Constraints and Limitations

Qualitative research is inherently subjective, and there is also a risk of bias in the sample selection process as convenience sampling may result in self-selection bias. However, this form of sampling is a generally accepted qualitative research procedure (Bédard & Gendron, 2004), and extant research suggests that this form of bias may not be a concern with respect to the quality of S&ER (Gray et al., 1995). As with any study of this nature, there is a risk of interviewer bias both during the interviews and in the analysis of the transcripts. An attempt has been made to alleviate this risk by carefully constructing open-ended interview questions, and by choosing not to review the social and environmental reports of the organisations prior to the interviews to avoid forming potentially biased judgments and preconceptions. Furthermore, the use of a systematic analytic protocol helps alleviate the risk of interviewer bias in the data analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994) and O’Dwyer (2004) advocates using narrative data analysis, suggesting that focusing on telling a story helps avoid selectivity in the analysis. The semi-structured interview method is potentially subject to bias both during the interviews and the data analysis process (Smith, 2003). Whilst it is acknowledged that the researcher cannot separate themself from the socially constructed world, and as such cannot claim the research to be value-free (Baker, 1999), the use of triangulation has been suggested to reduce the risk of interviewer bias and thus increase the validity and reliability of the research (Baker, 1999; Smith, 2003) and this was undertaken in this study. It has also been suggested that the adoption of a multi-faceted a-priori theoretical perspective, such as the Nexus of Theories provided in Chapter 4, can aid in the reduction of researcher bias (Marginson, 2004), and that codes that emerge during the data collection process have greater empirical grounding (Miles & Huberman, 1994). With respect to the content analysis stage of the research the use of archival research requires a validity trade-off in that while results may have more external validity, they may not be generalisable (Smith, 2003). However, as the purpose of the research is exploratory in nature and not intended to be generalisable this trade-off is less of a concern. Milne and Adler (1999) suggest that the use of a single coder may increase the reliability of content analysis. However, in cases such as this, where the sole coder is also the researcher, there is a risk of researcher bias.

120

Therefore, consistent with Perez and Sanchez (2009), the coding was intentionally kept as simple as possible to mitigate this limitation.

The fact that the websites were not analysed in the same year as the most recent reports analysed were published must be acknowledged as a limitation, which was due to the sequential nature of the research design. However, this limitation is mitigated by the fact that the purpose of the website analysis was not to compare web-based disclosures with paper-based disclosures, but rather to triangulate and support the findings from the previous stages.

6.8 Summary

The purpose of this chapter was to detail the research design, methods and methodology used to address the research questions developed in Chapter 5. The exploratory nature of the research suggests that a qualitative field study involving a small number of cases with rich data collection and triangulation is the appropriate method. Four distinct stages of research have been identified, each of which informed the subsequent stages. In order to address RQ1 the first stage of the research involved semi-structured interviews with representatives from ten ASX listed organisations engaging in S&ER. The data analysis method included three distinct but overlapping phases of analysis including data reduction, data display and data interpretation, the results of which provided a contextual framework for the second stage of the research.

The second stage of the research, the purpose of which was to address RQ2, involved content analysis of social and environmental disclosures, with particular attention to multi-modal impression strategies including the use of solely narrative disclosures, improperly presented graphs, and images and photographs. Secondary data analysed included the most recent reports published at the time of the stage one interviews, and the reports published immediately prior to the interviewees taking on the primary S&ER role. Content was classified as being ‘informative’ or ‘potentially misleading’ according to the presence or absence of quantitative information, or in the case of graphs, whether they were properly or improperly presented. The third stage of the research involved interviews with representatives from two design firms and one consulting firm with experience in assisting organisations with the preparation of social and environmental reports. The purpose of these interviews was to address RQs 3 and 4 and provide a more balanced perspective to the first stage interviews. The final stage of the research involved

121

analysis of the navigability, design and accessibility of the websites of the organisations interviewed in stage one, with a particular focus on the social and environmental pages of the websites. The purpose of this stage of the research is to provide a comprehensive picture of organisational S&ER by enriching and triangulating the data collected, and to provide a form of control against the possibility that organisations are focusing their efforts on web-based reporting, rather than hard-copy reporting.

Field studies of this nature are subject to inherent limitations at every stage of the research. However these limitations may be mitigated if the researcher is aware of them in the first instance and then takes the necessary steps to minimise the risks associated with them. Mitigation techniques used in the present study included careful construction of the interview questions, the use of systematic analytic protocols, and a multi-faceted a-priori theoretical framework.

In summary, the first stage of the field study considered internal S&ER choices, whilst the second examined external disclosure practices in hard-copy reports. The third stage explored the role of external consultants in those choices and practices, and the fourth triangulated and expanded upon the previous stages by exploring web-based communication. When considered in their entirety, the case studies may provide a broader picture of what differentiates those organisations that appear to be reporting for accountability purposes from those that appear to merely attempting to create the impression that they are socially and environmentally responsible. The following chapter provides an analysis and discussion of the first stage of the research.

122

Chapter 7 – Results of Stage One: Interviews with Organisational Representatives