Extent of the Problem

Every problem may be visualized as a journey to be undertaken by the researcher. There is a point of departure and a point of destination. Even at the point of departure, when the researcher is likely to begin, there may be a number of uncertainties relative to the preparation necessary. The longer the journey, with the length being measured both in terms of time and money, the more thoughtful and deliberate the preparation needs to be. How long, in terms of months or years, is the problem likely to engage the researcher? The total volume of work involved, considering unforeseen snags, needs to be included. The main phases of the research activity, namely, study, equipment building (if neces­sary), experiments, analysis, and presentation: all of these need to be accounted for. This is not to say that the time can be calcu­lated similarly to computing the number of hours needed by a machinist for a manufacturing job. No. Research is a totally dif­ferent kind of activity; sometimes the work progresses so quickly that even the researcher is surprised, while on other occasions, days and weeks may pass in fixing small snags or waiting for small pieces of equipment or material(s). Nonetheless, the researcher should use all his experience, any available advice, and all other resources to make an honest attempt to tag a problem with a time frame. Even while doing this, he should be aware that, almost as a rule, everything takes more time to execute than estimated; hence, an overhead time needs to be added.

One of the main questions for estimating the time required asks, Is the problem a logical continuation of one or more of those previously solved? If the answer is yes, the researcher’s pre­paratory work consists of studying and getting familiar with the previous work, published or otherwise. This saves a lot of time that would have been spent studying to define and hypothesize the problem, if it were a totally new one. If the present problem consists of extending previous work, a distinction needs to be made as to whether the extension is parallel to or in series with the previous work. If, for instance, the previous problems were to study structures by X-ray diffraction of twenty substances, and the present problem is to study the structures of ten other sub­stances, the problem may be considered a parallel extension; the same or nearly the same equipment and technique may be required, the difference consisting mainly in certain numbers. If, instead, the present problem is an extension in series, the prob­lem is likely to be more difficult and time-consuming. The prob­lem may involve more thought and study, more refinement in equipment, more sophistication in technique, if the extension builds upon previous work.

The reader may wonder, knowing that research cannot be planned as a building can be planned, why researchers need to be so concerned about time. Nobody’s time is unlimited. Besides, only a small percentage of research workers do not have to account for their time. In addition, those to whom the researcher is expected to report are quite often not researchers themselves; they are managers of some sort, whose expertise is confined to accounting for money and who know that time is another form of money.

The volume of work needed to solve the problem, though related to the time required, has an independent significance. A report, either at the end or at a convenient point during the course of research, may need to be presented, perhaps in the form of a conference paper, a journal article, a classified report to the sponsors, or a thesis for a degree. In the last case, for instance, no Ph.D. candidate, however concentrated his findings may be, is expected to submit a ten-page thesis. If in contrast, the problem and its solution are to be presented in conference paper, no audi­ence can take a forty-page presentation. The researcher may wish to live in a world of his own, in which ideals dictate that the vol­ume of the problem and the time required to solve it are the pre­rogatives. Alas! the reality is that the researcher is a small part of a big world, and his independence is not unconditional.

Source: Srinagesh K (2005), The Principles of Experimental Research, Butterworth-Heinemann; 1st edition.