Research Skills and Learning Statement - Learning and Mentor Meetings

Learning to Research

Reflection represents an active process of learning through the medium of experience. Consequently, the act of reflection often supplements the learning process, with metacognition, or thinking about thinking, serving the learner in a myriad of ways. Active reflection charges the individual to frame the learning process in terms of strengths and weaknesses, observation of meanings, and cultural contexts. According to Woo and Looi, structuring the reflective process by asking specific questions boosts the overall quality of reflection and aims the entire reflection at one, key goal; to position the significance of learning within broader dimensions such as personal or professional experiences, goals, or an overarching vision. The following inquiry, by extension, asks the following question to guide the reflective process: How did meetings with my mentor support the learning process?

Reflective thinking is not a series of random thoughts but a sequence of interconnecting meta-thoughts. Over the duration of the course, I met with my mentor three times, with each meeting representing a significant turning point in the research process for me. The first meeting was essentially a discussion of my research topic and evaluation of my proposed research directions. While initially I was disconcerted by the time constraints affecting my research methodology, reflecting on the first meeting by asking the aforementioned question highlights several experiences; namely, I learned the importance of flexibility in the research process as well as the need to constantly evolve the research scope. The second meeting was an extension of the first, though I was further along in the research process and had solidified the methodology. My mentor made several helpful suggestions during the second meeting, including how to conduct the quantitative surveys without unwittingly limiting my conclusions. The third and last meeting was less of a discussion and more of presentation, during which my research was concretely presented to my mentor in a way that highlighted what I perceived as the most critical points emerging from the research process.

In reflecting on my mentor meetings, in it clear that the potential existed for certain, preconceived notions to limit my learning. Musolino and Mostrom write that "it is the emotional, intellectual, and practical commitment to beliefs that pushes one to inquiry," with reflective thinking beginning with doubt and hesitation and moving toward exploration and observation (54). My inclination is to doubt that the communication dynamics between myself and my mentor limited my first meeting, but, ultimately, I believe I could have streamlined my research goals far earlier than I did had I felt comfortable discussing options with my mentor during the first meeting. The second and third meetings, however, represented more equal communication dynamics grounded in my better understanding of the research process. Ideal reflection comes from a position of comfort, pause, and uncertainty, and, reflecting from this position now, I see that a clear evolution existed over the course of the three meetings, with the initial meeting highly fragmented and fear-riddled for me and the latter meeting representing a far more empowering interaction. Overall, however, the meetings with my mentor were invaluable to the research process and aided me significantly in examining the direction of my research.

Achieving the Research Objectives

The mixed-method approach to research represents, ideally, a comprehensive means of combining the best practices in both qualitative and quantitative methods. In reflecting on the extent to which my research objectives were achieved, it is critical to identify the research aims and how well the methodology aligned with these aims; in doing so, the strengths and weaknesses of the research process are directly bound to the link between research objectives and methodology. Overall, while I do believe that my research objectives were met, two weaknesses in the research process could have been remedied by a more solid objective-methodology connection. The following inquiry explores the extent to which my research objectives were met and makes concrete recommendations for improving future research processes.

The dominant themes in my research were the relationship between motivation and organizational strategy, with the specific research objectives being as follows: Define the application of motivational theory within an organization; determine the most critical motivational factors within the same organization; evaluate the current motivational strategies being applied within the firm; make clear and practical recommendations for improvement of motivation within the organization. In order to achieve these objectives, the mixed-methods approach was applied to the research process, with the specific methodology comprised of quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews of thirty participants. Both qualitative and quantitative methods embody strengths and weaknesses that the mixed-method approach seeks to overcome. The extent to which my aforementioned objectives were met was directly informed by the strength of the methodology, by extension.

In essence, weaknesses of quantitative methods include results that are limited by the need to be framed as numbers, specifically in terms of quantity, and those of qualitative methods are linked to the higher level of subjectivity. According to Poggenpoel, Myburgh, and Van der Lind, qualitative methods emerged from a general level of dissatisfaction with quantitative methods: "The quantitative methodology and its requirements almost became the only accepted methodology even to the level of an ideology.... Respondents thus quite often become mere numbers. Research seemed to become equivalent to a mechanical implementation of a measurement instrument and statistical testing" (409). In my research, I attempted to use the qualitative interviews to supplement the quantitative research, and this affected the research objectives in both positive and negative ways.

Specifically, two of the four objectives were clearly supported by the mixed-methods approach, and two were rendered problematic by the methodology. The initial objective was to define the application of motivational theory within the organization, and this objective represented a weakness in that it assumed participants would be cognizant of motivational theories and many were not; thus, neither the quantitative nor qualitative methods were useful in meeting this objective. However, the second and third objectives were clearly met through the mixed-method approach, as motivational strategies were identified in both the surveys and interviews, with the data largely aligning with itself across methodological lines. Additionally, the most critical motivational factors were identified through the surveys and interviews, with the interviews filling in gaps left by the quantitative surveys. Specifically, the surveys had not identified all motivational factors relevant to the organization, but the participants were able to articulate these factors in their own words within the semi-structured interviews. Finally, the latter objective was to make recommendations for improving motivation within the organization, and this objective was met by linking the conclusions drawn from the data to literature on motivational theory; this final objective was difficult to meet from the research data alone, as the diversity in responses precluded universally applicable recommendations. Overall, however, the four objectives were met to various degrees, with the first and fourth objective not as supported by the methodology as the second and third objectives.

