Over the course of your research investigation, you might find yourself in one of two, or maybe a combination of the two scenarios: triaging bad research design or facing unexpected/disappointing results. Let’s face it, none of us can afford to be in a situation where we realize, after the fact, that a wrong design was used, or an inappropriate tool applied; however, this is very much a reality in the messy and complex world of humans and data. The fact is that more often than not, companies, researchers and non-profit organizations find themselves in a panic when the time comes to make sense of the data that have been collected, and this is partly due to the changing nature of data and data availability.

We all know the age old wisdom: trash-in, trash out, which essentially means, it is recommended to spend much more time at the beginning of the research pipeline i.e. the design-phase, and preferably with the guidance of a person who can see the consequences of the methodological choices in advance. Other situations arise where the design was thoughtfully considered, but the results leave much to be desired. Building ‘castles of @^#&’ or ‘cooking with water’ are other fun, colorful expressions used to describe these kinds of research projects, but are also important contexts to be avoided.

As a firm, we believe it is as important as it is ethical to embrace the beauty of the scientific method: allowing for the element of surprise, as well as accepting what it means to fail. We know that often applied researchers and investigators don’t have the luxury of being experimental when time, quality and cost constraints are present. This is why we have a bespoke solution for our clients in mitigating the surprises that real research investigations provide. In addition to protecting your study from various biases: the Mixed Methods approach, if carefully administered, can help you get to the core of your research question. Here is some important information to get you started.

Introduction to Mixed Methods

Theoretically there are an infinite number of methodological combinations, but there are ideal types that are determined based on different criteria. Creswell and Plano Clark (2007) define six major mixed methods designs based on these dimensions. These ideal types are labelled as, and further explained below:

• convergent parallel design,
• explanatory sequential design,
• explorative sequential design,
• embedded model,
• transformative design and
• multiphase design
• Convergent parallel design: The purpose of this mixed methods design is to combine complementary data on the same topic. Here the qualitative and quantitative methodologies merge only at the interpretation phase, data collection and analysis happen simultaneously. The advantage of this complementary nature is that the results of qualitative and quantitative strands can illustrate and support each other, the researcher can compare them.
• Explanatory sequential design: In this case the qualitative and quantitative methodologies are not separated but interact with each other. The quantitative data collection and analysis are followed by a qualitative phase that helps in explaining and explicating the quantitative results. The combination of the two types of methodologies appears during the designing procedure, thus, the details of qualitative design (e.g. sampling strategy, phrasing interview guideline) are largely based on the outcome of the quantitative phase. On the other hand, the qualitative results can extend the interpretation of the qualitative data. This design can perform extremely well, if we need illustrative examples, or have to explain surprising or significant outcomes, positive-performing exemplars, or outlier results.
• Exploratory sequential design: This one is also a two-phase model, but here the qualitative phase comes first, that is followed by a quantitative section. The purpose of this mixed methods design is to generalise the results of an explorative quantitative research to a larger population. This design is particularly useful, if a researcher wants to test theories or classifications that were developed during a qualitative research.
• Embedded or nested design: In case of this one- or two-phase model the researcher has a traditional qualitative research design or a quantitative research design that is combined with quantitative or qualitative elements. Its most significant peculiarity is that one of the research paradigms dominates the other that has a supplementary role. Embedded design is usually required, if the research questions require different types of data.
• Transformative design: This type of design has value-based and ideological reasons and has a transformative goal such as challenging the status quo and developing solutions. The transformative perspective allows researchers to focus on specific and marginal populations or on phenomena like social changes, power imbalances or empowering.
• Multiphase design: This type of mixed methods designs occurs when the researchers investigate a problem through an iteration of connected qualitative and quantitative studies that are sequentially or concurrently aligned. The combinations of the former designs can have also practical relevance, which are also examples for this type of mixed methods design. E.g. an explanatory sequential design has an embedded section in order to achieve the research goal.

The richness of the above designs, from a methodological point of view, can be characterized by one expression: paradigm change. The traditional qualitative-quantitative distinction in research preferences; where, researchers tended to call themselves either as a ‘qualitative expert’ or a ‘quantitative analyst’ and preferred one group of methodologies over the other, has been overwritten by a need to mix the advantages and possibilities of the two approaches known as: ‘mixed methods.’

Without applying both types of research methods within one research project, most investigations would be out of step with current advances in social research studies. More details on how and why to apply ‘Mixed Methods Research Design’ will be provided in our upcoming webinar series on Principles and Practices of Social Research: ‘Introduction to Mixed Methods’.

Follow me on social media to learn how to join our upcoming webinars on ‘Mixed Methods’!

Ildi Den-Nagy Economist and economic sociologist with a unique intersection of skill sets from both business management and academia. A published scholar and skilled researcher, familiar with both quantitative and qualitative methods, and an experienced teacher with a focus on Media Communication and Science & Technology Studies. A demonstrated business leader with significant experience in the international multicultural work environment.