These ensure that there is a distance between the subjective biases of the researcher and
the objective reality he or she studies.

This generally involves hypothesis generation and testing.

Typically, quantitative methods are used.

System Pardigm
There is only space here to outline the development of the system paradigm, without aiming at
completeness. The system paradigm, unlike many other paradigms in the natural or social
sciences,
cannot be linked with a single great name, a great innovative figure who fomented a scientific
revolution. It developed in a series of works, over a long period

The systems paradigm is a way of thinking about the strategic environment, and how to develop
processes in organizations that achieve strategic goals. The systems paradigm should be viewed
as a tool that leaders can use to design their organization's capability to: (1) analyze tactical and
strategic environments; (2) develop and enact strategies in response to environmental demands;
and, (3) sustain an adaptive and productive organizational culture. These three types of
organizational processes are important in determining whether an organization can achieve
strategic objectives in competitive environments.

The Interpretivist Paradigm

Assumptions and Beliefs of the Interpretivist Paradigm
Interpretivist views have different origins in different disciplines. Schultz, Cicourel and
Garfinkel (phenomenology/sociology), the "Chicago School of Sociology" (sociology), and
Boas and Malinowski (anthropology) are often connected with the origin the interpretivist
paradigm. The interpretivist paradigm developed as a critique of positivism in the social
sciences. In general, interpretivists share the following beliefs about the nature of knowing
and reality.

relativist ontology - assumes that reality as we know it is constructed intersubjectively

through the meanings and understandings developed socially and experientially.

transactional or subjectivist epistemology - assumes that we cannot separate ourselves

from what we know. The investigator and the object of investigation are linked such that
who we are and how we understand the world is a central part of how we understand
ourselves, others and the world.

By positing a reality that cannot be separate from our knowlege of it (no separation of subject
and object), the interpretivist paradigm posits that researchers' values are inherent in all
phases of the research process. Truth is negotiated through dialogue.

Findings or knowledge claims are created as an investigation proceeds. That is, findings
emerge through dialogue in which conflicting interpretions are negotiated among
members of a community.
 Pragmatic and moral concerns are important considerations when evaluting interpretive
science. Fostering a dialogue between researchers and respondents is critical. It is
through this dialectial process that a more informed and sophisticated understanding of
the social world can be created.

All interpretations are based in a particular moment. That is, they are located in a
particular context or situation and time. They are open to re-interpretation and
negotiation through conversation.

Methodology

Interpretive approaches rely heavily on naturalistic methods (interviewing and

observation and analysis of existing texts).

These methods ensure an adequate dialog between the researchers and those with whom
they interact in order to collaboratively construct a meanful reality.

Generally, meanings are emergent from the research process.

Typically, qualitative methods are used.

Critical Theory Paradigms

Assumptions of Critical Theory Paradigms

Critical Theory is a theoretical tradition developed most notably by Horkeimer, Adorno,

Marcuse at the Frankfort School. Their work is a critical response to the works of Marx,
Kant, Hegel and Weber.

Historical ontology - assumes that there is a 'reality' that is apprehendable. This is a

reality created and shaped by social, political, cultural, economic, ethnic and gender-
based forces that have been reified or crystallized over time into social structures that are
taken to be natural or real. People, including researchers, function under the assumption
that for all practical purposes these structures are real. Critical theorist believe this
assumption is inappropriate.

Modified transactional or subjectivist epistemology - we cannot separate ourselves

from what we know and this inevitably influences inquiry. What can be known is
inextricably tied to the interaction between a particular investigator and a particular
object or group.


Methodology

Critical theoretical approaches tend to rely on dialogic methods; methods combining

observation and interviewing with approaches that foster conversation and
reflection. This reflective dialogic allows the researcher and the participants to
question the 'natural' state and challenge the mechanisms for order maintenance. This is a
way to to reclaim conflict and tension.

Rather than naming and describing, the critical theorist tries to challenging guiding
assumptions.

Critical theorists usually do this by beginning with an assumption about what is good
(e.g. autonomy, democracy) and asking people in a social group, culture or
organization to reflect on and question their current experience with regard to the values
identified (e.g. To what extent are they an autonomous worker?)

Critical theorists are not just trying to describe a situation from a particular vantage point
or set of values (e.g. the need for greater autonomy or democracy in a particular setting),
but that are trying to change the situation.