Interpersonal and Communication Skills Demonstration

Communication and interpersonal skills represent a professional and academic necessity. Arn, Kordsmeier, and Gatlin-Watts write that "interpersonal and communication skills make or break your career success in the office of the future.... [T]o succeed in a knowledge-intensive environment, employees must work cooperatively, generate and archive knowledge, and communicate effectively" (4). The global marketplace demands that workers exhibit higher order communication skills, including negotiation, empathic communication, nonverbal communication, and culturally competent communication. The following inquiry explores the extent to which these and more basic communicative and interpersonal skills were demonstrated during the research process. Overall, I believe that my communication strengths lie in traditional, written communication as well as nonverbal and culturally competent communication. A communicative weakness of mine is empathic communication, though I am seeking out ways in which to improve in this area.

Traditional communication can be framed as oral and written communication, with written communication now manifesting in the digital world. I made initial contact with research participants via email and maintaining contact with them primarily in email form throughout the duration of the research process. Nontraditional forms of communication, or higher-order communication, proved invaluable, however, during the interview process. nonverbal and culturally competent communication, for instance, aided me in prompting interviewees and selecting the appropriate questions to ask in order to further my research aims. For example, one interviewee's facial expression and body language alerted me that she wanted to elaborate more regarding motivational factors in her department, and I was able to prompt her to do so. Empathic communication is essentially when one attempts to listen to another's point of view, attempting to place him/herself in his/her proverbial shoes during an interaction; I struggle with this, and I believe it could have benefitted my research by allowing me to take more effective notes during the interviews. The interviews were digitally recorded, and I focused intently on handwriting notes regarding nonverbal communication during the interviews; this may have precluded me from empathically communicating with participants.

Overall, however, I believe I demonstrated solid communication skills during the research process and, more saliently, identified areas that need improvement. Rao writes that "soft skills are the abilities required in the workplace for professional success.... They are a collection of several skills and abilities related to the execution of such tasks as communicating, managing time, negotiating, writing, listening, reading, presenting, problem solving, and decision making" (50). While hard skills represent concrete technical competencies, communication and interpersonal skills represent equally critical abilities to the global marketplace. The research experience, for me, supported an understanding of how I can both use my communicative strengths to mediate existing weaknesses as well as improve key areas that are, as yet, less formidable than others.

The Research Process and My Professional Role

The research process aided me in both my accountancy studies as well as my professional role in several ways. Most weightedly, the experience attuned me to the importance of research in facilitating organizational change. While many firms have issues related to worker motivation, specifically, that preclude ideal productivity, they do not seek out ways in which to improve worker motivation; this is due, in part, to a lack of empirical evidence that pertains directly to their firm. Moreover, organizations may opt to apply a one-size-fits-all motivational strategy to their firm which may be structurally or culturally not conducive to the proposed changes. The research process supported me in my workplace in identifying areas in need of change by discussing issues with the firm's internal stakeholders. In doing so, I was able to suggest preliminary changes related to motivation in my own firm.

Additional parallels existed between the research process and my academic goals, as personal motivation often represents a barrier to studying. Strong connections exist between worker and student motivation, and I was able to perceive similar issues in myself as the interviewees saw in their workers. Overall, the twenty-first century workplace demands that workers be competent in forging connections between existing research, experience, and their organizations in order to promote meaningful work for themselves. I believe that the research experience was beneficial for me in facilitating the identification of weak and strong areas that were not otherwise apparent to me, and, by extension, supported this same recognition in the broader organization in which I work. The research experience made me a stronger communicator, a more critical thinker, and an overall advocate of empirical examination.

Bibliography

Arn, J., Kordsmeier, B., & Gatlin-Watts, R. A Survey of Workforce Communication Skills. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 6(1-2), 1-23.

Culture and Learning in the Context of Globalization: Research Directions. ChildhoodEducation, 85(1), 65.

Musolino, G. M., & Mostrom, E. Reflection and the Scholarship of Teaching, Learning,and Assessment. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 19(3), 52-76.

Newman, I., & Benz, C. R. Qualitative-Quantitative Research Methodology: Exploringthe Interactive Continuum. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Poggenpoel, M., Myburgh, C. P., & Van der Linde, C. Qualitative Research Strategies asPrerequisite for Quantitative Strategies. Education, 122(2), 408-428.

Rao, M. S. Myths and Truths about Soft Skills. T&D, 66(5), 48-76.

Richens, G. P., & McClain, C. R. Workplace Basic Skills for the New Millennium.Journal of Adult Education, 28(1), 29-56.

Wu, L., & Looi, C. Agent Prompts: Scaffolding for Productive Reflection in anIntelligent Learning Environment. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 339-345.