Case Access

Shenton and Hayter (2004) suggest that one of the fundamental steps in undertaking qualitative research is gaining access to a particular organisation and ensuring that individuals associated with the organisation, for instance employees and practitioners, will serve as informants. This research required access to organisations and individuals within the organisation, therefore access was a process to be undertaken. This section explains how that access was gained both at the organisational and individual levels. Telecom companies in Tanzania are in stiff competition with each other, hence making them sensitive and resistant to research due to suspicion of spying. Some organisations have a clear policy for not allowing access to academic researchers. Overall, it was realised that the telecom industry does not openly welcome academic research. Nevertheless, this research used the following strategies to gain access to the telecom organisations and the access was successfully obtained.

First, the researcher sought a Research Permit from the Government’s Research Commission (COSTECH) before contacting the organisations. This was an alternative way, as usually a researcher would first contact the organisations in order to gather more supporting documentation for the research permit application. With confidence, the researcher applied for the permit using the University’s ethical research clearance (Appendix 4 Ethical Clearance) as well as the collaboration/hosting letters (Appendix 5 SMMUCo letters) from the data collection period at the host University (SMMUCo University) and the organisation (Bumaco Ltd) in Tanzania. The possession of the Government’s Research Permit and clearance were key and instrumental for obtaining access, as both organisations trusted the academic motive for the research. The

research clearance permit (Appendix 1: Research permit) underscored the legitimacy and credibility of the research.

Second, Peters et al. (2012) suggest reciprocation as a technique for gaining access to organisations. Reciprocating is agreeing to share findings with the organisation and to make available copies of any papers that emerge from that research. While seeking access to the organisations, the researcher suggested an opportunity to share some findings with the organisations and discuss how the organisations could benefit from the research findings. This was a win-win agreement as it will, amongst other things, facilitate the dissemination of the research findings to the relevant audience, may help the organisations improve their practice and also test the recommendations for future research prospects.

Mention can also be made of the published article co-authored by the researcher (Kwayu et al., 2016b) with the focus on one of the telecom organisations in the country. The presence of the published article, which was also shared with the organisations, cemented the trustworthiness of the research.

Third, Gorman and Clayton (1997) suggest openness as a means of influencing access to an organisation. They suggest that the researcher is open about a range of issues that will address concerns that the representatives of the collaborating organisations may have. This includes issues such as choices of field work sites. Tanzania is a relatively big country with some areas still remote and far from the main towns and cities. Visiting some of these sites may need more resources, in terms of finance, time and coordination. Thus, being honest about such limitations during access negotiations enabled a practical schedule for valid research to be drawn up. For example, the fieldwork schedule at Mwiko was coordinated by the human resources manager of the company which may have been difficult for the researcher to do. Some of the sites which he intended to schedule had to be re-negotiated according to the details of the research clearance permit as well as the field dynamics. Thus, openness enabled access which was well coordinated and ensured the success of the project.

The fourth technique that was used to gain access to the telecom organisations was a demonstration of professional suitability (Shenton and Hayter, 2004). The researchers developed contact with professionals while making preliminary approaches to the organisation. This was done by demonstrating an awareness of wider professional

trends occurring in the telecom industry as well as local developments. For instance, the researcher was engaging in various discussions regarding the new Cyber Crime Act (2015) in Tanzania that is linked to the use of social media. The professional contacts facilitated the researcher’s contact with the authorities, which enabled the researcher to gain access at Mwiko and Kili.

Furthermore, other techniques such as exploiting past links with organisations as well as being receptive to suggestions contributed to gaining access to the organisations. Through links with professionals and practitioners, the researcher was advised on ways to gain access. The authorities of the organisations suggested things that could be done in order to get access to the organisations. For instance, being directed to the right people who dealt with research such as the human resources departments.

In addition to gaining access to the organisations, access to individuals who are the informants was also a crucial process to undertake. Individual consent to participate was a necessity. Furthermore, individual willingness and openness was essential for enriching this research with significant information. The following tactics were deployed to gain access to individual informants.

Glesne and Peshkin (1992) advise the researcher to place an emphasis on individual personal contribution. This can be done through showing gratitude and acknowledging informants’ time, cooperation and the importance of them contributing to the research. This technique was often used to encourage participants who felt that their contribution would not be valuable. The researcher explained how their experience will contribute to new knowledge. This steered informants’ passion and energy to contribute as well as to consent to the interviews.

In addition, since Tanzania is a power society, where much emphasis put on authority (Hofstede, 1985), this research often referred to the support of some ‘authority’ who (i.e. managers) / which (i.e. research clearance authority) had already backed this research in order to influence access to individuals (Shenton and Hayter, 2004). This, as explained earlier, provided assurance to participants that the research was legitimate and credible. In absence of this, participants would fear that their participation would be interpreted as spilling organisational secrets. Hence, participants had nothing to fear because it had the seal of approval of relevant authority. Also, important to note, is that

individuals were informed of their rights, so they were not forced to participate and hence this eliminated potential of biasness.