In the view point of McMillan and Schumacher (2014), it is easier to collected secondary data as they are easily available at a cheaper price unlike primary data. The relevance of the secondary data depends on a number of factors. These factors are availability, relevance, accuracy, currency and sufficiency. It is only when these factors are fulfilled the particular source can be used as a secondary data for the particular study. In the article, ‘Relationship between quality of information sharing and supply chain food quality in the Australian beef processing industry’, the authors have used both secondary and primary sources of data in order to analyse the contribution of the supply chain management in the beef industry (Juan Ding et al. 2014). The foundation of any research is depended on the secondary sources used in the particular study. The background and the details of the particular can only be gained from the secondary resources. It is only when the concept gets cleared; the primary research or the findings can hold true importance in the report. Therefore, the importance of the secondary of data cannot be neglected.
The secondary data that have been used in this particular study are authentic enough to support the claim made in the report. The report is based on the Australian beef and red meat industry. In the introduction part, the information provided in the report includes a selling and the revenue proposition of the meat industry. Details of the revenue and retail industry could only be gained from the secondary sources of data. The information in the report has been rightly referenced that lead to the authenticity of the secondary sources used in the report (Best and Kahn 2014). The secondary data also included the details of the profitability of the beef processing industry and the changes that it has to suffer due to severe fluctuation of the beef price. In fact, the report has also analysed previous research works as well related to this particular topic that has helped to understand the background situation of the beef industry. It has to be said that without the secondary information that has been used in this report, the foundation of the report would had been weak that would degrade the overall findings of the research report. However, this situation was not seen in this particular study and the secondary sources have been used appropriately to meet all the necessary requirements of the research (Johnston 2017). The report was focused on supply chain practices and the food quality supply chain performance indicator in the Australian beef industry and the combining data has been used in this report from the secondary sources of data available.
The research strategy undertaken for this particular research report is a survey method. An online survey had been conducted among the beef processors. The questionnaire was set band was mailed to the beef processors of Australia. The aim of the survey was to ask the participants to express their views on the various aspects of the supply chain. As commented by Palinkas et al. (2015), research strategy is the channels how the particular research is carried on. It is equally important that the participants of the research are informed about the way the research is carried on so that they would eagerly participate in the complete research process. Therefore, the vision of the researcher should be made innovative and informative as well to deliver research h excellence. In fact, the research strategy can even supplement with the action plan of the research. It has been mentioned in the report that 600 questionnaires were sent via email to the meat processors and of which only 23% were actually used in the research study because the respondents did not respond correctly or because the questionnaire were partially completed (Juan Ding et al. 2014). There were no focus groups in the entire research and the complete finding was based on the limited response gained from the 23% of the respondents only.
As stated by Nomano et al. (2014), it is important to take the consent of the respondents when they are involved as a part of the research. In the report, no such evidence has been found that would show that the consent of the respondents was taken. Moreover, there was no evidence of the same in the appendix. There were no ethical consent forms or other checklist that would portray that the respondents gave their response with their consent. In addition to this, why the response was limited to those 600 chosen respondents was also not told clarified in the research report. This has definitely created a dilemma in the approach undertaken for the purpose of gaining response from the respondents. If these information were made available, then the entire process would have been cleared out and the understanding of overall primary research procedure. There were some evidences that showed that the information has been gained from a number of case studies and thus, it can be said that the research strategy has also undertaken the approach of the case studies (Kuntsche and Labhart 2013). However, it has to be mentioned here that in the entire research methodology, the research strategy has not been narrated in the right way. This could have been improved by clearly stating out the facts in the research methodology.
As stated by Creswell and Poth (2017), selecting the right sampling technique is the most important criteria of the research study because the primary data are gained from the selected respondents only. In addition to this, Creswell and Poth (2017) also stated that primary data is the most authentic and genuine information if the respondents selected are directly related to the particular topic of the research. Therefore, there is no doubt that the respondents selected for the purpose of the study should be wisely selected. Basically, two types of sampling techniques are used for the process of respondent selection. These are probability sampling technique and the non-probability sampling technique. The probability sampling technique include the simple random technique, systematic random technique and the stratified random technique; while the non-probability sampling technique undertakes the approach of the quota sampling, self-selection sampling and the snowball sampling technique and most importantly, the purposive sampling.
