The researcher was cautious in creating standard questions during the interviews in the three countries. The researcher was focusing on this issue during the training he delivered to the survey team and during the few interviews he joined in Turkey and Italy. The lack of standardization in the interviews may lead to concerns about the reliability of the output (Saunders et al 2000). The concern about reliability is related to the issues of bias.
That is why the interviewers were asked not to impose their beliefs or interpret responses.
In order to reduce the non-response rate, the researcher reviewed carefully the eligibility (i.e. number of the employees) of the firms before starting the field work. As well, the researcher reviewed all of the updated contacts (telephone number, fax number, address, e-mail address-if any, contact person) of the firms in the sample size in order to avoid un-reachable respondents. Mainly, the reason for non-response is that few respondents refused to be involved in the research without giving a reason.
In Jordan, we see that the non-response rate is relatively low (5.5%) in comparison with Turkey and Italy for different reasons:
√ A pre-test sampling was conducted. A questionnaire has been distributed to five firms in order to refine the questionnaire so that respondents have no problems in answering the questions.
√ A survey was conducted in 2003. The non-response rate in the first cycle was too high. The number of questionnaires received was 62 out of 140 that have been distributed. The respondents involved in the 2006 survey and those who have been involved in the 2003 survey were familiar with the questionnaire.
√ The survey was conducted by the researcher. The researcher was cautious to visit the respondents in appropriate times (i.e. the researcher used to phone the contact person to arrange for the face-to-face interview).
√ The assistance of the Competitiveness Team – Ministry of Planning. Porter mentioned in the introduction of his book 'The Competitive Advantage of Nations" that he has been working in a regional economic plan in the Middle
East, involving national teams from Egypt, Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority. The National Competitiveness Team provided the researcher with the list of the respondents and all of the necessary information about the natural stone sector in Jordan.
In Italy, the non-response rate is (6.5%) is lower than the rate in Turkey for three main reasons:
√ The essential conditions for conducting the survey were available. All of the statistics are accessible; most of the firms were concentrated in specific regions;
and it was not very difficult to arrange for face-to-face meetings with the respondents)
√ Training received by the survey team. During his visit to Italy, the researcher delivered a two-day intensive training to the survey team. The researcher discussed with them objective of the research, questionnaire, and collecting primary data using questioners. The survey team in Italy consisted of five persons; all of them hold Bachelor degrees and working in the natural stone sector.
The non-response rate in Turkey is (17.5%). This percentage is relatively high for two reasons:
√ The survey team in Turkey faced many difficulties in delivering and collecting the questionnaires. The firms are scattered; and it was not easy to arrange meetings with the respondents.
√ The survey team consisted of two university students. Although the researcher delivered two-day training to the survey team, the team did not manage to convince all of the respondents to fill in the questionnaire.
The researcher was cautious in avoiding any intended possibility for the respondents in the three countries to respond differently. The following points may explain how:
√ Language. Using native languages in their countries reduces the opportunity to respond differently due to any language misunderstandings.
√ Survey team. Conducting the surveywith natives avoids many cultural misunderstanding.
√ Experts. Using native translators for the questionnaires avoids many cultural misinterpretations.
√ Types of the questions. The researcher was cautious with the type of questions used in the questionnaire. The researcher avoided open-ended questions. Also, he avoided any cultural or behavioral questions.
√ The training delivered by the researcher to the survey team in Turkey and Italy might help in avoiding many misunderstandings by the team that may lead to a tendency to respond differently.
4.5. Summary
The data collection started with the gathering of the secondary data by doing literature research. First, a pre-test was conducted in order to test the validity of the developed constructs. After revising the questionnaire, the data were collected from Jordan, Turkey and Italy for the analysis of the given hypotheses.
In Jordan, the Chamber of Commerce in Amman has prepared a list of all the companies’
names and their addresses with the help of the Ministry of Planning. The interview survey was conducted by the researcher in cooperation with the Competitiveness Team in the Jordanian Ministry of Planning. In Turkey, the Turkish Association of Marble, Natural Stone and Machinery Products (TUMMER), Izmir Marble Producers Association and the Turkish Embassy in Tel Aviv, Israel, have prepared the names and addresses of the companies. In Italy, the names and addresses of the firms have been prepared with the help of the Associazione Italiana MARMOMACCHINE, Rome Chamber of Commerce and Italian Consulate in Jerusalem, Israel.
The questionnaire was developed in four languages: English, Arabic, Turkish and Italian.
Hence, a careful translation method was used. Moreover, the scale items were tested in terms of reliability and validity to examine the consistency of the constructs and related items. In addition to the survey method, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten SMEs working in the natural stone in Jordan and other related and supporting organizations and ministries in Jordan, Turkey and Italy.