Interpretive Frameworks Clarifying your Perspective

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Interpretive Frameworks Clarifying your Perspective

Interpretive Frameworks: Clarifying your Perspective

(Author’s name)

(Institutional Affiliation)

Trying on Different Lenses

Where would you locate each researcher on the continuum represented in Figure 3.1(in the attached chapter)?

The continuum is composed of two main aspects, the orienting question and the aims of the researcher each of which is made up of four factors. The researcher’s aims can be found by understanding the way things are, questioning the perceptions of the participants, taking issue with a situation, and transforming and unsettling the situation. The orienting questions are composed of a number of questions that helps one discover what is going on (Chapter 3).

Rebecca Rogers’s stance in this case is at fourth aspect of the continuum; the transforming and unsettling the way things are. She does by asking herself whether she should take the challenge of educating the perspectives of the setting or choices they might not be aware of, or not. This stance requires the researcher to decide whether she will add to the basic research she has done the responsibility of aiding those in the setting act upon or attend to a perspective. In doing this, Rogers engages in her research with a mindset which is more confrontational (Chapter 3). In doing this, she assumes the role of raising the critical consciousness in herself and others around the issue at hand. She presents a discourse analysis that is critical of two aspects. She analysis the subjects of her study and feels that she is obliged to make corrections to the prior studies by adding that the CSE meeting is filled with discourses and further gives a number of recommendations. Her position is critical (Rogers, 2002).

Elizabeth Crepeau, on the other hand, takes the second stance in the continuum. She tries to figure out in her research what is it that is going on that makes things fell like they are supposed to be like that in a setting. In doing this, Elizabeth begins by building into her position an inquiry approach that is more value- focused. This means that by asking this question, Elizabeth includes into her goals the intent to show how other perspectives and possibilities might provide an understanding that is more comprehensive if what is going on with a certain group or individual in her survey (Chapter 3). For example, Elizabeth focuses on the responsibility narratives about a patient play in building an image of that patient. She uses the stories given by three participants to show how they can be used to create images of the patients. Her position is, therefore, interpretative (Crepeau, 2000).

How are their respective research purposes, as stated in the articles, served by the extent to which they chose to emphasize a critical or interpretive perspective within their research stance?

The perspectives with which these two authors choose to reach their goals serve them largely by asking questions. The critical perspective, for example, serves Roger’s goal of critiquing the discourse analysis of two studies by engaging in her research with a mindset that is more critical and confrontational than she would if she took a different perspective (Rogers, 2002). Her purpose is served by this perspective because it allows her to raise questions and critical consciousness both in herself and in others. She might also use notions like catalytic validity explicitly with this perspective to help her frame her aims (Chapter 3). Elizabeth, on the other hand, aims to find out the role stories about patients play in forming images about them. She assumes an interpretative stance which also helps her attain the research goals. This is because the stance helps her come up with questions which include in her research goals the intent to show how alternate perspectives and possibilities can provide an understanding that is more comprehensive of what is going on with a particular subject in her survey (Crepeau, 2000; Chapter 3).

In her article, Rogers makes the following statement ‘Further, I gained insight into how, as a female literacy researcher and teacher, I was implicated in a system of education that assumes literacy is women’s work but not their right’, how could Rogers have reshaped her research aims, focus, and/or questions to foreground an even more explicit feminist perspective?

Rogers could have done have shaped her goals to depict her feminist perspective by doing a number of things. For example, she could have questioned the role or the responsibility relationship and power play at both the personal and societal levels between the researched and the researcher. She could have also designed her goals in a manner that establishes a non- exploitative and collaborative relationship through processes in research to show how these relationships really impact the stories being told in a study. Another way she could have shown a more feminist view would be to design her goals in a manner that questions the neutrality and objectivity ideas and the denouncing of ‘distancing’ that most traditional social sciences endorse as the only fair way of observing (Chapter 3).

Would it have made sense for either researcher to filter her ideas, aims and methods through an ecological or systems- oriented perspective? Why or why not?

For Rogers, it would have made a difference because with her feminist ideas, she believes that research should be based on a perspective or on the notion that individuals are equal and the same. The results she would get would be different because she has based her research on the fact that individuals cannot be analyzed based on their differences and that they are the same (Chapter 3). On the other hand, the research by Elizabeth would not be affected because she carried out her research based on the fact that different people have different ideas. Her research would not have been affected.

Developing Sensitivity to your Perspective

Introduction

Qatar museum is an organization that was set up by the government for the purposes of enhancing museums and archeology within Qatar. The organization was set up in 2005, thereby, it is a newly formed with limited experience in the field. The institution is operated and run under the budget provided by the Qatar government and its aims are to improve the services of the institution with time. The company has a number of responsibilities, one being to manage and supervise archeological and museum projects. Furthermore, the company participated in the processes of development in these areas (Qatar living.com, 2008).

