Introduction

Research may be considered a particular type of learning device by which the researcher as a learner tries to discover scientific truth. By discovering the truth the researcher is changed in his ability to deal with the environment and is actively contributing and guiding others to better deal with their environments. This view is supported by Eaton (1938), as quoted by Snelbecker (1974) who stated that when a man has learned anything he is, for a time at least, changed in his readiness to deal with his environment. He has become, with respect to certain things, events, meanings, as the case may be, differently sensitive, differently percipient, differently disposed as to the forms of his responsive behaviour, whether in action, in understanding, or in feeling.

In the search for scientific truth and unification in the social research approach it is important that the scientist firstly discover the fundamentals underlying principles that underpin truth and realities. These fundamental principles can be discovered through the reading of scientific articles and books, but to get to the roots of the principles, the scientists need to become actively involved in research by going out, sitting in peoples homes, see their faces, hear their stories directly and find out what their lives are like. By becoming actively involved the researcher avoids what Fonda (2005) labeled A sandwitch without filling. By identifying these fundamental underlying principles uncertainty and error in interpretation can largely be avoided. Once these principles are identified and validated, the researcher may continue to higher layers of inferences and knowledge. This is the approached followed by most reputable scientists like Einstein and Curie.

Purpose

The purpose of this article intends to introduce the unified principles that applies to both natural and social science research and broadly stated by Sigmund Freud as: The present dies, unless it multiplies for the future as it relates to the longetivity and application of the research output in pioneering research processes. Stated alternatively one may formulate it as: Pioneering knowledge developed in the present, needs to be multiplied in the future to demonstrate its relevance for the future.

Pre-conditions to enhance longetivity of knowledge

Knowledge created today can only be validated and finds its application and extension into the future if the following conditions exist or are created:

Existence of opportunity for experimentation

The first and most obvious pre-condition required for multiplication of knowledge is that enough opportunities are given to the pioneer researcher to be exposed to experimentation in order to ensure that the thinking and action process does not come to a complete standstill. To drive the research process to completeness requires a commitment on a personal and professional level for better or for worse (Burns, 2004) as the researcher set in motion a process of discovery, validation, verification, significance and suitability. Without enough opportunities to continue with the process, the researcher may stop too early before the real breakthrough or dicovery is made.

Navigation of the thinking and action processes

Secondly, in order to validate and correct the thinking process, the pioneer researcher should force him or her self to navigate the thinking and action process also into unknown territories to ensure that the abacus of possibilities and application increases over time. This is also of particular importance as it allows the researcher to discover new avenues for inventions, learn from new discoveries and possibilities and adapt knowledge and inventions to the environment of choice.

Focusing on a niche as a research problem

Thirdly, the researcher needs to focus his or her attention on a niche that will enable the researcher to pioneer knowledge creation and inventions in a specific sphere of interest. In this regard it may be worth emphasizing that the correct formulation of a problem is as important as solving a problem.

Each pre-condition will be explained more precisely in the next sections.

Problem Formulation

Operating at the cutting edge of knowledge creation requires that the knowledge pioneer and researcher does not wait for a problem to present itself to the researcher as it may come at an inconvenient and disagreeable time. Rather, the researcher should attempt to be the initiator of the process by working through the puzzling elements and available materials of the knowledge niche in which the researcher is interested in based upon the own terms of the researcher, like unfilled pieces of knowledge that still needs to be reveled or knowledge that needs to be re-evaluated and validated for acceptance.

The pioneer researcher may also risk to impose is or her own ideas on the pioneering process by improvising beyond the boundaries of what is already known or guessed at. The person benefiting most, will be the one that devoted his whole life-span generating questions, probing ideas and finding solutions for problems and opportunities. Too be able to do that requires firsthand experiences, dedicated effort and active exploration by the researcher of the phenomena in the chosen social research niche area. In all of this the researcher needs to find the center essentials of the problem under investigation and the ability to move away from the fancy edges of the problem. Too uncover the center essential of a problem demands critical thinking about the problem, in-depth reading and understanding on what is already known, who in this field is working on what, critical analysis on the methodologies employed by others and the time- and spaceframework in which it occurred.

