Área de Influencia y Área de Estudio a) Delimitación del Área de Estudio a) Delimitación del Área de Estudio

In order to ensure credibility of this research, two elements of the research methods were considered: validity and reliability of the study.

3.7.1. Validity

The most important prerequisite of the research is validity. Validity refers to coherency of conclusions of a study, and it involves three criterions. First, measurement validity concerns does the applied measurement truly reflects the concept that it supposed to. If not, the results cannot be considered credible. Since the measurement validity focuses on a relationship between measurements and results, it is usually applied to the quantitative research. Therefore, emphasizing measurement validity is not needful in this study. Secondly, internal validity focuses on a relationship between conclusions and variables, and hence it stress issues of causality. It concerns whether a found relationship between two or more variables is trustful or not. It can be used when a study examines a relationship between e.g. a program and test results. In such case, internal validity aims to measure did implemented changes in the program really caused chances of the test results. (Bryman & Bell 2015:49-50.) Since internal validity focuses on credibility of the relationship of compared variables, it is not relevant to take into account in this study.

Lastly, external validity refers to generalizability of research findings (Bryman & Bell 2015:49-50). It concerns whether results of a study are equally useful in another research setting or not. External validity applies especially studies with small sample and a case study. If the data sample is small, the purpose is to describe what is happening in the certain research setting, instead of forming theories that are generalizable. In such cases, the research aim is to present findings and reveal their possible connections to earlier studies in the field. (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill 2008: 158.) This study examined how female managers have succeeded get through the glass ceiling. Since the data sample is small, the study does not claim that findings are generalizable in other settings. Hence, the study does not produce theories how the glass ceiling can be broken. However, the findings provide new information regarding the factors that have helped some women get

through the glass ceiling. Moreover, the results are supported by other researches in the field, and empirical findings are linked to a theoretical view.

3.7.2. Reliability

Reliability measures repeatability of results of a study. It focuses on examining whether results of a study are consistent or not. Reliability is relevant issue especially in quantitative studies, since it is interested in used measurements and consistency of them. (Bryman & Bell 2015:49.) According to Saunders et al. (2009), reliability measures credibility of a data collection and analysis processes. It measures whether the results would be the same or not if the study would be conducted under other occasion.

Further, Saunders et al (2009) has defined three threats that threat reliability and should be considered. First, subject or participant error refers to time when the interview is conducted. Informants’ answers may depend on their feelings at the moment the interview is on, and hence the interview should be implemented during “neutral” time. (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill 2009:156.) This threat has been taken account, since the interviewees had opportunity to choose time that was the most suitable for them. Each interview time was agreed a month before the interview, so the managers had possibility to choose time that was the most ideal for them. No interview was conducted under the rush, or in hectic environment, and hence the results can be considered trustful.

Secondly, subject or participant bias refers to external factors that may limit truthfulness of responders’ answers. Interviewees may not give honest answers because of the external pressure, or consequences that they may lead. Threat usually concerns companies that are led by authorial management style, or where employee insecurity exists. (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill 2009:156.) Responders of this study were managers that work in the top management levels within companies, so therefore threat towards management or employee insecurity did not exist. Consequently, answers were truthful and represented managers’ own thoughts. However, the topic of the study is extremely sensitive and it reveals personal data regarding managers’ careers, including relationships with colleagues and thoughts about previous employers. Therefore, the managers were informed at the beginning of the interviews that the study will be published anonymously.

Consequently, threat of subject or participant bias was eliminated, hence the results can be considered reliable.

The last threat to reliability is observer error. It refers to interviewer’s own feelings and opinions that may affect to understanding of received answers and knowledge. (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill 2009:157. The author of this study had collected theoretical framework and got herself familiar with the theoretical view of the topic before the interviews. However, since the topic is fresh and there are no previous studies especially in the context of Finland, the author had neutral mindset when conducting the interviews. In addition, the aim of the research was to produce new information regarding the topic, which supports the neutrality of the interview setting. Thus the results can be considered trustful.