Conclusiones

Prior to conducting any research, it is essential that the methodology of the research is prepared. Research methodology is defined as the overall approach to be used in the research process, from the theoretical underpinning to the collection and analysis of the data (Collis and Hussey, 2009). In order to explain the appropriate research methodology for this research, the researcher will follow the ‘research onion’ model proposed by Saunders et al., (2009). This model is followed due to its clear definitions and systematic order of process starting from the philosophical stance of the research in the outer layer, down to the central point of the research onion which is the data collection and data analysis process.

Figure 3.2 – Saunders' Research Onion Model

112 However, researcher following the Saunders model of research methodological design should be aware that the components and layers of the onion are not mutually exclusive to each other. For instance, a researcher may adopt more than one research strategies (eq. utilising both case study and survey strategies for certain part of the research), and that a research may use both deductive and inductive approach for the different part of the studies.

Having described the justification for using Saunders's onion model, the remainder of this section will accordingly elaborate the research methodology of this study following the steps of the research onion model, starting with the research philosophy as the first layer.

3.3.1 Research Philosophy

The outer layer of the research onion is the philosophy of the research. Saunders et al., (2009) express research philosophy as an over-arching term that relates to the development of knowledge and the nature of that knowledge. He also points out that the adopted philosophy and assumptions will underpin the research strategy and methods which follow as part of the strategy and it would be misleading to think that one philosophy is ‘better’ than another as they are ‘better’ at doing different things. Furthermore, Easterby-Smith (2002) suggests that understanding research philosophy is important for at least three reasons:

 It can help to clarify research designs;

 It can help the researcher to recognize which design will work and which will not

 It can help the researcher to identify, and even create, designs that may be outside his or her past experience.

Most literature classifies research philosophy into three main perspectives, namely ontology, epistemology and axiology (Saunders et al., 2009). Accordingly, the following paragraphs will provide a brief summary of each perspective and later describe the philosophical stance of this study.

3.3.1.1 Ontology

Ontology concerns the nature of reality and assumptions about the way in which the world works (Saunders et al., 2009). There are two aspects of the ontological position; objectivism and subjectivism. At one end of the spectrum, objectivism assumes that social entities exist in

113 reality external to the social actor concerned with their existence. At the other end of the spectrum, the term subjectivism holds that social phenomena are created from the perceptions and consequent actions of those social actors concerned with their existence and is often associated with social constructionism that views reality as being ‘socially constructed’ by different social actors (Saunders et al., 2009). Remenyi et al. (1998) also stress the importance of knowing “the details of the situation to understand the reality or perhaps a reality working behind them.”

3.3.1.2 Epistemology

Epistemology concerns what is acceptable knowledge in a particular field of study (Saunders et al., 2009). In their book, Easterby-Smith et al. (2002) define epistemology as a general set of assumptions about the best ways of inquiring into the nature of the world. There are different names assigned to philosophical stances within epistemology, but they generally have similar meanings. Saunders et al. (2009) distinguish epistemological stances into positivism and interpretivism while Remenyi et al. (1998) categorise them as positivism and phenomenology.

According to Saunders et al. (2009), a research using a positivism philosophy is likely to represent a natural scientific approach where only observable phenomena can lead to credible data. In a similar fashion, Remenyi et al. (1998) add that working within a positivism philosophy implies that the researcher is working with an observable social reality and that the end product of such research can be the derivation of laws or law-like generalisation similar to those produced by the physical and natural scientist. A researcher adopting a positivism approach will be concerned with facts rather than impressions and undertake the research in a value- free way (Saunders et al., 2009).

On the other end, the interpretivism approach recognises the differences that exist between humans as social actors and encourages the researcher to understand such differences(Saunders et al., 2009). The challenge for a researcher adopting the interpretivism approach would be to enter the social world of the research subjects and understand their world from their point of view (Saunders et al., 2009).

114 3.3.1.3 Axiology

The third continuum in the research philosophy is axiology. Axiology is a branch of philosophy that studies judgement about values. These value judgments may lead to the drawing of conclusion which may be different from those drawn by the researcher with other values. The main emphasis in this philosophical branch is whether research assumptions are made in a value-laden or value-free environment (Collis and Hussey, 2009).

3.3.1.4 Philosophical stance of this study

Within the context of the research philosophy, the aim of this research is to evaluate the capacity of the local governments in the maintenance of the road infrastructure assets within the context of the post-disaster reconstruction process in Aceh, Indonesia. As this process involves different stakeholders and the fact that their ‘subjective’ perceptions and decisions collectively ‘socially construct’ what was seen as the road reconstruction ‘phenomena’, the ontological stance of this research falls on the subjectivism continuum. Additionally, this research adds special emphasis upon the involvement and the role of the local governments in the road reconstruction process. The different perceptions and experiences of the various stakeholders involved in the reconstruction process will be analysed. Their interpretation of the phenomena found in the road reconstruction process will vary according to, among other, the role, responsibility, capacity and level of experience of each stakeholder. Accordingly, this research recognises and values such differences and will therefore utilise the in-depth semi- structured interviews with a number of stakeholders and experts to understand their different perceptions. From that point of view, the epistemological stance adopted by this research lies in the interpretivism approach.

