The theory of knowledge, otherwise known as epistemology, is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of knowledge, its possibility, scope and general basis (Hamylin in Honderich 2005: p.260; Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe 2002: p.31). Although it can be argued that an extensive range of epistemologies exist (Crotty 1998: p.8), they can, as part of the social research design framework, be classified into three stances: objectivism, subjectivism and constructionism.
Objectivist epistemology assumes that there is an objective, meaningful reality beyond what is known through human perception and which therefore exists independently of consciousness (Davis et al 1993; Crotty 1998: p.8). This implies that meaning and truth reside in reality as objects (Crotty 1998: p.5-6) and that through applying scientific principles and methods, true essence can be uncovered. Objectivism for this research has been discounted because it will involve the exploration of selected mental and social constructs of those who are affected by abstract concepts that pertain to PPP operations such as VfM outcomes, partnership management, risk management and performance management, for which no single reality or way of doing things exists.
In sharp contrast with objectivism, subjectivism holds that objects actually have no meaning in themselves (Crotty 1998: p.9). Instead, meaning is derived from the different perceptions, choices, experiences, etc of people and it is these factors that determine our starting point in developing (and communicating) reality (Foss et al 2008). Therefore, meaning and truth are concepts that have shared meaning and are not rigidly determined by externalities (Foss et al 2008). For this research, however, even though the subjectivist paradigm embraces mental and social constructs, this worldview is excluded because subjectivism is considered to be individualistic, where realities are not necessarily built upon and shared as cultural norms (Creswell 2009: p.8). The management of PPPs relies less upon individuals than upon the effective functioning of groups and their interactions.
The third epistemology is constructionism. This perspective rejects objectivism as adherents claim that meaningful reality cannot exist without a mind (Crotty 1998: p.8) i.e. there is no objective meaning just waiting to be discovered. Constructionism shares a view with subjectivist epistemology in that reality is socially constructed, thus derived from interactions between people and our world (Crotty 1998: p.8), but differs in the belief that meaning is developed through the shared experience of historical and cultural norms (Mannheim 1976: p.52, 76; Creswell 2009: p.8). Constructionism is where subject and object emerge together in constructing meaning so attention must be given to the use of language as well as the exchange of information between people (Crotty 1998: p.9; Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe 2002: p.34) including specific contexts in which people live and work (Creswell 2009: p.8). This epistemological position suits the management context of PPPs.
As implied, the task for researchers that adopt a constructionist stance is to disregard the notion of 'facts', or so-called objective knowledge (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe 2002: p.30) and instead focus on appreciating the diversity of constructions and meanings that people place upon their own experiences (Mannheim 1976: p.52) in the situation(s) in which they are being studied (Creswell 2009: p.8; Crotty 1998: p.43). Questions asked of research participants should be broad so that they can construct the meaning of a situation, which typically involves personal interaction with other people (Creswell 2009: p.8). Moreover, researchers should be aware of the impact that their own experiences have on the research e.g. how their backgrounds may shape its direction and outcome (Creswell 2009: p.8).
Ontology is excluded from the social research design framework. Ontological inquiry relates to the study of 'being' (van Manen 1990: p.183) and the assumptions made about the nature of reality (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe 2002: p.31). Crotty (1998: p.10) asserts that matters of ontology and epistemology emerge together - the construction of meaning equates to the construction of meaningful reality. If ontology was introduced into the framework, he says, it would dovetail with epistemology, in that it informs the theoretical perspective (Crotty 1998: p.10). Moreover, if ontology were to be integrated into the framework, relativist ontology would complement the constructionist position as this view points towards the existence of multiple realities (Denzin and Lincoln 2003: p.35). From a methodological and methods position, relativist ontology supports a range of perspectives and data sources (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe 2002: p.42) that could be applied to this research.