The cross case analysis is performed to allow patterns in the within-case analysis to be identified. This will allow similarities and differences between the findings from each of the cases to be identified and discuss common themes that may exist across the cases. This provides insights into the wider contact centre context.
The initial phase of the cross-case analysis is to identify the barriers and enablers to innovation activities in contact centres; this is in order to answer RQ 2. The organisational factors that have a positive effect on innovation activities (+) are described as enablers and the factors that have a negative effect (-) on innovation activities are described as barriers.
From an initial analysis it can be seen that there are more enablers than barriers emerging from across the case data. The organisational factors from the cases that did not fit into a classification from the literature review were analysed and it can be seen that the factors all relate to the nature of the advisors job. Therefore a new factor is added that is called ‘Nature of Job’.
Table 6.16 uses the factors; corporate strategy, employees, innovation tools, management style and leadership, nature of job and organisational culture which have been identified from the within-case analysis as important factors affecting innovation activities in contact centres to analyse the data across the cases.
Table 6.16 – Cross-case analysis grouping data by factor
Factor Enablers Phase of Innovation Activities Barriers Phase of Innovation Activities
Corporate Strategy that…
Builds relationship and promotes interaction with clients
(BBC/Capita; The Good Morning Project) Idea Generation
Are involved, engaged and represented (BBC/Capita;
DVLA) Idea Generation
Have personal development (BBC/Capita) Idea Generation
Have good employee morale (DVLA) Idea Implementation
Employees that…
Work in business improvement teams (Dell) Idea Implementation
Result in individuals to put ideas forward without support (NCR)
Idea Generation
Are not an effective suggestion scheme (NCR) Idea Generation
Have no incentive for using it (NCR; Dell) Idea Generation
Innovation Tools that…
Use an ideas process (DVLA; Dell) Idea Generation and Implementation
Does not encouraged agents to come up with new
ideas (NCR) Idea Generation
Has support from senior management (DVLA) Idea Generation
Focuses on good staff welfare (BBC/Capita)) Idea Generation Is participatory and encourage people to get involved
(BBC/Capita; NCR) Idea Generation and Implementation
Management Style and Leadership that…
Adopts a top down approach to BPI projects (Dell)
Idea Implementation
Is 'on-line' dealing with customers and is 'tied' to the computer system with heavy performance measures
(NCR; DVLA; Dell) Idea Generation and Implementation Has no scripting or constraints for agents (BBC/Capita)
Idea Generation
Nature of job that…
Are monotonous so BPI gives them something new (Dell)
Idea Implementation
Has a good attitude to innovation (DVLA) Idea Generation
Has an open, friendly environment where employees challenge current working practices (The Good Morning
Project; NCR; DVLA) Idea Generation and Implementation
Has improvement engrained in the culture (BBC/Capita)
Idea Generation
Is reactive to change rather than proactive (Dell)
Idea Implementation
Organisational Culture that…
Table 6.16 provides the factors that are most commonly witnessed across the cases. The description of the factor is followed by the case names in brackets - this shows how many cases this factor relates to. It can be seen that there are no factors that are common across all five cases however, by analysing the table it can be seen that there are a small number of factors that are seen across three of the five cases. A moderate number of the factors are common across two of the five cases and a large number of the factors are attributed to single cases. There factors are categorised accordingly as:
Primary factors (emerging from three out of five cases) Secondary factors (emerging from two out of five cases) Tertiary factors (emerging from one out of the five cases)
Based on the analysis carried out in Table 6.16 a number of findings can be deduced: There are two primary factors
There are five secondary factors There are fifteen tertiary factors
These factors are presented in Table 6.17, the implications of the findings contained in Tables 6.16 and 6.17 will be examined in the discussions chapter so will not be discussed here.