In addition, the data collection process includes interviews with different sources. The researcher believes that personal interaction with the interviewees is of high importance in order to obtain a good insight into the interviewees’ perceptions and to understand the context of the phenomena being discussed. Hence, from the axiological stance, this research will be value-laden in nature.

115

Figure 3.3 – The Research Philosophy of This Study

The above figure summarises the philosophical stance of this study. Furthermore, following the Saunders research onion layers, the next section will discuss the appropriate research approach for this study.

3.3.2 Research Approach

According to Saunders et al. (2009), the research approach relates to the way in which theory is developed. There are two types of approaches to research, deductive and inductive. In the deductive approach, the researcher develops theory and hypothesis (or hypotheses), expresses the hypotheses in operational terms to explain the relationship between variables, and tests these hypotheses prior to examining the specific outcomes and if necessary, modifies the theory according to the findings (Robson, 2002 cited in Saunders et al., 2009).

In the deductive approach, Saunders et al. (2009) describe that the causal relationship between variables is developed with the researcher being independent of what being observed in order to satisfy the principle of scientific rigour. In the inductive approach, in contrast, no theory is developed prior to data collection. Instead of creating a cause and effect link independently as in the deductive approach, a research using an inductive approach believes that an insight into the way in which humans interpret and perceive their social world is critical and is particularly concerned with the context in which such events take place.

This research is mainly a combination of exploratory and explanatory. The main purposes of this research are to evaluate the post-disaster road reconstruction process in Aceh,

Objectivism Ontology Subjectivism

Positivism Interpretivism

Epistemology

116 investigating the capacity of the local governments in maintaining the reconstructed assets, as well as to understand the reasons behind the phenomena being studied.

At the initial phase the research deductively obtained understanding and created certain assumptions based on the findings from the literature review and pilot interviews. However, at the later stage, apart from the understanding gained from literature and document reviews, no theories and propositions or hypotheses were made for testing. Instead, the primary data was collected through semi-structured interviews and document analysis from which a conclusion would be made at a later stage. Accordingly, from that perspective, this research mainly used an inductive approach. More details on the different approaches adopted in the study with regards to the development of theory are presented in Figure 3.4.

Research aim and objectives Pilot interviews Initial stimulus Literature reviews Conceptual framework Data Collection Semi-structured Interviews Individual case report Individual case report Individual case

report Cross case analysis Build initial theory

Triangulation of theory

Literature Expert validation _interview

Develop Theory

Figure 3.4 – The process of theory building

The next layer of the research onion is the research strategy. Therefore, the various strategies suitable for this study are discussed in the following section.

3.3.3 Research Strategy

In conducting a research, there are a number of strategies or approaches that can be adopted. The choice of an appropriate research strategy for a study is based on the research questions

117 and objectives (Avison et al., 1999, Saunders et al., 2009), the extent of existing knowledge, the amount of time and other resources available and the philosophical underpinnings (Saunders et al., 2009).

Yin (2003) divides research strategies into experiment, survey, archival analysis, history and case study. In addition to these strategies, Saunders et al., (2009) add action research, grounded theory and ethnography into the research strategy list. Each research strategy has its own advantages and disadvantages. However, a common misconception is that the various research strategies should be arrayed hierarchically and that certain strategy will only fit certain phase of the research (Yin, 2003). In fact, each strategy can be used for all three research purposes; exploratory, descriptive or explanatory. Instead of distinguishing the strategies hierarchically, Yin (2003) argues that there are three other conditions for identifying research strategy; the type of research question posed, the extent of control an investigator has over the actual behavioural events, and the degree of focus on contemporary as opposed to historical events. Even though each strategy has its distinctive characteristics, there are also large overlaps among them (Yin, 2003). The following table summarises characteristics of each strategy.

Table 3.1 – Relevant Situations for Different Research Strategies

Strategy Form of research

questions Requires control of behavioural events? Focuses on contemporary events?

Experiment How, why Yes Yes

Survey Who, what, where,

how many/much

No Yes

Archival analysis Who, what, where,

how many/much

No Yes/No

History How, why No No

Case study How, why No Yes

Source: COSMOS, cited in Yin (2003)

The first condition for identifying a research strategy concerns the type of research questions, which are commonly categorized into ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘where’, ‘how’, and ‘why’ type of questions (Yin, 2003). The purpose of this study is partly exploratory, which is to find out and understand what happened in the post-disaster road reconstruction in Aceh. This is reflected in the ‘how’

118 type of research questions developed for this study, which includes ‘how was road reconstruction in Aceh managed and delivered at the local level?’ From this point of view, this study may therefore adopt any of the five strategies described above.

