CONTABILIDAD DE COSTOS

The credibility of the data in a social science study generally needs to be proven during the research process, and certain quality criteria such as reliability and validity must be observed, irrespective of whether the study is quantitative or qualitative in nature (Denscombe, 2011; Mayring, 2010).

Reliability reflects the extent to which similar results from observing something or interviewing someone can be repeated by another researcher. For validity, a verification of the conclusions drawn in terms of the scientific question and investigation instruments are well-grounded and correspond to the real world (Flick, 2009). However, researchers try to adapt these classic quantitative approaches of reliability and validity in qualitative research as well. It is suggested that qualitative studies should be judged according to slightly different criteria than quantitative studies (Bryman, 2012). Lincoln and Guba (1985) proposed the concepts of trustworthiness and authenticity for assessing a qualitative study. Trustworthiness includes four criteria parallel to a quantitative study: dependability equates to reliability, credibility equates to internal validity, transferability equates to external validity and confirmability equates to objectivity.

Lincoln and Guba (1985) argued that this is necessary to be able to judge a qualitative study as socially real and feasible. LeCompte and Goetz (1982) specified the approach with reliability and validity with the following definitions: external reliability, internal reliability, external validity and internal validity, and defined the terms to facilitate a critical realist perspective in a qualitative study. This view says that reliability and validity in a qualitative study can be used similarly to a quantitative one (Mayring, 2010). These different views are summarised as follows in Table 11, which also highlights how these quality criteria are achieved in this study.

According to LeCompte and Goetz (1982), reliability can be divided into external and internal reliability. External reliability is viewed as the degree to which a measure of a concept produces similar results and the degree to which the findings are repeatable by another researcher.

C h ap te r: R E SE A R C H M E T H O D O L O G Y

Table 11: Quality Criteria of Social Science

Quality criterion Description Phase of research How achieved Reliability

(external reliability)

Refers to the extent to which a measure of a concept produces similar results and the degree to which the findings are repeatable. Useful tools are an in-depth study protocol and a related database.

Data collection - Interview guides - Observation protocol - In-depth study

protocol

- Database to manage the gathered data Validity

(internal validity)

Refers to the accuracy and precision of the data, and is also called construct validity. Multiple sources of reproducible evidence are recommended.

Data collection - Interview data from salespeople

- Interview data from customers

- Observation data from salesperson-customer meetings

Generalisability (external validity)

Refers to the prospect of applying the findings from research to other examples of the phenomenon. The theory is viewed as being

appropriate for in-depth studies.

Research design and discussion - In-depth study of a specific group of people - Findings are generalisable in the B2B sector with complex and customised products and services in Central Europe

Objectivity Refers to the absence of bias in the research study. It highlights that the claims, methods and findings are impartial and neutral, i.e. the researcher has no influence over them.

Research design and discussion

- Planned the data collection well in advance

- Tried to be open- minded and not restricted to particular opinions - Viewed face-to-face interviews as expansion of his experience and knowledge

Source: adapted from Denscombe (2011) and Yin (2009)

The participants in this study from the various B2B companies with complex and customised products and services would also be available to other researchers. However, the experiences of the participants are constantly changing und may vary in a further interview (Bryman, 2012) and result in slightly different responses. Furthermore, an in-depth study protocol and a related database were used to store the data in this study. Hence, by following this formal procedure with an in-depth study protocol and a database, the external reliability can be considered sufficient. Internal reliability is not applicable because the researcher was the only person who conducted the interviews with the study participants. Validity can also be judged from an external and internal perspective (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982). External validity corresponds to the generalisability of the data (Denscombe, 2011), and it is discussed later in this section. Internal validity is the accuracy and precision of the data and is also called construct validity. Multiple sources of reproducible evidence are

C h ap te r: R E SE A R C H M E T H O D O L O G Y

recommended. Within this study, salespeople and customers were interviewed face-to-face and observations of initial meetings between a salesperson and customer were carried out. This data allowed triangulation, which strengthened the internal validity of the data and contributed to the completeness of the findings (Denscombe, 2011; Silverman, 2015).

