Case Study Discussion Guide

A substantive set of questions (discussion guide) reflecting the actual line of inquiry lies at the heart of the case study protocol. These questions are guide posts for the interviewer to identify the information to be sought, and why, as well as providing prompts during the course of the interview and to keep the process on track (Yin, 2003). The case study questions were developed from the checklist provided in Chapter 4, which is itself grounded in the literature summarised in Chapter 3. The assessment of participants’ chain awareness or development was based on examples provided as ‘word pictures’ of ‘high’ and ‘low’ performance in terms of each category. Possible indicative factors for each category are also provided to guide interviewers.

This case study methodology was also modelled on the relationship marketing study methodology employed by Lindgreen et al (2006), and detailed in Chapter 3, because of a similar focus on normative issues and the development of an assessment tool. A case study from the motor vehicle industry was used to test the assessment tool. In that case a self assessment questionnaire was sent to participants for response. The questionnaire involved 10 dimensions, some of which resemble the six dimensions identified in this study. However, against each dimension, respondents were asked to identify their own performance against one of 11 statements in a gradation from 0 to 10.

This approach seems fraught with difficulty in terms of a practical assessment tool for use by managers in field situations. For example, it requires some ability in literary comprehension to read, comprehend and evaluate the subtle differences in meaning in the total of 110 graded statements. Would busy executives, many of them hands-on managers, be prepared give the survey due consideration? Gummesson (2000) has identified similar problems in achieving meaningful or accurate responses or opinions from busy executives in research studies. Do they simply tell researchers what they want to hear? Responses to survey questionnaires in business studies are typically 30 to 50 per cent which is often regarded as ‘acceptable’.

The value chain case study requires participation in the case from each of the key businesses in the vertical chain and a reasonable cross section in the horizontal woolgrower alliance. In these circumstances an interview situation was chosen involving verbal responses.

“Among the methods available to the traditional researcher, qualitative (informal) interviews and observation provide the best opportunities for the study of processes.” (Gummesson, 2000 p35)

Structure of Discussion Guide

The questionnaire was designed accordingly. Some examples of the discussion guide format, and its structure, are shown in Table 5.1 below. The first column features the dimension being investigated. The first dimension is consumer focus which includes five categories; the first being creating customer value. The dimensions and categories selected flow from the research literature in Chapter 3. These also align well with field experience. The second and third columns show examples of high and low chain awareness. The fourth column provides the lead questions for the researcher to ask the participant to gauge the stage of chain development or awareness. The final column provides for a score, either numerical or verbal (high, low or intermediate). As the use of this questionnaire was exploratory the verbal approach was used. The first column also provides the researcher with possible parameters that define each category, as shown. Examples are provided from each of the six dimensions. The full discussion guide, provided in Appendix A, features 24 categories and takes from 90 minutes to two hours to administer, depending on the respondent.

Table 5.1: Examples from Discussion Guide

Parameter Example of High Chain Awareness (score 7-10 Example of Low Chain Awareness (score 1-3) Specific Discussion Questions to Participants Evaluation and Score 1. Consumer focus (a) Creating Consumer Value Target segment Segment size Category trends

The firm is able to clearly articulate their target customer group, growth trends in the segment, and

The firm has only a vague notion of their customer segment with little detailed

understanding of

Who do you see as the principal customers for your wool products? How do you see current consumer

Level of competition Unmet needs

the gap in the market based on the level of satisfaction with current suppliers.

their needs and situation.

perceptions of wool products? How do you see future demand for woollen goods? 2. Capability development (a) Capabilities Performance Alternatives Capability gaps Capability boundaries

The firms involved are clearly high performing – the alternatives are inferior. The capability boundaries have been delineated and there are few capability gaps.

This looks more like a collection of firms based on convenience, with significant

capability gaps and fuzzy boundaries.

Is there a common thread about the capabilities of businesses in the WoolConnect membership e.g. how they see each other or how they relate to each other? 3. Chain

development (a) Industry context Trends

New ways of doing business

Leadership

The chain strategy is consistent with trends in the industry. It is widely accepted this is the way successful firms will operate in the future. There is a high degree of uncertainty, and probably scepticism, about the future role of chains in this industry.

What is your view of chain development, along the lines undertaken by WoolConnect, as a business strategy for the wool industry?

4. Relationships