Lecture
note on pragmatism and how to employ it in MBA dissertation projects
I am a part-time MBA student, learning the
subject of Research Methods. My understanding is that the research philosophy
of pragmatism is highly relevant for doing BA dissertation projects due to the
pragmatic and managerial orientation of the MBA program design spirit. Please
highlight 3 main ideas of pragmatism and suggest how to employ
pragmatism-oriented dissertation investigation tasks with three how-to advices
so that the dissertation report is able to create practical (and managerial
oriented) values.
You’re
right that pragmatism aligns very well with MBA‑style, managerial
dissertations. In essence, it lets you focus on “what works” to solve a real
business problem, using whatever methods are most useful, and judging your
research by its practical consequences rather than abstract philosophical
purity.[1][2][3]
Below
are three core ideas of pragmatism, followed by three “how‑to” pieces of advice
for designing a pragmatist, value‑creating MBA dissertation.
Three
main ideas of pragmatism
1.
Focus on practical outcomes and consequences
Pragmatism
evaluates knowledge by its usefulness:
ideas, theories, and findings matter if they help you act effectively and
improve a real situation. Truth is understood in terms of “warranted
assertions” – claims whose value is demonstrated through their practical
consequences in the world.[4][1]
For an
MBA dissertation, this means:
·
Start from a concrete managerial problem (e.g., low customer retention, poor
employee engagement, inefficient logistics).
·
Judge your research design and findings by
whether they help managers make better
decisions, design interventions, or change policies.
2.
“What works” and methodological flexibility
Pragmatism
is methodologically pluralist: you choose methods because they help answer your
question, not because they fit a rigid paradigm. Pragmatist researchers often
combine quantitative and qualitative data, and move between deductive
(hypothesis‑testing) and inductive (exploratory) reasoning as needed.[2][3][5]
Key
implications:
·
You can legitimately use mixed methods – surveys, interviews, company data, case studies,
experiments – in one coherent design, as long as each part clearly serves the
research question.
·
You can draw on both positivist-style measurable relationships and interpretivist-style rich explanations of experience, treating them
as complementary lenses on the same managerial issue.[6][2]
3.
Inquiry as action and experience‑based learning
Pragmatism
treats research as an action‑oriented
inquiry process: you identify a problematic situation, develop possible
lines of action, evaluate them by anticipated and observed consequences, and
refine your understanding through experience.[5][7][8]
This
leads to:
·
Emphasis on context and lived experience of stakeholders (managers, employees,
customers) as a source of knowledge.
·
Viewing your dissertation as part of an ongoing cycle of problem recognition,
intervention design, and organisational learning, rather than a purely
theoretical exercise.
Three
pragmatism‑oriented “how‑to” advices for your dissertation
1.
Design the project around a clearly defined managerial problem
Aim: Ensure that every part of the dissertation
is anchored in a practical issue and leads to actionable insights.
How‑to:
·
Start
and end in practice. Frame your topic explicitly as a problematic
situation in a specific organisation or sector (e.g., “How can Company X
improve post‑purchase customer engagement to increase repeat purchases?”).
Define the current symptoms, stakeholders affected, and business impact.[7][9]
·
Formulate
pragmatist research questions. Write RQs that ask “What works, for whom,
and under what conditions?” rather than only “Does X statistically affect Y?”.
For instance:
o RQ1
(quantitative): “What is the relationship between loyalty program participation
and repeat purchase frequency among customers of Company X?”
o RQ2
(qualitative): “How do different customer segments experience and interpret the
loyalty program and its perceived value?”
·
Specify
intended managerial outputs upfront. In your introduction and methodology
chapters, state clearly what decisions your findings are meant to inform (e.g.,
redesign of loyalty tiers, staff training priorities, segmentation strategy). This
aligns your whole project with pragmatist emphasis on consequences and
actionable knowledge.[9][1]
This
makes it easy, in the conclusion, to translate findings into concrete recommendations, KPIs, and implementation
steps, which examiners in an MBA will view as practical value.
