Reflective Academic Journal Entry – Daniel Zelli
2/3/2025
Reflective Statement: Key
Learning on Qualitative Research
1. The Key Learning Area
This course, RBU602 - Research in Business, delivered by James Keene at
AIM Business School, has completely changed how I approach research
papers. It feels like I’ve been handed a new pair of glasses — I can now
see not just what the research says, but why it says it, how methods
influence findings, and why papers look so different. The differences
actually make sense once you understand purpose and methodology.
The biggest learning for me has been around qualitative research. Coming
from a science and IT background, I was comfortable with quantitative
papers — large sample sizes, tables, p-values and confidence intervals all
felt like “real evidence.” In contrast, qualitative research used to frustrate
me. It felt long-winded, full of quotes and commentary instead of clear
answers, and lacked the certainty I expected from good research. This
wasn’t because qualitative research was weaker — I simply didn’t
understand how it worked.
Topics 5 and 6, particularly sections 5.3 and 6.5-6.6 (AIM Business School,
2025), were eye-openers. They explained the philosophical foundations of
qualitative research, something I hadn’t considered before. The supporting
readings, especially Bell et al. (2022), unpacked what makes qualitative
research “good.” I had always judged quality based on sample size, clear
hypotheses, and statistical validity. Now, I understand qualitative research
uses different measures — credibility, dependability, and transferability
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985) — designed to fit its unique aims.
2. Comparing My Initial and Current View of the Papers
This shift dramatically changed how I approached Assessment 2. One
clear example is how I judged Bowell et al. (2023), which I chose to
Reflective Academic Journal Entry – Daniel Zelli
2/3/2025
evaluate. Initially, Bowell seemed weak — fewer than 20 interviews, no
statistics, and “soft” conclusions compared to Li and Wang (2024), with its
sample of nearly 600 survey respondents. In Assessment 1, I mistakenly
applied quantitative criteria to a qualitative paper, thinking small sample
size meant low credibility. I now know sample size isn’t the point — it’s
about data saturation and depth (Braun & Clarke, 2022). A small but well-
conducted qualitative study can reveal complexity a large survey would
flatten.
This also made Bowell et al.’s (2023) research stand out in Assessment 2.
It showed how monitoring could be experienced positively or negatively
depending on context — insights a survey alone couldn’t capture. I now
appreciate that this variability is exactly what qualitative research excels
at uncovering — something quantitative research often misses when
respondents are locked into pre-set questions and aggregate data (Bell et
al., 2022).
3. Understanding Grounded Theory
Another lightbulb moment involved grounded theory. Before this course, I
misunderstood it entirely — I thought it was just another theory about
monitoring. In my first matrix for Assessment 1, I even listed it under
“Theoretical Framework” for some papers, not realising grounded theory is
actually a methodology (Charmaz, 2006).
Now, I see the real difference between thematic analysis (what Bowell
used) and grounded theory. Thematic analysis codes data using pre-
existing ideas or concepts (Braun & Clarke, 2022). Grounded theory tries
to build theory directly from the data with no pre-set coding frame
(Charmaz, 2006). That’s why I now critique Bowell et al. (2023) for sticking
too tightly to their organisational justice coding frame. If they’d used
elements of grounded theory, they might have generated more original
insights.
Reflective Academic Journal Entry – Daniel Zelli
2/3/2025
4. The Big Lightbulb Moment
The most impactful moment came during an online class with James
Keene, when he said something simple but profound:
“Quantitative research asks what, qualitative research asks why.”
That sentence clicked everything into place. Quantitative research
measures what is happening — how many employees like monitoring, how
many don’t, and what predicts their opinion. Qualitative research explores
why they feel that way — what experiences shaped their views, and how
monitoring fits into broader workplace relationships.
5. Applying This to My Work
This learning has already changed how I work. In IT consultancy, I’m
constantly shown “industry reports” based entirely on surveys. Before, I
would’ve accepted these reports as credible if they had big sample sizes
and plenty of charts. Now, I’m much more sceptical. I know these surveys
are missing the why, and the survey questions themselves shape the
answers (Zikmund et al., 2013).
A great example came up recently in a Request for Information (RFI) for a
nurse call system for an aged care client. The RFI had two parts — a
written response (quantitative) and a product demonstration (qualitative).
In the past, I’d have scored the demo with a checklist. Now, I approached
it like a focus group — asking open-ended questions, encouraging
reflection, and understanding why vendors made certain design choices.
This gave me much richer insights to take back to the client — not just
which product ticked the boxes, but which ones genuinely fit the client’s
culture and needs.
Reflective Academic Journal Entry – Daniel Zelli
2/3/2025
6. Linking to Broader Research Literacy
This course has fundamentally improved my research literacy. I used to
read research papers passively — assuming credibility because they were
published and often skipping the methodology. Now, I actively critique
every paper. I spot methodological red flags, assess philosophical
alignment, and evaluate trustworthiness — especially in qualitative work.
This fits with Taylor (2017), who stresses that critical appraisal isn’t just
using a checklist but understanding each study’s strengths and limitations
in context.
This mindset is essential in the big data era, where statistics are
everywhere but often low quality (Nuzzo, 2015). I now know flashy stats
without qualitative context are misleading. Qualitative research adds the
human story behind the numbers — critical in areas like organisational
change, technology adoption, and workplace culture (Bell et al., 2022).
7. Final Reflection
Ultimately, this course has been transformational. I no longer see research
papers as just data sources — they’re windows into the research process
itself. I know how to ask the right questions about methodology,
reflexivity, and theoretical contribution. I’m confident in reading between
the lines of what papers claim versus what they can actually support.
Most importantly, I now know good research isn’t just about answers —
it’s about asking the right questions the right way. This course hasn’t just
improved my ability to read research — it’s given me the tools to
commission better research in my role, so my clients and leadership get
credible, meaningful insights, not just headline stats. This is a skill I’ll
carry into every future project, making me a more critical, thoughtful, and
valuable consultant.
Reflective Academic Journal Entry – Daniel Zelli
2/3/2025
8. References
AIM Business School. (2025). RBU602 - Research in Business: Course
Notes - Topics 1-7. AIM Business School.
Bell, E., Harley, B., & Bryman, A. (2022). Business Research Methods (6th
ed.). Oxford University Press.
Bowell, T., et al. (2023). Employee Perceptions of Remote Monitoring:
Organisational Justice and Contextual Variation.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide
through Qualitative Analysis. Sage.
James Keene. (2024). Lecturer for RBU602 - Research in Business, AIM
Business School [Live Webinar: Session 3].
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage.
Li, J., & Wang, Y. (2024). Interactive vs. Electronic Monitoring in Remote
Work: Employee Engagement and Deviance in China.
Nuzzo, R. (2015). Scientific method: Statistical errors. Nature, 506(7487),
150-152.
Taylor, D. (2017). Critical appraisal of a quantitative research paper.
University of Leicester.
Zikmund, W. G., Babin, B. J., Carr, J. C., & Griffin, M. (2013). Business
Research Methods (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
