I was aware while undertaking this research that for the findings to be beneficial it was essential that they were viewed as valid and reliable. In looking at the credibility and transferability of my process, substantial time was devoted in the field to engage firstly with a wide cross-section of Chief Executives or senior staff from within NSOs board and secondly Pasifika and Māori board members. The nature of my sample was explained, along with methods of selection and approach, also providing basic descriptive information concerning them.
In social research such concepts as validity and reliability are employed to determine the quality of the research and its findings. Questions about quality, of trustworthiness or authenticity of findings, need to be addressed if research is to be judged and its findings accepted by an audience (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Four key tests are often applied to measure the rigour of both quantitative and qualitative research: construct validity, internal validity, external validity, and reliability.
Construct validity involves questioning whether the quality of findings is compromised given the tools used to measure it. Three specific tasks were proposed by Yin (1993) to
117
intensify construct validity: employing a wide range of sources of evidence (which included use of multiple methods of gaining information, specifically the use of a significant number of survey respondents and interviewees); developing a chain of evidence (the research was sequential as the interviews followed the survey); and allowing research informants to receive the case study reports to verify the authenticity of interpretation and analysis. The research adopted multiple sources of evidence (literature review, survey and individual interviews) as a strategy to improve construct validity of theresearch findings.
The precision of information and whether it corresponds with reality is the focus of internal validity. The ‘truth’ value of qualitative research is measured in terms of credibility; that is whether the study’s interpretation or description of human experience is able to be immediately recognised by people who have had that same experience or by other people who have only heard or read about the experience (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). Creswell (1994) proposed two tactics for ensuring internal validity: triangulation and informant review of findings.
Triangulation is a useful strategy that aims to corroborate research findings and thereby add to the credibility of a study. Patton (1987) distinguished between four types of triangulation:
• Data triangulation – the use of multiple sources of evidence • Investigator triangulation – the use of more than one researcher
• Theory triangulation – the use of a range of perspectives to interpret data • Methodological triangulation – the use of a range of methods to collect data
This study employed data triangulation and methodological triangulation. Data were drawn from the survey and semi-structured interviews. Methods employed in the study included archival data analysis within the literature review and the multiple interviews. Investigator triangulation involved the use of my supervisors to provide checks and balances through the data administration and analysis phase. My supervisors also analysed the accuracy of the qualitative data collection phase; by, going through the procedure to check accurate interview guides, consent forms and ethical issues. Internal
118
validity is also about other Pasifika and Māori individuals being able to understand what the participants mention as a Pasifika and Māori phenomenon or experience. In addition regular updates were made to Te Rōpū Manaaki and the Pasifika advisor of the progress of the research.
Reliability of a study involves questioning whether the study is constant, fairly stable over time and across researchers and methods (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The survey was counted as reliable, as, before distribution, it was pilot tested on a former NSO CEO and a former Chairman. As a result they responded with advice concerning to the format, its comprehension, and completion time. Guba and Lincon (1994) suggested auditability as meaningful criteria for qualitative research. An auditable study is a clearly documented decision pathway that can be followed by a researcher who, when having access to the study’s data, as well as the original researcher’s perspective and situation, is able to reach the same or comparable conclusions.
Despite a survey and the employment of semi-structured interviews representing the overall forms of data collection, other methods were used, including informal discussions with regional and former Pasifika and Māori individuals in sport leadership and governance roles. The requirement for honest responses-not shallow “press pass” information – are seen as crucial to the interview process (Stiles, 1993). The relationship with the individual must be based on clear rapport and trust. I was able to show interest, empathy, and association with the participants due to my perceived insider status. The information provided by participant responses was in-depth to the degree of outlining personal journeys, as well as positive and negative experiences. After the interviews were complete, in some cases more information was acquired from some participants who did make contact with me again, providing evidence of the relationships and bonds established.
Quality assurance was not only regarded as an important priority and feature throughout the fieldwork, but also subsequently. With regard to transferability, the research process has been clearly explained, its findings, and examples from participants responses discussed in the next chapters. These chapters will provide readers with insights into sport governance from Pasifika and Māori perspectives and allow the
119
opportunity to evaluate the relevance of findings to other settings with which they are familiar (Seale, 1999). Where possible, summaries of the findings are provided in diagrams to show vital themes and methods to assist understanding and transferability (Elliot et al., 1999).
The concepts of dependability and conformability have been made clear in my detailed description of the nature of the research topic; why it was chosen; my prior interest, knowledge, and experience within Pasifika culture; the process used; my methodology, methods, participants’ selection; and in how I approached and examined the data. Conformability was achieved as all the phases were subject to inspections from my supervisors, which has been beneficial in that they have acknowledged inconsistencies and gaps and provided potential ideas that that could increase validity. It was beneficial using mixed-methods as it provided a form of triangulation (Spicer, 2004).
The limitations that exist within my research study have been recognised and acknowledged. One key limitation that is associated with Ferkins’s (2007) study of New Zealand sport governance: the dependence on a limited set of ‘voices’ and the absence of some stakeholder views. Additionally, not all of the Pasifika and Māori in sport roles in NSOs in New Zealand are represented in this study. Also, it is important to see the findings as relevant to a specific time, place, location and culture and consequently may not be appropriate to sport governance in other countries, locations or eras. Furthermore, expectations for concentration in terms of data and people and the amount of fieldwork had to be balanced with tight schedules, which caused restrictions, and small budgets. A substantial volume of data were captured. Ultimately how they are perceived is subject to my interpretation. Analysis is not an exact science as to how data are understood, but can be subject to a range of views. There can also be a factor of innovation and abstraction to the process, and personal insight, knowledge and ‘feel’ can support this. Seale (1999) suggests that understandings occasionally can be flexible and open-ended. Closely linked to this, Rose and Webb (1998) admit that some of this process takes part at a creative level where full interpretation is not possible in terms of definitive language purely as it takes place at a level that is too abstract to be represented correctly. However, this section shows that this research was conducted to
120
the best effect and in good faith, given these restrictions, challenges, and admissions, and in line with the procedure defined.
Chapter Conclusion
This chapter began by outlining the importance of the research paradigm and then discussed how the research approach adopted was a mixed-method case study combining both elements of outsider and insider research. The choice of a mixed- methods approach using both a survey and semi-structured interviews was examined before concluding with a section on research credibility and the centrality of the researcher’s judgement for interpreting data. Limitations were identified and discussed, and these will be further elaborated later in the concluding chapter.
In summary, chapter three has detailed the purpose of the research, its approach, and methods adopted. The next chapter is the first of four chapters in which I present my interpretation of findings in light of current scholarship.
122