2. Use
mixed methods strategically to answer “what works”
Aim: Combine quantitative “pattern‑finding” and
qualitative “meaning‑making” methods to build robust, context‑sensitive
guidance for managers.
How‑to:
·
Start
from the research question, not the paradigm. For
each sub‑question, ask: “What evidence will most convincingly help a manager
decide what to do?” If the answer involves measuring effects, use quantitative
methods; if it involves understanding why stakeholders behave or feel a certain
way, use qualitative methods.[2][5]
·
Design
complementary data streams. For example, in an MBA dissertation on
employee engagement:
o Quantitative:
An online survey measuring engagement scores, job characteristics, and
performance metrics.
o Qualitative:
Semi‑structured interviews or focus groups exploring how employees interpret
engagement initiatives, leadership behaviour, and organisational culture.
The survey shows which factors
correlate with engagement; the interviews explain how and why those factors matter in your specific context.[1][6]
·
Integrate
findings around managerial decisions. In the discussion chapter, don’t treat
survey and interview findings as separate silos. Use a pragmatist “integration”
logic:
o Use
quantitative results to identify priority
levers (e.g., supervisor support and autonomy strongly predict engagement).
o Use
qualitative insights to design feasible
interventions (e.g., micro‑practices managers can adopt, how autonomy can
be increased without hurting compliance, how employees perceive fairness).
Make explicit how each integrated insight translates into a decision rule, policy change, process
redesign, or management practice.[9][1][2]
This is
exactly the kind of “what works” mixed‑methods reasoning that pragmatism is
known for, and it naturally produces managerial value.
3.
Build a clear “impact pathway” from findings to change in practice
Aim: Ensure your dissertation doesn’t stop at
“interesting findings”, but demonstrates how those findings can generate real
organisational improvements.
How‑to:
·
Map the
problem–evidence–action chain. In your discussion or implications chapter,
use a simple structure for each key finding:
a. Problem
statement (e.g., low repeat purchase rate among a specific customer segment).
b. Evidence
summary (e.g., data show clear link between perceived value of after‑sales
service and repeat purchase; interviews reveal customers feel ignored
post‑purchase).
c. Proposed
actionable intervention (e.g., design a segmented after‑sales follow‑up
protocol, with specific contact frequency and content, integrated into CRM).
d. Expected
consequences and KPIs (e.g., target % increase in repeat purchases; customer
satisfaction scores).[7][9]
·
Co‑design
or validate with practitioners where possible. If
feasible, involve managers or stakeholders in reviewing your proposed
interventions (through expert interviews, workshops, or feedback sessions).
This is very much in line with pragmatism’s emphasis on inquiry embedded in
practice and co‑creation with practitioners.[5][9]
·
Reflect
on implementation constraints and learning cycles.
Pragmatism emphasises that knowledge is fallible and always open to refinement
based on experience. In your conclusion, explicitly discuss:[4][9]
a. What
organisational constraints might limit implementation (budget, culture,
technology).
b. How
managers could pilot your recommendations, monitor outcomes, and iteratively
adjust (e.g., A/B testing, phased roll‑out, feedback loops).
By showing this “learning cycle”, you position your dissertation as a starting point for ongoing organisational
inquiry, not a static blueprint.
Putting
it together in your MBA dissertation
If you
frame your methodology chapter explicitly in pragmatist terms, you might
emphasise:
·
Ontology/Epistemology
(briefly): You treat reality as experienced in practice
and knowable through its observed and felt consequences; you value both
numerical patterns and subjective experiences as legitimate evidence for
managerial decisions.[2][5]
·
Axiology: Your
research is explicitly value‑oriented,
aiming to improve organisational outcomes and stakeholder experiences, not just
to advance theory.[3][9]
·
Methodological
stance: You adopt a flexible, mixed‑methods design driven by the research question and
the need to produce actionable, context‑specific insights.
With
this framing, your dissertation will clearly embody the “spirit” of an MBA:
solving real managerial problems, using whatever methods work best, and
translating evidence into practical recommendations that your examiners can see
as genuine, pragmatic value.
** a collection of lecture notes on research methods
