RESPUESTAS AL TRATAMIENTO ANTIRRETROVIRAL

4.5.3.1. Identification of the population sample and selection of a sample frame There were a number of considerations that had to be contemplated in order to select the sample. The underlying implication of carrying out quantitative analysis was that inference would be made from the data that could be transferred to the total population. Therefore, it was important to make sure that the sample was large enough. In this study, it was discovered that 69,490 contractors were registered with the Malaysia CIDB (refer Table 2.13 in Chapter 2), making it impossible to use the entire dataset (Sekaran, 2003).

As there was such a large number of contractors within the Malaysia construction industry, and because of the difficulties in tracing the contractors that implemented formal knowledge management practices, a convenience sampling procedure was undertaken to select companies who were willing to be included in the main study (refer Table 4.12). According to Kumar (1999), the justification of using convenience sampling is based on the researcher’s judgment. In other words, the respondents selected were the ones whom the researcher thought could provide the best information and were willing to be included in the study. It is noted that convenience sampling is frequently undertaken in business research (Zikmund, 2000).

The selection criteria for both questionaire survey and semi-structured interview was that the companies:

1. Had active contractors registered with CIDB (unit of analysis in this study) and the contact person was from management (embedded unit of analysis in this study) 2. Employed best practices in knowledge management and knowledge sharing, and/or

were involved in various stages of knowledge management 3. Were still in business

4. Were carrying out building and civil engineering works

5. Met the criteria of the definition by European Commission for construction sectors 6. Gave their agreement to be a part of both the semi-structured interview and the

survey questionnaire sessions.

As of the year 2012, Malaysia had 69,490 registered local contractors with CIDB and almost 27,000 active contractors. An active contractor was defined by CIDB as a “local contractor who has projects during the period their registration is in force. These contractors have experience and are serious about construction” (CIDB, 2010). It was assumed that the opinions of these contractors represented the present situation and attitudes towards knowledge sharing within contractor organisations. Of the list of active contractors, 350 organisations were chosen to participate in the research.

Having identified the target population, the next step was to obtain a suitable population sample frame. A study sample may produce more reliable results (Sekaran and Bougie, 2010) as fatigue and data collection errors are reduced. Several efforts were made to obtain a suitable list of contractors in Malaysia. Among the companies or professional bodies contacted were the Malaysia Small and Medium Industries Development Corporation (SMIDEC), CIDB, the Department of Statistics Malaysia (DOSM) and the Security Commission Malaysia (SCM). However, in some organisations (SMIDEC, DOSM & SCM) desired information, such as the number of employees or annual turnover, were unobtainable due to confidentiality. Additionally the Malaysia CIDB only listed professional staff, excluding those in supporting roles, making it very difficult to discover the number of permanent employees within the organisation.

The Department of Statistics Malaysia (DOSM) was contacted in order to obtain information on the numbers of employees and on the annual turnover of contractors. Regrettably, the information sought could not be obtained due to confidentiality.

The Security Commission Malaysia (SCM) was also consulted. SCM had the annual turnover data for its Malaysian registered companies but it did not have detailed information on the number of employees in each organisation. Data on annual turnover was available for purchase however it was deemed uneconomical to spend money on this. CIDB Malaysia Directory. Currently, CIDB does not categorise contractors in Malaysia according to number of employees (Subsection 2.4.2 in Chapter 2). The yearly updated CIDB directory lists all the registered contractors in Malaysia based on grade of registration, region, state, status, and works’ specialisation. Although the directory lists all contractors, it is impossible to ascertain which of the contractors practise knowledge sharing initiatives. As there was such a long list of contractors in the directory it was considered uneconomical to contact each individual organisation to ascertain whether they carry out knowledge sharing initiatives or not.

Malaysia Construction Industry Excellence Award (MCIEA). Other attempts made to obtain a suitable population sample frame including looking at the CIDB list of contractors involved in the best practices excellence award (see Figure 4.4). Best-practice organisations could easily describe how sharing knowledge contributes to business goals. Their experiences should be learned by others and shared. There were 50 contractors listed in the MCIEA category in 2008 and 2009, and these covered a wide range of organisational sizes.

Figure 4.4 : Malaysian Construction Industry Excellence Award Categories MCIEA 2008

 Safety & Health award

 Environmental Best Practices award

 IBS award  Innovation award  ICT award Individual award International Achievement award R&D project award Special award Contractor

s’ award Contractor _{of the year}

The human resource departments of all 50 contractors in MCIEA were contacted via email and telephone to ensure they fitted in with the study’s selection criterion. Of these, 19 contractors agreed to be involved in this study. These consisted of seven large, five medium and seven small organisations. This sample does not claim to be a structured, representative sample of SMEs and large Malaysian construction contractors.

Managers in the context of this study were categorised by their position as listed below, as there are no standardised management titles in Malaysia:

1. Top managerial level, for example, CEO/Director/Managing Director/General Manager/Board of Executives, whom are responsible for strategic policies and operational management and, may be expected to have an overall strategic insight (OECD Knowledge Management Survey, 2002). They were considered to be the best addressees because they oversaw the companies’ operations and were likely to be the ‘‘thought’’ leaders for knowledge sharing initiatives.

2. Mid-level management, for example, Project Director/Project Manager/Engineer/Quantity Surveyor/ Senior Manager/Human Resource Manager/IT Manager/Knowledge Manager/Quality Manager. These individuals were selected because they were involved in the day-to-day running of business and construction projects, and had in-depth knowledge of the organisation. Middle managers were those in charge of facilitating the different knowledge conversion processes as well as the learning processes of human groups and work teams that they were responsible for. They were an important link for the successful implementation of knowledge management initiatives and in helping to achieve the desired strategic outcome of superior organisational performance (Purcell et al., 2003; Currie and Procter, 2001). 3. Junior-level management, for example, Site Personnel/Site Supervisor/Site

Agents/Site Managers/Sub-Agents undertook more direct supervisory roles, often with specialised responsibilities.

These employees regularly have needs to share their knowledge in the course of performing their jobs. The questionnaire survey and the semi-structured interviews were able to cover multiple viewpoints by sampling employees from these different levels. Various aspects of hierarchy, culture and functions were represented by the diverse range of respondents.