Generalisability describes the application of the findings from the research to other examples in the context. A relatively small sample is studied intensively and afterwards generalised in context. LeCompte and Goetz (1982) called it external validity; whereas, Lincoln and Guba (1985) called it transferability. Thus, the question is to what extent the findings are transferable to the population rather than to what extent the findings exist in other examples of the context (Denscombe, 2011). In the current in-depth study, insights from social cognitive neuroscience and its application to marketing and salesperson-customer relationship theories were used to discuss the empirical findings which emerged from the interviews and observations carried out with participants from the high-technology B2B sector. Thus, it was possible to reflect on the transferability of the findings to similar salespeople in other contexts than the high-technology B2B sector with complex and customised products and services. With this approach of transferability, the findings of this study can be considered generalisable or externally valid within other contexts as well. Objectivity relates to whether the claims, methods and findings are impartial and remain uninfluenced by the researcher, i.e. personal interests, particular perspectives or community bias. The researcher’s identity, values and beliefs are always part of the research process and the formation and analysis of the data. As Denscombe (2011) states, there are two ways for the researcher to deal with this situation. One way is to distance himself from his normal and everyday beliefs, and the second is to revise the research agenda until his personal experiences and social history are no longer evident in the data. In this study, the researcher took care to maintain his distance from the topic by planning the data collection and analysis well in advance. In addition, the researcher tried to be open-minded and not restrict himself to particular opinions. He viewed the face-to-face interviews as an expansion of his own experience and knowledge in the high-technology B2B sector with complex and customised products and services. Finally, the researcher always considered the influence that his position could have on the data analysis and tried to maintain objectivity whenever possible. Despite the researcher’s efforts to respect the four quality criteria of reliability, validity, generalisability and objectivity, possible limitations must be considered. For instance, the researcher of this study took care to maintain his distance from the topic to be as objective as possible. As mentioned above, this was ensured by planning the data collection and analysis well in advance. However, if researchers are directly involved in the data collection phase, it is difficult to maintain distance from the topic at all times (Flick, 2009). For this reason, the researcher of this study used the content analysis technique (Denscombe, 2011; Mayring, 2010) to analyse the empirical data collected through the face-to-face interviews. In addition, the researcher tried to be open-minded and not restrict himself to particular opinions. He tried to see the face-to-face interviews as an expansion of his own experience and knowledge in the high-technology B2B sector with complex and customised products

C h ap te r: R E SE A R C H M E T H O D O L O G Y

and services. Despite the researcher’s best efforts, a certain non-verbal bias on the subject existed at times.

In addition to that, the researcher always considered the influence that his position could have on the data analysis and tried to be objective whenever possible. For this reason, it is argued that the methods and findings are impartial and neutral, i.e. the researcher had no influence over them during the analysis and interpretation phases. But the researcher always influences the methodological decisions because he is the one who decides on the research framework and its components (Section 5.3). Finally, the researcher gave his report to five different people during the writing process and regularly sought their opinion. His supervisors numbered among these people. Taking the afore-mentioned into consideration, the study can be viewed as sufficiently objective but with certain possible limitations which must be considered.

Furthermore, the research design and the empirical data collection had a limitation which needs to be addressed. The researcher of this study tried to infer unconscious processes through interviewing and observing. This limitation refers to the two quality criteria of generalisability and objectivity because these were the focus during the research design and discussion phases.

The initial conceptual framework (Section 2.2.4, Figure 7) emerged from the investigation into the researcher’s question on how the customer’s human reward system could be positively influenced. The human reward system consists of the automatic and controlled social cognition systems and significant neurotransmitters which are circulating while these two systems are active (Carter, 2009). Hence, the question was: how could the salesperson with his cognitive performance positively influence the automatic social cognition system to ensure that interpersonal reward situations result?

The initial conceptual framework shows that the social domains of experience may be used to influence the customer’s automatic social cognition system. The social domains of experience investigated within this study are: certainty, cooperation, fairness, autonomy and social status (Section 4.2). In Chapter 4, during the synthesis of the literature review and the conceptualisation of the black box of the customer’s mind, it emerged from the social cognitive neuroscience literature that these five social domains of experience have the potential to activate the automatic social cognition system when triggered accordingly. This resulted in the elaborated conceptual framework (Section 4.3.1, Figure 15).

Based on this elaborated conceptual framework, the two interview guides were developed to collect empirical data. Through content analysis and category development (Section 5.7.5), specific topics and concepts emerged (Sections 7.2.1 – 7.2.5), which were assigned to the social domains of experience. This resulted in the finalised conceptual framework (Section

7.3, Figure 22). As mentioned at the beginning of this section, a possible limitation was that

the researcher of this study tried to infer unconscious processes through interviewing. There is no unequivocal research evidence that these topics and concepts indeed activate unconscious processes in the customer’s brain, as this would require the use of

C h ap te r: R E SE A R C H M E T H O D O L O G Y

neuroimaging tools (Section 2.2.1). However, the literature on B2C and social cognitive neuroscience provides strong evidence that topics and concepts which create certainty, cooperation, fairness, autonomy and social status behaviour have the potential to activate unconscious processes in the human brain. The problem that the researcher of this study attempted to infer unconscious processes through interviewing will be addressed once more in the Section 8.6 on the research limitations. In the same section, future research possibilities will also be suggested.