PLANIFICACIÓN Y EVALUACIÓN RESUMEN EJECUTIVO

When considering research design, one must define the paradigm of inquiry that will ultimately inform the methods employed during the course of the research. This paradigm is composed of one’s ontological and epistemological standpoints, as Hughes has explained, “every research tool or procedure is inextricably embedded in commitments to particular versions of the world and to knowing that world” (1990, p.11). Therefore, in order to arrive at a suitable methodology, researchers should first identify their ontological leaning. This is done by determining what they perceive to exist in the world, and so deals with categories of realism, or what is construed to be ‘real’ or truthful in what surrounds us.

The philosophical basis for my research will help identify its ontological leaning. In order to achieve this, it must first be understood that the key feature of social science

59

that distinguishes it from others is its exploration of human society. This focus on the social aspects of humans as opposed to the biological or physical, rests on our ability for reflexive thought. This allows us to identify and analyse our own social interaction, thereby gifting us with an added dimension of thought and perception that is not found anywhere else in the animal kingdom. For me, this fundamental fact is the first building block of my ontological outlook. The social sciences are a study of society, which according to Hughes, was “a product of the human mind, was subjective, emotive as well as intellectual” (1990, p.90). Therefore, it can only be understood in a way that acknowledges this variability in its content.

When considering what constitutes reality, the capacity for divergent individual thought plays a significant role and I move to consider the various names and definitions allocated to the behaviours that were to be studied in this research project, be they ‘bullying’, ‘harassment’, ‘mobbing’, ‘negative behaviour’ or ‘ill-treatment’, as seen in chapter 2. These suggest that different interpretations of such behaviour are constructed based on different actors’ own ways of making meaning, and researchers’ means of understanding them. Several realities of the behaviour in question are created by the differing perceptions of various actors, each stemming from a construction of reality through their actions and interactions with other people (as suggested by Berger and Luckmann in 1967).

Therefore, my research position is rooted in a relativistic ontology and transactional epistemology, in keeping with a social constructivist paradigm as defined by Denzin and Lincoln (2005). It relies “as much as possible on the participants’ views of the situation being studied” (Creswell 2003, pg. 8), results in “the production of reconstructed understandings of the social world” (Denzin and Lincoln 2005, pg. 184) and lends itself to the production of multi-voiced texts.

According to Guba and Lincoln’s (1994) stance, my identification with the constructionist social science perspective means that the research ethics are automatically less concerned with subterfuge and involve obtaining participants’ fully informed consent. This will be explored further in section 4.5. However, to arrive at the decision to use qualitative methods to address the research questions required reference to existing research in the relevant fields.

The research questions designated at the end of chapter 3 were very open-ended and required an interpretive approach. Much of the empirical research in the field of

60

ill-treatment relies on quantitative survey methods in order to measure the prevalence of ill-treatment in a certain field, or even country. Fevre et al. (2010) point out the difficulties that can be experienced in gaining access to national data and not all such studies are representative of the population, which detracts from their relevance.

Liefooghe (2003) conducted a qualitative study investigating the ways in which employees conceptualized bullying in the workplace and found that use of the term incorporated more of an organizational dimension than had been considered. This indicates the value of exploring employees’ perspectives of ill-treatment. D’Cruz and Noronha (2009) also conducted a qualitative study consisting of unstructured narrative interviews using a hermeneutic phenomenological methodology, in order to achieve their aim of exploring employees’ subjective views of work. Once again, this provided insight into the complex conceptualization of bullying and the necessity of considering an organizational perspective. This indicated a need for Weberian

verstehen (understanding) in the constructivist approach as opposed to explanation

of any phenomenon (Johnson 1998).