However, the remaining questions of this study also include the ‘why’ type of questions, as the second purpose of this study is also explanatory. This means that in addition to finding out what actually happened in the road reconstruction process in Aceh through addressing some ‘how’ type of questions, this study is also aiming at understanding ‘why’ such phenomena occurred and therefore need to establish causal-links between the observed phenomena. For instance, through the interviews with the key stakeholders, this study aims to get an insight into the decision-making process, the process of finding and creating solutions for the challenges and obstacles experienced in the project delivery, as well as in the maintenance of the road assets once the construction is completed.

Since the survey and archival analysis strategy may not be suitable to answer the ‘why’ type of research questions, as far as the research questions are concerned, the survey and archival analysis strategies are considered inappropriate for this study. Therefore, the experiment, history and case study remain the possible options of research strategy for this study.

The second conditions that Yin (2003) emphasises is related to the ability and requirement to control the behavioural events. As summarised in Table 3.1, this condition is obviously required for an experimental method. The experimental method owes much to the natural science where the purpose is to study the causal-links through observing the effect of interventions of one independent variable towards another dependent variable (Hakim, 2000 cited in Saunders et al., 2009). Additionally, Yin (2003) stresses that experimental method is done when an investigator can manipulate behaviour directly, precisely and systematically. In order to achieve the greater control over aspects of the research, experiment researches are often conducted in the laboratories rather than in the field (Saunders et al., 2009). Since this research does not have control over the behavioural events being studied, conducting an experiment research is accordingly not possible. At this point, the remaining possible options for this study are the historical and case study method.

119 To identify the more appropriate strategy between the remaining two options, the third condition is applicable. This condition is related to the degree of focus on the contemporary as opposed to the historical events. Whilst the historical method focuses on past events where documents and cultural and physical artefacts are used as the main sources of evidence, the case study has two additional techniques not usually included in the historical method; direct observation and interviews (Yin, 2003). Many aspects of these research strategies are overlapping. However, the case study’s unique strength is its ability to use a vast range of source of evidence beyond that which might be available in a conventional historical study (Yin, 2003). This research mainly concerns with issues that happened in the past - the road reconstruction in Aceh post-disaster recovery, which has now completed. However, even though the road reconstruction in Aceh has completed, it can be considered as contemporary since the issue is still relevant to present conditions and many of the stakeholders and experts involved in the process are still available to provide input for this study through interviews. Direct observation in the field is also possible to be used as one source of evidence for this study. Accordingly, based on the aforementioned justification, the case study method is considered to be the most appropriate for this research and thus is adopted.

In addition to Yin’s list of research strategy, Saunders et al. (2009) add action research, grounded theory and ethnography as the possible options for research strategy. To complete the justifications for the research strategy selection, the following paragraphs will elaborate the possibility of using any of these alternatives for this study.

According to Avison et al., (1999), action research is a unique method in the way it associates research and practice, so research informs practice and practice informs research synergistically. Saunders et al. (2009) stress the strengths of an action research strategy as it focuses on change, the recognition that time needs to be devoted to diagnosing, planning, taking action and evaluating, and the involvement of employees (practitioners) throughout the process. Additionally, action research is an iterative process involving both researchers and practitioners acting together on a particular cycle of activities (Avison et al., 1999) that forms a continuing action of diagnosing, planning, taking action and evaluating (Saunders et al., 2009). To achieve the intended objective, Schein (1999 cited in Saunders et al., 2009) emphasises the importance of involvement of the employee (as part of the research objects) throughout the

120 research process, as they are more likely to implement change they have helped to create. From this point of view, it is accordingly both the lack of the required access to perform intervention towards the organisation and phenomena being studied and the inappropriateness with the research objectives which hinder the adoption of action research as a strategy for this study.

Additionally, grounded theory can be seen as a process of ‘theory building’ through a combination of induction and deduction approach (Saunders et al., 2009). In the grounded theory, data collection starts without the formation of an initial theoretical framework and the theory is developed from data generated by a series of observations that lead to the generation of predictions, which are then tested in further observations that may or may not confirm the predictions (Saunders et al., 2009). Even though this strategy is considered a possible alternative, it is argued that developing an initial framework based on the available literature on the road management and road reconstruction project in the non-disaster context as a starting point would be a more efficient and effective strategy. This approach is adopted based on the result of the literature review and the initial observation which suggests that most of the post-disaster road reconstruction projects are indeed delivered based on the best practice of road projects in a non-disaster context with the addition of some waivers and exceptions to accommodate the challenges, uncertainties and dynamic condition of a post-disaster reconstruction. Hence, even though considered as a possible alternative, grounded theory strategy is not selected for this study.

The next research strategy is ethnographic. Saunders et al., (2009) refer to this strategy as “a research strategy that is very time-consuming and takes place over an extended time period as the researcher needs to immerse herself or himself in the social world being researched as completely as possible.” In addition to seeing the above factors as obstacles for this study, this study also does not see the benefit of immersing deeply into one particular group towards achieving the research objectives and answering the research questions of this study. Therefore, the ethnographic method is not suitable for this study.

Based on the above reasoning and justification, the case study strategy is considered as the