The sampling technique that has been used for this particular research is non-probability sampling technique with the purposive sampling. The respondents selected for the purpose of the primary research were all from the beef industry of Australia and the response from them could be easily gained if the approach was made in a proper way. It is important to inform the respondents about the research study that has been undertaken (Robinson 2014). In such situation, the respondents are aware of the entire process and they can willingly participate in the primary research. However, no such evidence has seen found when it comes to informing the respondents or the taking permission from them. In fact, it has been stated that all the respondents did not provide their response correctly and this was the reason that the response was very limited that was gained. Moreover, the intended sampling size was also large which was equal to 600 respondents.
In the view point of Lewis (2015), for a research study, it is beneficial to undertake a small group of respondents for the purpose of gaining information and the same can be converted to the equivalent number as needed. This is the reason that large respondent size is usually avoided and a balance in obtaining information is made. In addition to this, when the sampling size is kept small, the result gained from them is easier to evaluate. As already mentioned that informing the respondents about the research is equally important and that can be possible if the response size remain small; but this was not the case in the research but the response size was quite bigger. This could have been avoided or reduced.
As commented by Zwart (2015), the aim of a report is only to communicate with the readers or the particular group of people for whom the report has been written. This is the reason that the report is written in a lucid language and in a communicative tone that could be easily understood by the readers. The way the overall findings and the research is written and presented in a report creates great importance for the authors of the report. The presentation in a report is enhanced if adequate charts and graphs are used in the entire report that is easy for the readers to understand and at the same time, gives detailed information about the same thing (Leeds 2017). However, it has to be understood that the presentation style and the communication has to be different for different types of reports (Lester and Lester 2015). This particular report was based on the supply chain management of the beef industry in Australia. This automatically requires enough evidence from the existing sources of data that is the secondary sources and at the same time, it also requires the evidence of the primary sources of data as well. Therefore, the presentation depends on both types of resources.
If the report is examined in terms of its presentation and communication ability, it has to be said that there was a clear and concise structure that was followed in the report. It has an abstract that represented the overall findings in a gist (Juan Ding et al. 2014). One can easily understand the purpose of the report and the ultimate findings of the report. The report has been divided into distinct sub-sections like introduction, discussion, analysis, findings, conclusion and references. Many charts and diagrams have also been used in the report that has provided the information in a concise manner that could be easily understood by the readers (Cargill and O’Connor 2013). In terms of the secondary sources that have been used in the report, referencing has been done nicely that has given the proof of the sources from where the particular information had been taken. All these perspectives add to the better way of presentation of the entire report. Therefore, it can be said that in terms of presentation and communication, this particular report can be easily regarded as one of the best presented report that has followed appropriate structure of the entire report has been nicely designed fulfilling the general criteria.
References:
Best, J.W. and Kahn, J.V., 2014. Research in education. Pearson Higher Ed.
Cargill, M. and O’Connor, P., 2013. Writing scientific research articles: strategy and steps. John Wiley & Sons.
Creswell, J.W. and Poth, C.N., 2017. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.
Johnston, M.P., 2017. Secondary data analysis: A method of which the time has come. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 3(3), pp.619-626.
Juan Ding, M., Jie, F., A. Parton, K. and J. Matanda, M., 2014. Relationships between quality of information sharing and supply chain food quality in the Australian beef processing industry. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 25(1), pp.85-108.
Kuntsche, E. and Labhart, F., 2013. ICAT: development of an internet-based data collection method for ecological momentary assessment using personal cell phones. European Journal of Psychological Assessment.
Leeds, A., 2017. Guide to writing your research paper. Unpublished manuscript, Political Science, Rice.
Lester, J.D. and Lester Jr, J.D., 2015. Writing Research Papers: A Complete Guide (paperback). Pearson.
Lewis, S., 2015. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Health promotion practice, 16(4), pp.473-475.
McMillan, J.H. and Schumacher, S., 2014. Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry. Pearson Higher Ed.
Nomano, F.Y., Browning, L.E., Nakagawa, S., Griffith, S.C. and Russell, A.F., 2014. Validation of an automated data collection method for quantifying social networks in collective behaviours. Behavioral ecology and sociobiology, 68(8), p.1379.
Palinkas, L.A., Horwitz, S.M., Green, C.A., Wisdom, J.P., Duan, N. and Hoagwood, K., 2015. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and policy in mental health, 42(5), p.533.
Robinson, O.C., 2014. Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: A theoretical and practical guide. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11(1), pp.25-41.
Zwart, H., 2015. NERRI WP3 Final report: presentation and analysis of 60 Mutual Learning Exercises.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download