Analyse and critique the research and methodological choices in three Essay

Analyse and critique the research and methodological choices in three academic chase aftereting articles on the specific theory in mark - Essay ExampleIn the article Towards a New Model of Customer Compliance Service Provision, Kasabov and Warlow (2010) used secondary sources to determine the similarities and differences between customer-centric worry models and the customer-compliance business model (CCBM) in swear out industries. In an earlier article, Automated Marketing and E-Marketing Practices of Customer Compliance Providers, Kasabov and Warlow (2009) examined the concepts and processes of customer compliance providers. Dellande and Nyer (2007) empirically tested the emergence of public commitment on role compliance in Using Public Commitment to Gain Customer Compliance. This essay critically evaluates the research figs and methodology strategies of these articles. Critical Evaluation of Methodologies Based on the data collection and analysis processes of Kasabov and War low (2010), they have a bun in the ovened a qualitative research, where they used existing studies on their topic to form their conclusions and to conduct their conceptual analysis. This research design is effective for their research because it considers the development of the service management literature on compliance models, and it helps determine research gaps. The constructionist approach that they sedulous explores the growth and much needed direction for the research on compliance models (Eriksson and Kovalainen, 2008 80). The weaknesses of their research design are poor validity and dependableness in generating conclusions and taste research issues. They cannot generalise their findings too because of lack of empirical information that can provide tested results on compliance models. Kasabov and Warlow (2010) did not present their research design anymore, such as what systematic reviews normally do, but they did try to adopt numerous studies on customer compliance. Thei r sampling includes studies conducted from the 1990s to the 2000s, with more studies on the 1990s. This cuckold of references shows extensive consideration to the development of the literature, but more recent articles and studies are necessary to ensure the relevance of their findings. Without further details on their research design, however, it is unverbalised to replicate their methods and to come up with the resembling conclusions, which reduced the articles reliability (Wilson, 2010 116). A careful analysis of the arguments and use of sources is needed to explore the reliability and validity of their claims and conclusions. Kasabov and Warlow (2010) collected information about the CCBM through reviewing related literature. They have enhanced the validity of their research by including the doubts surrounding service provision and guardianship management. They avoided the straw man fallacy, which happens when they only respond to weak arguments to their own claims. In order to critically evaluate their article, their main findings must be discussed. Kasabov and Warlow (2010) argued that CCBM cannot apply the same values and norms used in traditional service provisions and complaints management literature. Furthermore, they complained that current studies have not fully explored the importance and extensive applications of CCBM. They asserted that service management scholars often focused on outcomes and disregarded the importance of CCBMs novel processes. In doing so, these studies were not able to wholly