Description Phase of Innovation Effect on Innovation Activities Number of Cases where Evident
Organisational culture that has an open, friendly
environment where employees challenge current working
practices Idea Generation and Implementation Enabler 3
Primary Factors
Nature of job that is 'on-line' dealing with customers and is 'tied' to the computer system with heavy performance
measures Idea Generation and Implementation Barrier 3
Corporate strategy that builds relationship and promotes
interaction with clients Idea Generation Enabler 2
Employees that are involved, engaged and represented Idea Generation Enabler 2 Innovation tools that use an ideas process Idea Generation and Implementation Enabler 2 Management style and leadership that is participatory and
encourage people to get involved Idea Generation and Implementation Enabler 2
Secondary Factors
Innovation tools that have no incentive for using it Idea Generation Barrier 2 Employees that have personal development Idea Generation Enabler 1 Employees that have good employee morale Idea Implementation Enabler 1 Employees that work in business improvement teams Idea Implementation Enabler 1 Management style and leadership that has support from
senior management Idea Generation Enabler 1
Management style and leadership that focuses on good staff
welfare Idea Generation Enabler 1
Management style and leadership that adopts a top down
approach to BPI projects Idea Implementation Enabler 1
Nature of job that has no scripting or constraints for agents Idea Generation Enabler 1 Nature of job that are monotonous so BPI gives them
something new Idea Implementation Enabler 1
Organisational culture that has a good attitude to innovation Idea Generation Enabler 1 Organisational culture that has improvement engrained in
the culture Idea Generation Enabler 1
Organisational culture that focuses on communication Idea Generation Enabler 1 Innovation tools that result in individuals to put ideas
forward without support Idea Generation Barrier 1
Innovation tools that are not an effective suggestion scheme Idea Generation Barrier 1 Management style and leadership that does not encouraged
agents to come up with new ideas Idea Generation Barrier 1
Tertiary Factors
Organisational culture that is reactive to change rather than
proactive Idea Implementation Barrier 1
Comparison against conceptual framework
In order to compare the cross-case findings against the conceptual framework the within-case analyses (i.e. Figures 6.6; 6.10; 6.14; 6.18; 6.22) were compared against each other. Figure 6.23 shows the findings of this cross-case analysis; it identifies the organisational factors that impact on innovation activities in comparison to the factors that were identified for generic organisations. The other factors (resources, organisational structure, corporate strategy, technology and knowledge management) have been shaded to show that they have limited importance within the contact centre context.
There are also no relationships (i.e. (+) or (-)) identified on Figure 6.23, this is because the organisational factors identified here can be either enablers or barriers to innovation activities depending on how they are characterised. For example, from the NCR case factor (32) “Agents are not encouraged to come up with new ideas enough” which is assigned to ‘management style and leadership’ has a negative effect on innovation activities whereas the opposite is true in the BBC/Capita case. In the BBC/Capita case factor (36) “Management encourage people to get involved in developing new ideas” which is also assigned to ‘management style and leadership’ has a positive effect on innovation activities.
6.3 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS
The main conclusions of this chapter are that the research questions of this study have been answered through the within and cross-case analysis which was presented in this chapter. A summary of these findings is presented in this section.
It can be seen that the case contact centres are involved in innovation activities but these activities usually focus on the generation of ideas or the implementation of ideas or change initiatives.
The type of innovation witnessed in the cases focuses on incremental process innovation; although some cases focused on service innovation the type of innovation in the majority of cases was process focused.
A number of factors were identified as important as enablers and barriers for innovation activities in contact centres, the factors that were common across a number of cases are described and primary or secondary factors.
The primary and secondary enablers of innovation activities in contact centres are: Primary factor
o An organisational culture that has an open, friendly environment where employees challenge current working practices
Secondary factors
o A corporate strategy that builds relationship and promotes interaction with clients
o Employees that are involved, engaged and represented o Innovation tools that use an ideas process
o Management style and leadership that is participatory and encourage people to get involved
The primary and secondary barriers of innovation activities in contact centres are: Primary factor
o Nature of job that is 'on-line' dealing with customers and is 'tied' to the computer system with heavy performance measures
Secondary factor
Chapter 7: Discussions
“…free discussion is the very life of truth” Thomas Huxley (1825-1895)
This chapter develops insights and interpretations from the findings to provide a robust theory building process. In accordance with Eisenhardt (1989) this chapter provides a discussion which allows the enfolding of literature – both similar and contrasting – to allow new theory to be developed. This analysis with the literature will show where there are gaps in the theory and where these empirical findings contradict, verify or add to existing knowledge. This then shows where the research has developed theory and has given its contribution to knowledge.
This chapter compares the findings from the fieldwork against the research questions – this will show if the research questions have been answered and the implications that this brings. It also provides a free debate to discuss why the relationships within the findings have occurred and develop a number of predictions on this - this is a key step in the theory building process. The issues of verification and rigour are also addressed in this chapter which concludes with a discussion on the limitations and benefits of the methodological approach of this research work.