Abstract
It is refreshing to read a book that adds to the increasingly expanding literature on mixed methods, but Plowright takes an exceptionally evangelical (and thus original) tact by stating from the start that the terms ‘qualitative’ and ‘quantitative’ will never appear in the text beyond the introductory chapter and references. This forces the reader to focus on the nature of the research question being asked and to devise a research design that appropriately answers it. Unlike some of the other key mixed methods texts, Plowright does not explicitly identify combinations of methodologies such as using a qualitative focus group to inform quantitative survey items or confirming survey results with follow-up interviews, but there is discussion over ‘data integration’, which highlights the issues inherent in triangulation. This exploration of the differences between nomothetic and ideographic explanations of the social world is most welcome as it grounds the central argument of the text in the existing debates in social science about ‘what can be known’ and ‘how can we know it’. The outcome is a framework for an Integrated methodology (FRaIM), which is based on pragmatic concerns rather than methodological tribalism. Essentially, this book reminds us that the research question comes before methodology.
The process of knowledge generation through research is often a mystery to outsiders. What does research actually involve? How can someone do research? This text is specifically written for those in organisations without a ‘culture of research’, although I suspect that some people in the university sector would benefit from the central message. Essentially, Wandsworth begins by problem generation, leading on to resource restrictions, research design, analysis and reporting findings. Perhaps because this text is written for people typically outside of the ‘research profession’, it does not suffer from the qualitative/quantitative paradigm that blights academic social research. To emphasise this point, the reader is asked in the introduction not to skip straight to ‘how to write a survey’ but to consider the preceding chapters, which will explore whether the survey is the correct instrument for the research question in the first place. The language is engaging and accessible with many empirical examples, and the conversational style is in stark relief to many of the mainstream formal texts on social research methods.
In academia, it is fine to be wrong and acceptable to admit ignorance, and we are all positively encouraged to rethink our views and opinions in the light of new evidence. It is this reflexivity rather than rigidity that drives enquiry in the social sciences. Yet, as Wandsworth points out from the start, these values are at odds with those held by policymakers who want clarity, confidence, cause and effect and strong leadership. Thus, the evaluation of ‘human services’ (the Australian equivalent of components of the UK welfare state and social services) seldom takes into account those who it engages, and the increase in the volume of literature on evaluation over the past 40 years has not resulted in more effective delivery. In response to this, the text advocates that we view evaluation as a ‘living system’, which is fluid, evolves and is interconnected. Social actors are not individuals but parts of ‘living systems’ that interact with each other, a view akin to a social ecology model. The prose is both conversational and emotive, giving the impression that the reader is a participant in this exchange of ideas that complements the underlying theme of the text – that nothing is isolated and connections matter.