There are a variety of ways in which research data can be collected. Some authors such as Saunders et al. (2012), and Sekaran (2003), have classified data as ‗primary‘ which are collected specifically for the research project being undertaken and ‗secondary‘ which were originally collected for some other purpose and which can be analysed to provide additional or different knowledge, interpretations, or conclusions. Easterby-Smith (2008:142) has grouped the methods of data collection for qualitative research into three basic approaches. The first is the natural language approach which aims to discover the views, perceptions, and opinions from both individual and groups, and uses the in-depth interview as its main method. The second is the ethnographic approach which depends on collecting data through examining and understanding symbols, settings and observations, and uses participant observation, non-participant observation, and visual methods. And the third emcompasses interactive methods such as photographs or other visual metaphors.
Regarding case study, Yin (2009) has suggested six major sources of evidence that are listed in Table 4.6 and compared in terms of their strengths and weaknesses. Yin (2009) stresses that no single source of data has a complete advantage over others, and that using multiple sources of evidence is helpful and supportive in understanding the actual facts of the phenomena and in triangulating the obtained information. Many authors have encouraged the use of multiple sources of evidence to improve the validity of data (Silverman, 1993; Denzin and Lincoln, 1998), to enhance the reliability of the research (Golafshani, 2003), and to avoid the bias associated with just one single method (Collis and Hussey, 2008).
Based on the earlier discussion, the researcher has chosen face-to-face semi-structured interviews as a primary source (the natural language approach), with direct observation as another primary source (the ethnographic approach) to access the required information for the
141
research. Additionally, documentation, and archival records are used as secondary sources of data as these are the most appropriate methods for accessing such information.
Participant observations were not appropriate for this research due to fact that the researcher was not involved in any of the activities within the CSOs. Moreover, that strategy usually requires months or years of intensive work denied in a PhD study. Nor were physical artefacts suitable as this research focuses on investigating the factors affecting the readiness for EFQM implementation.
Table 4.6: Strengths and Weaknesses of Six Sources of Evidence
Source: Yin (2009:102) 4.6.1 Interviews
Kvale and Brinkmann (2009:3) have defined the research interview as a conversation that ―has a structure and a purpose. It goes beyond the spontaneous exchange of views in every day conversations, and becomes a careful questioning and listening approach with the purpose of obtaining thoroughly tested knowledge‖. Collis and Hussey (2009:144) consider the interview to be ―a method for collecting primary data in which a sample of interviewees
Source of Evidence Strengths Weakness
Documentation - Stable: Can be reviewed
repeatedly
- Unobtrusive : not created as a result of the case study - Exact: contains exact names,
references and details
- Retrievability: can be low - Biased selectivity, if collection is
incomplete
- Reporting bias : reflects bias of the author
- Access : may be deliberately blocked
Archival Records - Same as above
- Precise and quantitative
- Same as above
- Accessibility may be limited for privacy reasons
Interviews - Targeted : focuses directly on
case studies
- Insightful: provides perceived causal inferences
- Bias due to poorly constructed questions
- Response bias
- Inaccuracies: interviewees say what they think interviewer wants to hear
Direct observation - Reality : covers events in real time
- Contextual : covers context of event
- Time-consuming
- Selectivity: poor, unless broad coverage
- Reflexivity: events may be processed differently
Participation / direct observation
- Same as for direct observation - Insightful into interpersonal
behaviour and motives
- Same as for direct observation - Bias due to investigator‘s
manipulation of events
Physical Artefacts - Insightful into cultural features
- Insightful into technical operations
- Selectivity - Availability
142
are asked questions to find what they think, do or feel‖. Saunders et al. (2012) and Berg (2009) have classified interviews into three main types:
Structured (standardised) interviews as used in questionnaires, based on a formal pre- determined or identical set of questions. They are called ‗interviewer-administered questionnaires‘.
Semi-structured (semi-standardised) interviews are non-standardised, and are often referred to as qualitative research interviews. The researcher has a list of themes and key questions to be covered. It is not necessary to ask all the questions of every interviewee, nor to ask them in the same order. Basically, the researcher has the flexibility to add or delete questions as the situation requires.
Unstructured (unstandardised) interviews are informal interviews, being used to explore in depth, a general area of the researcher‘s interest, and being referred to as ‗in-depth‘ interviews. There is no pre-determined list of questions, and interviewees have the opportunity to speak freely about events, behaviour and beliefs.
Robson (2011), however, talks of a different typology: Focused interviews;
Non-directive interviews.
Easterby-Smith et al. (2008) consider interviews as the best methods for gathering information since the interviewer can develop secondary questions on the basis of non-verbal clues such as facial expressions, inflections in the voice, and the overall appearance of the interviewees; however, they do criticise the complexity and time-consuming nature of certain types of interview. Yates (2004) also believes that interviews are useful for exploring the subjective meanings of participants, bringing the potential for new knowledge which will benefit a study. Yin (2009:108) stresses that ‗‗interviews are a critical source of case study evidence because most case studies are about human affairs or behavioural events‘‘.