As there was a lack of previous research in the maritime literature directly related to the sociological approach to ill-treatment that is the focus of this study, I had to refer to studies that were similarly explorative of a relatively under-researched area in the maritime field. Fittingly, there is some constructionist research being conducted in the field of shipping, often ethnographic work such as Sampson’s (2005), which explored the way in which seafarers share spaces that transcend ethnicity when they sail with international crews. There have been other ethnographic studies carried out that related primarily to seafarer welfare, such as Bhattacharya’s (2009) study on the impact of the ISM code onboard, and more qualitative studies such as Anand’s (2012) thesis on work, skills and identity in the maritime sector.

Thus, qualitative methods were chosen for my study because they best fit in with the constructionist character of my own research and best fulfil the need for verstehen. Qualitative research “typically focuses in depth on relatively small samples, even single cases (N=1), selected purposefully” (Patton 2002, pg. 230). It entails the use of units of analysis for case studies and comparisons, based on distinctions such as whether the subject of research is geography focused, activity focused or time based (Patton 2002).

61

The ethnographical research in the maritime context, by its nature entailed observation. However, unlike Sampson’s and Bhattacharya’s studies where they were guaranteed of observing some action related to their subject of study, there would be no such guarantee were I to choose to board a ship for fieldwork. Although the absence of ill-treatment could have been treated as a result in itself too, I chose instead to focus on semi-structured interviews to gain a deep understanding of the ways in which the seafarers conceptualized ill-treatment and how they were able to respond to it. This would be the best method for me to answer my research questions.

In light of this, and the other studies mentioned above, I chose to address my research questions with a qualitative study that entailed the use of semi-structured interviews. Bearing in my mind that my research, although sociological in nature, is descended from the work of psychologists and there continue to be large quantitative surveys in the field that reflect this, I revisited Fevre et al.’s (2010) modified use of the negative acts questionnaire (NAQ) in their British Workplace Behaviour Survey (BWBS) in order to adapt it for my own use.

The questions are drawn from the Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ) as used by Fevre et al. 2010, who had in turn taken the NAQ as modified by Hoel and Cooper (2000) from Einarsen et al. (2003). Fevre et al. (2010) conducted cognitive testing on this modified NAQ in order to determine the extent to which the questions were understood similarly by different groups of respondents. They found that it was very difficult to achieve a single definition of ‘bullying’ which would be understood similarly by different groups, and chose to revise the instrument on the basis of the results of the cognitive testing. This revised battery of questions then formed part of their BWBS. They end with the recommendation that it does not appear to be fruitful to apply pre-existing definitions and values for ‘bullying’ and ‘harassment’, without adaptation for the individual circumstances of their research context. They further recommend that in the case of smaller sample sizes, conducting a qualitative study would yield much more helpful and contextualized data than a quantitative survey.

Having already decided on an interpretive approach in response to the nature of my research questions, it was prudent to consider the size of the sample and the respondents for the fieldwork. Initially, it was thought that researching officers’ views of the hierarchy and their relationships with shore management in particular, would provide sufficient data that could be analysed to elicit their experiences of ill-

62

treatment. The emphasis on only one company instead of a wider sample of Indian seafarers from different organizations was to ensure that when analyzing the data, any emerging themes could be traced back to specific company practices. Bearing in mind the lack of recent research in the area of ill-treatment onboard ships, and the limitations of time and finance, it was deemed appropriate to carry out a qualitative study which would “explain the contextual issues and explanations for workplace bullying in that particular setting” (Fevre et al. 2010, pg. 83).

It was decided that a feasibility study would provide a good opportunity to gauge the validity of my semi-structured interview approach and establish initial access negotiation with the company. However, through the initial interviews, as well as informal conversations with the employees there, it quickly became clear that the study should include ratings in the sample as well. Bearing in mind the strong role that the organization might play in influencing seafarers’ experiences of ill-treatment, the study was further expanded to include another company, an Indian company (IC), for comparison purposes. Therefore, the research was conducted in two stages – there was one trip during which a feasibility study and many of the officers from the multinational company (MNC) were interviewed, and in the second, much longer trip, I was able to gain access to an Indian company and commence interviews there as well. The exact process is detailed in the section below.