Background Information

Before delving into the details of this case study, it is essential to first comprehend the background information on which the operational methods of the company are based. For one to properly understand the human resources issues and employee policies in this country, it is essential to understand the country (Jirasinghe & Houldsworth, 2008). For example, Qatar is one of the richest countries in terms of oil reserves, and products. The largest population in the country is concentrated in the capital city. It is one of the richest countries in the world. The largest population is made up of foreigners, and so is the labor force. As a result, most practices at work have been adopted from the western culture. The country is also largely a Muslim country, therefore, most of the beliefs, and values are based on the religion. Though women have been taking up professional roles, the level has not raised high enough to reach that of other developed countries. The poverty level in the country is extremely low, and so are the crime rates (Qatar living.com, 2008).

Before going to work for the Qatar museum, the author used to work at the fuel industry in the country. This sector employs a larger number of employees than the museum and archeological industry. Management skills and techniques are also different between the two sectors. For example, it has been found that the museum sector does not have any program for managing talent and retaining employees. The author tried to apply a number of methods of talent management and employee retention commonly practiced in the oil sector but they did not work, as the two sectors are governed by different factors (IDS, 2008). As a result, it was found necessary to launch a study to find out methods of talent management that can be useful in the sector. The government has invested a large amount of money in the sector, therefore, it would be wise manage talent and improve performance in the museum. The author was appointed to lead a group of individuals in a program called Young Cultural Program whose main aim is to improve talent management in the museum.

Expected Results

The author and his program team members deem that if the program is successful it will be of immense help to the organization by achieving a number of goals. For example, it is expected that the program will come up with ways that will help the organization retain the talents the employees exhibit and use these talents in building the organization, as well as, improving the whole industry (Baron & Armstrong, 2007). The author and his team can achieve this by ensuring that employees attend constant training on their skills and new skills. The author also hopes that the program will come up with ways of enabling talents in the organization for the purposes if managing the museum’s investments. One way the program can do this is through retaining the motivation of the employees by providing them with incentives. The author and his team also figure that they can come up with a model that fits with the needs of the organization and help the industry manage and retain talent. This model can be developed after a thorough research on the needs of the organization, the strengths and weaknesses of the employees.

Reasons for giving this Research more Importance.

There are a number of reasons why the managing of talents n the museum has been put on the forefront. One of the reasons is that there have been huge investments that have been made towards the improvement of museums in the country which have been made to align with several events in the future such as the 2022 world cup. Additionally, there is a need for an improvement model as the sector does not have any such model which is essential in such a significant industry (Improvement and development agency, 2007). Furthermore, the author has an undying passion for talent management.

Why is the Author so Passionate about the Subject?

Since the author’s career goes in line with the business o museums, he has found it irresistible to avoid talent management issues in the industry. While working at the at the museum and archeological sector, the author hopes that he will be able to come up with a model for retaining employee talent that he will able to retain for a long time so as to minimize costs associated with hiring new talent (North Cornwall District Council, 2007; Rankin, 2008).

Conclusion

The Qatar museum sector is a new venture that the government recently started. It has numerous challenges some of which have to do with maintenance and management of talent. The author was given the responsibility of leading a team that was supposed to come up with a model for managing talent in the museum. A number of ways of managing talent were recognized that the author could use in the management of talent in the industry.

References

Baron, A. & Armstrong, M. (2007). Managing performance: performance management in action. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development Report

Chapter 3. Clarifying your perspective. Positioning yourself for inquiry, 39- 51.

Crepeau, E. B. (2000). Reconstructing Gloria: a narrative analysis of team meetings. Qualitative health research, 10: 766.

IDS (2008). Improving staff retention. Report on HR Studies, 863, 56.

Improvement and development agency (2007). Getting performance management right. Retrieved from http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=440577

Jirasinghe, D. & Houldsworth, E. (2008). Managing and measuring employee performance. New York: Kogan Page.

North Cornwall District Council. (2007). Staff retention. Retrieved from http://www.ncdc.gov.uk

Qatar living.com (2008). The Qatar Museum Authority. Retrieved fromhttp://www.qatarliving.com/user/login?destination=node/24186#

Rankin, N. (2008). Labor turnover rates and costs. IRS Employment Review, 894, 89.

Rogers, R. (2002). Through the eyes of the institution: a critical discourse of decision making in two special education meetings. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 33 (2), 213.

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Posted in Uncategorized

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount