Case study

General Plan

The case study enterprise was originally a private enterprise and now it has been restructured as a joint stock corporation. But with the help of the insiders, the research still had some convenience in accessing to the enterprise.

The first two days was used for the research to settle in, including the tour around the enterprise and introduction to some senior managers from other department. For the rest three days of the first week, information of the enterprise were gathered through documentation and records as the analyses of documents and records could help to examine the validity of information obtained by other methods and could also provide further information on issues that the researcher was

interested in gathering. It has a small kind of reception room where they display their patent copies, prizes and other reputations to its guest and all the

documentation including journals papers, reports, memoranda, statements, news, letters, policy documents and guidelines of the enterprise could be obtained in this room.

The next five days was first scheduled for interviews and another five days for observation; but an immediate business trip for the manager from the operation department confounded this plan and then the researcher decided to make an open schedule for the following ten working days with interviews and observations. The researcher went to the offices, plants and warehouse for observation and

interviewed people. But the axenic workshops were not approached, as there were many complex rules and procedures to enter into those workshops. The interviews were semi-structured; the researcher had a list of themes and questions to be covered but these would vary from interview to interview as it is assumed that employees from different department and plants might concern differently in terms of green issues, resources use or environmental protection.

The last five days were used for doing the summary from the observations and interviews; and the information gathered from the case study enterprise were checked by the insiders before the researcher left for research ethical concerns.

Data collection

From the general plan for case study, there were two main methods to gather data in the enterprise– observations and interviews.

Observation

Observation is a method to watch what people do, listen to what they say and sometimes ask them to clarify certain issues. The benefits of engaging in observation include looking at what people actually do, instead of what they said they are doing or what and how they should be doing it (Gillham, 2000). Through observations, the researcher was able to investigate the GSCM development in the case study companies. Observations for this research project also enabled the researcher to identify possible questions asked during interviews.

However, there are also limitations to case study method including the possibilities of hidden processes behind the execution and that participants might be play-acting and going through the motions that they thought the researcher wanted to see, and not exactly what they would have been doing when not being observed. The disadvantage of observations was limited in this study, as the majority from the case study enterprise did not know that they were observed and behaved as usual.

In the case of this research project, the researcher was allowed to go all areas of the enterprise to observe what people doing and saying related to its GSCM and note down for analysis with the findings from the interviews.

Semi-structured interviews

Semi-structured interviews are interviews designed with a number of sufficiently open-ended questions in advance, while subsequent follow-up questions are not supposed to be planned but improvised impromptu (Wengraf, 2001). Gillham (2000:65) also believed that semi-structured interviews are highly flexible and regarded as “the most important form of interviewing in case study research”. A semi-structured interview method aims to gradually reconstruct the interviewee’s subjective views and also as a method to seek validation of previous interviews, as well as critical re-examination of competing alternatives. Thus, the researcher could summarise and reconstruct the views of the interviewees on their understandings of GSCM, their evaluations on GSCM development within enterprise/department and so on.

According to Saunders et al. (2009), semi-structured interview strategy provides the interviewers freedom to add or omit some questions in particular interview given specific interview contexts. The order of questions or themes raised in interviews can also be varied depending on the flow of the conversations. But it has to be assured that all the questions asked were within the framework of the questionnaire and related to the aspects mentioned and more findings from interviews and observations will be discussed in Section 4.4.3.

In the case of this study, eight candidates were chosen to be interviewed, including personnel from top management, middle management and employees from the five different departments, including sales department, production department, finance department, quality department and engineering department. One of the candidates from senior management was the general manager, while two middle management candidates included the sales manager and production manager. The other employees each represented a function of the enterprise. To avoid biased information as far as possible, it was assured that all the interviewees except the

general manager were not told with the aim of this study until they had been chosen and started their interviews.

The interviewees were labeled as Interviewee A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H in the following discussions for research ethics considerations. The alphabetical order was corresponding to the sequence of the interviewees participating to the case study and who were these interviewees in terms of their positions and departments are labeled in Table 3.6. During the interviews, only note taking was used to record the information/data from the interviewees as negotiated with the case study enterprise. Thus, the narrative data were collected.

Table 3.6 Interviewee labelling

The structure for each of the interviews for this project was as follows introduction of the interviewer and the

secondly, brief outline of the

and recorded information from interviewees by note

from interviewees on the interview itself and also confirm

Each interview lasted around 30 minutes in order not to disturb the regular order of production and operation for

general manager were not told with the aim of this study until they had been chosen and started their interviews.

The interviewees were labeled as Interviewee A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H in the following discussions for research ethics considerations. The alphabetical order was corresponding to the sequence of the interviewees participating to the case study e these interviewees in terms of their positions and departments are . During the interviews, only note taking was used to record the information/data from the interviewees as negotiated with the case study enterprise.

ve data were collected.

Interviewee labelling

The structure for each of the interviews for this project was as follows introduction of the interviewer and the purpose of the interview

the possible areas to be discussed; thirdly, asking questions and recorded information from interviewees by note-taking; finally, seeking feedback from interviewees on the interview itself and also confirmation of data collected. Each interview lasted around 30 minutes in order not to disturb the regular order of production and operation for the case study enterprise..

general manager were not told with the aim of this study until they had been chosen

The interviewees were labeled as Interviewee A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H in the following discussions for research ethics considerations. The alphabetical order was corresponding to the sequence of the interviewees participating to the case study e these interviewees in terms of their positions and departments are . During the interviews, only note taking was used to record the information/data from the interviewees as negotiated with the case study enterprise.

The structure for each of the interviews for this project was as follows: firstly, the and the study; discussed; thirdly, asking questions eeking feedback ation of data collected. Each interview lasted around 30 minutes in order not to disturb the regular order of

Significant as Stake (1995) claimed that t

plan in order to push the data gathering process and it was therefore to ask the right questions

and the questionnaire and t

guide to the semi-structured interview process can be found in

Table 3.7 List of main questions for the semi

Data analysis

Narrative analysis method study; it is a form of qualitative

respondents impose order on the flow of experience in their lives and thus make sense of events and actions in which

Narrative analysis has been widely used for management research in recent years as it is significantly helpful in providing the way to understand “organizational sense-making” (Bryman and Bell, 2007

(2003), the form of notes, summary, word

and descriptive accounts as a result of watching and listening from the observations, as well as any published written material like doc

regarded as the narrative data. Thus the qualitative data analysis of narrative analysis was selected to describe and interpret the GSCM development of the case study as Stake (1995) claimed that the interviewer should have a strong advance plan in order to push the data gathering process and it was therefore

to ask the right questions. The interview themes were derived from the literature and the questionnaire and the list of main questions that was used in

structured interview process can be found in Table 3.7

List of main questions for the semi-structured interview

Narrative analysis method was used to analyse the data collected from the case form of qualitative data analysis in which the analyst focu


respondents impose order on the flow of experience in their lives and thus make sense of events and actions in which they have participated (Saunders et al., 2009) Narrative analysis has been widely used for management research in recent years as it is significantly helpful in providing the way to understand “organizational making” (Bryman and Bell, 2007:542). According to Taylor-Powell and Renner (2003), the form of notes, summary, word-for-word transcripts from the interviews and descriptive accounts as a result of watching and listening from the observations, as well as any published written material like documents, reports, articles can be regarded as the narrative data. Thus the qualitative data analysis of narrative analysis was selected to describe and interpret the GSCM development of the case study a strong advance plan in order to push the data gathering process and it was therefore also important . The interview themes were derived from the literature he list of main questions that was used in providing a

Table 3.7.

collected from the case alyst focuses on how 


respondents impose order on the flow of experience in their lives and thus make (Saunders et al., 2009). Narrative analysis has been widely used for management research in recent years as it is significantly helpful in providing the way to understand “organizational Powell and Renner word transcripts from the interviews and descriptive accounts as a result of watching and listening from the observations, uments, reports, articles can be regarded as the narrative data. Thus the qualitative data analysis of narrative analysis was selected to describe and interpret the GSCM development of the case study

enterprise.