4.6.1.1 Justification for Choosing Semi-Structured Interviews
According to Kvale and Brinkmann (2009:3) a semi–structured life world interview ―is an interview with the purpose of obtaining descriptions of the life world of the interviewee in order to interpret the meaning of the described phenomena‖. Easterby-Smith et al. (2008) mention that semi-structured interviews are very confidential where they can grant a chance to the interviewees to mention some personnel issues. Additionally, Easterby-Smith et al. (2008) consider semi-structured interviews are the most appropriate method for data collection where the need is to understand a construct that the interviewee uses a basis for
143
his/her opinions and beliefs about a particular matter or situation. Similarly, Saunders e al. (2012) state that the semi-structured interview is helpful when the interpretivist epistemology has been adopted and the researcher is concerned to understand the meanings that the participants highlight about various phenomena. This point was also clarified by Sekaran (2003) and Oppenheim (2000) who confirm that in depth face-to-face interviews can help the researcher to interpret the implied additional meaning of people‘s activities, and detect any discomfort, stress, nervous tapping or any other body language. In addition, this type of interviews helps the researcher to elucidate the research purpose for the respondents smoothly and without ambiguity. Jankowicz (2005) indicates that semi-structured interviews are a powerful data collection technique when used within the context of a case study research strategy. However, Jankowicz (2005) and Easterby-Smith et al. (2008) link the use of semi- structured interviews with the nature of the questions affirming that this type of interview is advantageous where there are a large number of research questions to be answered, where the questions are complex or open-ended, and where the order and logic of questioning can be varied.In this study , the reserch questions are transffered to be covered by a huge amount of interview questions as clarified in Appendix 10 and 11.
Based on the above discussion, the researcher has chosen semi-structured interviews as the main source of data collections since this is the best suggested method for the exploratory and explanatory nature of this study, which seeks to explore the factors affecting the readiness to implement the EFQM Excellence model in the context of the Syrian market. The nature of research questions ‗how‘ and ‗why‘ supports the use of semi-structured interviews as these will allow the researcher to gain an in-depth appreciation of how and why certain factors impact upon the excellence of service quality in the SBS. The researcher also depends on face-to-face interviews to gain more credible information from participants.
4.6.2 Direct Observation
According to Creswell (2009) qualitative observation refers to noting down some information about the behaviour and activities by the researcher at the research site. Collis and Hussey (2009) mention that the most common type of observation in business research is non- participant observation where the researcher observes and records what people say and do without intervention. Yin (2009) considers that direct observation is a potential method in case study because all case studies should be conducted in the natural setting which enables researchers to observe some relevant behaviour or environmental conditions. Saunders et al. (2012) state that if the research questions and objectives are concerned with what the people
144
do, observation will be the best way to discover this. According to their view, observation involves: systematic observation, recording, description, analysis, and interpretation of people‘s behaviour. Manning (1987) confirms that close observation of individuals can generate data which might support, contradict or substitute for any oral records. Robson (2011) has distinguished descriptive observation where the focus is on observing and describing the physical setting, the key informants and their activities, and particular events and emotions involved. He stresses that the researcher must go further than journalist, and focus on particular events and interactions between key informants, which lead him to call it focused observation. Sekaran (2003:253) has recognised some unique advantages for observational studies:
1. The obtained data are generally reliable and free from respondents‘ bias.
2. It is easy for the researcher to note the effects of the environmental influences on specific outcomes. For example, the weather (hot, cold, and such other factors) can be noted as a reason for behaviour patterns, such as absenteeism, late arrival, etc
3. It easier to observe some groups of individuals – for example, very young children and extremely busy executives, from whom it may be otherwise difficult to obtain information.
However, there is a substantial criticism of observation, that being that the very act of observing itself may cause people to change their usual behaviour since they know they are being observed.
Nonetheless, the researcher used direct observation to collect some primary data regarding the employees‘ behaviour, relationships, communication, and interaction with each other as employees at the same and different managerial levels. For example, one branch manager in CSOA claimed to fully empower his employees, yet during the interview, many employees interrupted the proceedings to consult the manager about small routine matters, thereby highlighting a contradiction between what the manager declared and the reality. A similar observation was made in CSOA when an employee mentioned that her manager was very supportive and modest, and then her manager entered the room and gently asked her to sign a document, which she had forgotten to do. This behaviour confirmed the interviewee‘s impression of her manager as supportive towards her.
4.6.3 Documents
Yin (2009) notes that documentation includes different types of information such as letters, memoranda, agendas, e-mail correspondence, administrative documents, progress reports,
145
newsletters, newspaper articles, minutes of meetings, formal studies, news clippings and other media articles related to the investigation area. Proverbs and Gameson (2008) suggest that such kind of documentation can be useful in helping to corroborate evidence from other sources and in obtaining some basic factual information about the case at hand. Saldana (2011) has recommended looking for or reviewing any publicly-accessible document in the field site but only with permission of the participants. It is preferable to keep a copy of the key document or scan it if possible.
The researcher has accessed various documents from the three CSOs such as: annual reports, records of the organisational structure, job description, samples of training files, some circulars and management review results, and some unpublished financial results. For example, she accessed the training plan for 2010 for CSOA which shows the type of training courses followed by the employees, from which she observed that no courses on quality or customer service had been held, and that whilst the training plan suggest training about 300 employees during the year, only 95% of the plan was performed in 2010, and even if 100% of the plan had been implemented, it would still not have been enough to meet the entire bank‘s needs.
4.6.4 Archival Records
According to Yin (2009), archival records include service records, organisational records, lists of names, staff and payroll records, old correspondence, and other such records. Yin confirms that archival records are relevant for many case studies. In the present study, the researcher examined records showing the history of the organisations, their establishment and structure. The researcher also saw the historical development of the Quality Departments and the improvements in the quality journey in CSOA, B and C.