Since this research seeks to understand in considerable detail the formal and informal settings of work and employment in Saudi Arabia, the qualitative research design was deemed to be the most appropriate. Despite the philosophical debate regarding the relative merits of qualitative versus quantitative research, the suitability of the methodology selected for answering the research questions is a key element in justifying its adoption (Kumar, 2014; Marshall and Rossman, 2016). The type of questions asked (exploratory, descriptive or explanatory) defines the nature of the answers that a study attempts to provide (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2012; Bryman, 2016). Due to the exploratory nature of the research questions, it was necessary to employ a qualitative methodology that would offer in-depth answers.
The use of a qualitative approach is well-established in the field of work and employment, since it allows researchers to undertake more in-depth investigations and to develop a richer understanding of realities in their actual contexts. A notable strength of qualitative research for the social sciences is that it can incorporate a variety of sources, while data can be collected in a variety of ways, for example, through interviews, direct observation and document analysis (Neuman, 2007; Yin, 2009).
Highlighting the unsuitability of the quantitative method for this research also serves to develop the rationale behind the preference for adopting a qualitative methodology. Quantitative research is based on the use of numbers to represent the real world. It is widely accepted that the main advantage of relying on numbers is that ‘it allows us to step away from our object of study, the societies we are necessarily a part of, and therefore maintain scientific objectivity’ (O’Leary, 2014: 106). Even though the quantitative design is rigorous, serving a variety of purposes such as finding causal relationships, quantifying and measuring
phenomena, generalising findings and formulating general laws (Marshall and Rossman, 2016), it is not appropriate for the exploratory enquiries of this research. Notably, it is more often than not that quantitative research incorporates qualitative data to compensate for shortcomings in depth of analysis. O’Leary (2014: 129) illustrates this point:
I was once told that mixed methodology was all about adding a bit of qualitative flesh to the quantitative bones. The underlying premise here is that the heart of a mixed approach is quantitative. Researchers who think this way tend to accept the underlying assumptions of the quantitative tradition, but also accept that some qualitative data might help ‘flesh out’ their study.
5.3.2 The Multiple-Case Strategy
Each of the principal research strategies in qualitative research (e.g. case study, narrative, phenomenology and ethnography) has a specific focus and scope that can be more or less suitable for a particular study based on the research questions (Marshal and Rossman, 2016). An analysis of previous research on Saudi work and employment (see Chapter four) has shown that little is known about workplace dynamics, especially workers’ experiences and understanding, and thus, a case study-based research was particularly needed. The researcher decided that the best method to adopt among the wide array of strategies available for conducting social science research was the multiple-case strategy complemented by ethnography. It is key to note here that the use of the case study and ethnography designs predominates in labour process research. As Edwards (2010: 42) asserts:
A distinctively labour process analysis of work needs to retain its core strengths. These include an empirical interest in the experience of work at the point of production and a theoretical concern with the contradictory relationships between capital and labour. And, in terms of method, detailed case studies and ethnographies have been, and should be, the preferred approach. (Italics in original)
A ‘case study’ could be an individual, a group, an event, an organisation, a sub-group of a population or a city. For a study to be considered a case study, however, it is crucial that the case in question is a bounded system; boundaries can be either time or space or both (Kumar, 2014). Creswell (2007: 73) comprehensively defines the case study design as follows:
Case study research is a qualitative approach in which the investigator explores a bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information (e.g. observations, interviews, audio-visual material, and documents and reports), and reports a case description and case-based themes.
Case study research either follows a single or multiple-case study design. The latter was considered more appropriate for this research because it increases the opportunity of obtaining richer and more varied data, thus, providing more reliable conclusions (Creswell, 2007; Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2012). There are, however, reasons for choosing a single-case study design as opposed to a multiple-case design (Yin, 2009). A single-case study design can be used in situations where the case study itself is critical, unique, typical, revelatory or longitudinal (ibid.). None of the case studies chosen for this research, however, conform to any of these types. Therefore, the multiple-case strategy was adopted to provide multiple detailed illustrations of workplace relations.
The multiple-case study design is not only considered by the researcher to be the best strategy for answering the research questions, but it is also congruent with his philosophical position. A major advantage of the case study strategy is that it allows for deep exploration of the relationship between the cases studied and their real-life contexts using multiple sources of evidence (Kitay and Callus, 1998; Creswell, 2007; Yin, 2009; Marshall and Rossman; 2016), which is very significant for critical realists. Bryman (2016: 68) argues that:
Case studies are perceived by critical realist writers as having an important role for research within this tradition, because the intensive nature of most case studies enhances the researcher’s sensitivity to the factors that lie behind the operation of observed patterns within a specific context.
Due to the importance of context for this research, involving an ethnographic approach was also deemed appropriate because it enabled the collection of rich, in-depth data on the reality of work and employment in Saudi Arabia. The researcher positions himself within the realist ethnographers group by recording an objective account of the situation. Creswell (2007: 70) argues that the ethnographer in this group ‘remains in the background as an omniscient reporter of the “facts” […] uncontaminated by personal bias, political goals, and judgement’. Moreover, the author researched the ethnographic aspect to the two case study firms by
socialising with workers (both Saudis and migrants) inside and outside the workplace. The requirements of ethnographic research, especially outside the workplace, enabled the researcher to gain the workers’ trust, which made them more open in relating their experiences with their managers and sponsors.
Employing a multiple-case design is a worthwhile strategy for developing an existing theory, since it enables the collection of empirical evidence from a variety of sources (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Bryman, 2016). Nevertheless, Yin (2009) stresses that the theory under examination needs to be developed before making any field contacts in order to avoid any miscalculations during the design process, especially in terms of defining the data required and the methods of data analysis. The present research considers the strengths and weaknesses of institutionalist theoretical perspectives and draws on the labour process theory to highlight the limitations of the patrimonial capitalism model for understanding the dynamics of capitalism in Saudi Arabia. Empirical evidence from the workplace regarding state-capital-labour relations was, thus, required in order to amend and refine the patrimonial capitalism model.
Having discussed the reasons behind the choice of research design, the following section discusses the selection process of the two case study firms.