3.3 Criticisms of the selected interpretivist approach
Whilst the strengths of the interpretivist approach include its flexibility and ability to support the exploration of the development of a range of meanings based upon the complexity of the research subject, the criticisms of this approach also need to be acknowledged (Cresswell and Cresswell 2018; Gill and Johnson 2010). The criticisms of interpretivism include the lack of research conventions, in comparison to the positivist approach, which may lead to difficulties in areas such as reliability, validity and generalisability (Cresswell and Cresswell 2018; Saunders et al 2016; Lee and Lings 2008). This lack of research conventions requires the researcher to develop a framework which not only addresses any potential weaknesses in the research process, such as bias, but also presents the data findings and analysis to ensure that the these address the research aim and objectives (Neuman 2013; Gill and Johnson 2010; Riley et al 2000). In this piece of research, the methodology will include a literature search to provide the similarities and differences between sustainability and the Circular Economy (research objective 1) and a case study approach to explore the impacts of these on business models and innovation (objective 2). Both the literature review ad the case study approach will be used in the response to objective 3 which seeks to evaluate the relationship between sustainability and the Circular Economy. The presentation of the data findings will therefore undertake a thematic analysis based upon the research aim and objectives (Yin 2018; Saunders et al 2016; Bryman and Bell 2015; Dul and Hak 2008).
3.4 Data collection
The data collection will only include secondary data from academic websites, including Google Scholar, and publicly available websites, including industry, business and news sites. This secondary data will be predominately qualitative in nature although some quantitative data may be included. It is acknowledged that the use of secondary data is a limitation for the research, but this is addressed by using both academic sources to support the exploratory approach and real-world case studies to support the inductive approach and thus using the mixed methods approach (Saunders et al 2016; Bryman and Bell 2015; Molina-Azorin and Cameron 2010).
3.5 Mixed Methods approach
The use of the mixed methods approach has been applied to this piece of research for the following reasons (Cresswell and Cresswell 2018; Saunders et al 2016). Firstly, by using a number of secondary sources, bot academic and real-world, there is a reduced risk of bias which can occur if only one data source, or a mono-method approach, is utilised (Molina-Azorin and Cameron 2010; Tashakkori and Teddlie 2010). Secondly, the mixed method approach allows for the data to be analysed in a number of ways including the sequential approach which has been utilised for this research (Cresswell and Cresswell 2018; Molina-Azorin and Cameron 2010). This sequential approach sees the data from the academic sources analysed first and then this is followed by the data from the real-world case studies. This allows for the examination of both areas to be explored individually and to then undergo a process of synthesis to support the inductive