Navigate thinking and action into in unknown territories

As chaotic as the behaviour of social phenomena may seem, it is most probably only the case in the eyes of the novice. A good social researcher, on the other hand, is able of navigating research thinking and action in the realization that the content of a sinlgle phenomenon is bound by occurrences that came before and after it as if there exists in any phenomenon a golden thread. The knowledge pioneer therefore needs to see a problem or opportunity within a time and space perspective with proper regard for the expectations of the individual or group generation, their present situation and the history from where the phenomena and the individual or group under investigation comes. Taking time and space into account will ensure that a researcher remains realistic, foresighted and self-controlled.

In all of this, it is the knowledge process, rather than the knowledge content that is free in terms of methodology, the way in which it represents itself and how it is absorbed by the individual or group. It is through the knowledge process that people change and grow. This change may be caused by continues influencing circumstanses, but may also include discontinued change paths as well as focused and unfocussed efforts on the part of the individual or group.

However, it is through the analysis of the knowledge content and thus its structure what happened before and after (time) and in what personalized environment (space) - which one begins to essentially understand the truth of institunionalised phenomena into the personalities and behaviour of people. One can thus conclude that the structure or functional relations - of a phenomenon prevails and that this is what really needs to be discovered. This opinion is deducted from the Theory of Constancy which indicates in the direction that in human behaviour the nervous system endeavours to keep constant something in its functional relations that Freud described as the sum of exitation.

Experimentation to keep thinking and action dynamic

The pioneer researcher is better described in terms of a verb called dedicated experimenting - rather than in terms of a noun which refers to a title or an ego. As a verb the pioneer researcher is action oriented busy exploring the extremes of the central essentials of a problem to arrive first at understanding and offering solutions to social phenomena. Avoiding cutting through the extremes would lead to sterility in new knowledge creation and only to a situation of knowing more of the same. New knowledge or novice knowledge is often discovered by investigating the other side of the coin of popular research. These research knowledge can then be gradually developed and accumulated over time by focusing on fine detail of all research work, reading, the matching conclusions and identifying contradictions.

Research done by Amara and Landry (2005) indicated that researchers and firms that have access to a larger variety of sources of information enhances the chances of novelty in research. In this regard it is important to keep the thinking process going by asking proper questions and probing deeper. To foster learning further, the pioneer researcher should be given ample time to gain sufficient understanding of the knowledge idea and enough space to explore the idea according to his or her frame of reference and niche of interest. Further, the pioneer researcher should be able to adapt, re-engineer and design new research design and methodological processes fit to meet the demands and challenges of the research problem under investigation.

As a pioneer the researcher will often felt like walking in the dark, with no one able to provide direction, only able to rely on his or her own value system, his or her confidence in understanding the research problem correctly, the dream to succeed, a willingness to get away from what is known and believed and a desire to create and step into new knowledge paradigns.

Conclusion

The pioneer researcher arrives first because the pioneer is able to focus on the centrality of critical problems, actively explore in a dedicated an in-dept manner the extremes of the problem, whilst being able to navigate the research process in the presence of unknown territory because of a proper understanding of the structure of the problem at hand. In all of this the pioneer researcher is willing and motivated to be there first and not to be constrained and blinded by current social paradigms.

Bibliography

Amara, N. & Landry, R. 2005. Sources of information as determinants of novelty of innovation in manufacturing firms: evidence from the 1999 statistics Canada innovation survey. Technovation. 25:245-259.

Burns, H. 2004. Four dimensions of significance: Tradition, method, theory, originality. Computers and Composition. 21:5-13.

Fonda, J. 2005. My life so far. New York: Random House, Inc.

Snelbecker, G.E. 1974. Learning theory, instructional theory and Psychoeducational design. McGraw-Hill: New York.

Stone, I. 1971. The passions of the mind: A novel of the life and work of Sigmeund Freud. Cassel: London.