Muestreo en la auditoría

As this thesis represents basically an attempt to theoretically approach companies’ decision-making characteristic with CSA, various drawbacks and limitations of the approach itself need to be mentioned and be taken into account. First, already the initial choice of this thesis to conduct a (mini) case study entails some limitation aspects: the sheer volume of data can lead to an overload which increases the possibility to selection bias, i.e. that the researcher has picked the most suitable aspects and neglects other important ones (cf. Eisenhardt, 1989). This can be said to be the case in the context of motivational aspects where a mass of publications is existing. Further, the literature review that has been conducted potentially entails systemic problems in itself. Not only is the file- drawer problem present here, i.e. that only published work can be taken into account whereas studies that did not produce meaningful results simply are not published32. It is also that no clear rules for the selection exist which gives the researcher freedom but at the same time, reduces the coherency across studies’ methodological approaches (cf. Taylor, 2012).

Second, the “classical” aspects of limitations which preponderantly refer to the concrete work and research design need to be mentioned. These are reliability, validity, generalizability, and transferability and shall also be discussed in this very order.

Reliability

The interpretation of storylines with RCT and SET can potentially lead to same results in a similar context (Germany, social organization support). However, limitations of reliability definitely need to be taken into account (e.g. social desirability, moderator acceptance bias) since the interpretation always rests on the social construction of reality by respondents and more importantly, by the researcher. Nonetheless, the author of this thesis expects a similar research design with a different sample drawn from German companies with CSA to potentially yield similar results, though with probably other emphases in the interpretation thereof.

Validity

It has been attempted to increase the validity of this thesis work through focused triangulation, i.e. with the help of additional documents (company publilcations, academic literature) the findings were aimed to be strengthened. However, it still only represents a fragmentary “snapshot” due to the very small sample and the observation at one particular point in time, the various biases which were admittedly in place as well as the high vulnerability to individual interpretation possibilities due to the aspect of social constructions of realities. Here, a more quantitative approach possibly could advance the issue where a higher number of companies could be approached and analyzed. This could also then be extended with some experimental decision-making game where the concrete

61 choices of individual managers responsible for CSA could potentially better be observed. Additionally, it must be clearly stated that the interviewing of persons representing a company in this context must be seen with caution. As has been mentioned beforehand as well, it is the social or reality construction of every individual which must be taken into account.

Further, possible limitation in terms of generalizability stems from the fact that this research topic is situated in a context of moral and ethical considerations where it is clear that every person has a different mindset on this. These concepts which are difficult to grasp can be assumed to be quite influential and hence, calling for other research designs which can elaborate on them more profoundly and sustainably. A possible example would be an embedded direct observation of decision behavior over a longer time period or experimental testing through a more psycho- analytical approach.

Generalizability

Based on the qualitative approach taken in this thesis, it is difficult to assume a strong generalizability of the findings. Also, it seems slightly problematic since the whole research is based on a social phenomenon with a strong emotional part and in a highly normative (ethical, moral) research field. Although the mentioned motivation and selection aspects could be transferred to other settings as it was also mentioned in the thesis, the way how individuals - as representatives of a company – make sense of the decision-making process can vary tremendously. However, RCT and SET appear suitable to enhance understanding to almost every form of decision-making, leading to the conviction that it always is a mixture of both approaches that can best explain a phenomenon such as the one which this thesis focused on. Also, generalizability of a case study as chosen here is limited due to the very specific lens through which the researcher aims to obtain information on the discussed phenomenon: Interviewees merely are influenced by the situation and hence, lack objectivity.

However, the findings on a general openness towards SROI as an impact assessment method and possible selection criterion can be tentatively assumed to be quite generalizable. Moreover, the selection criteria mentioned by the interviewees can be seen as representing a type of generic criteria which other companies with CSA would probably also support as essential, being therewith a quite generalizable aspect.

Transferability

The transfer of this research – i.e. making a case study on the motivation and selection aspects of companies’ CSA decision-making – is probably possible to other companies in Germany that are active in social organization/project support, too. However, the specific discussion the neglecting of economic motivational aspects would be different when the research subjects are companies from the Anglo-American (geographical) area. Here, a culture of CSA is much more established and some

62 preliminary research activities by the author of this thesis on disclosed selection criteria of companies from this area has shown that a more open approach is practiced there.

Nonetheless, the research could be applied to the private social spending choices of individual human beings as well. Here, it probably would follow a much more emotional and SET based interpretation: people acting as part of an organization like a company are simply bound in power-relationships and doomed to act rationally as an old-fashioned decision-making imperative whereas private persons can be said to be more freely to choose their courses of action.