Data Collection

The data in my research study was collected iteratively and was guided by the results of the analysis of each data slice (see Figure 16) through several methods (quantitative and qualitative), namely semi-structured interviews, questionnaires, direct observation, and documentation. When

University

of Cape

Town

PhD Thesis Peter Weimann 93

profiling grounded theory approaches Matavire & Brown (2011) discuss the “types of data” in the grounded theory method and point out that qualitative analysis techniques can be applied to any type of data whether qualitative or quantitative. According to van Niekerk & Roode (2009), Glaser differentiates between qualitative research and qualitative analysis, while the latter is any type of analysis, as in the grounded theory method, that results in findings without the use of statistical methods.

Figure 16 - Phases and Steps of my Research Approach

Analyse UCT-Teams

2008

Analyse UCT-Teams

2009

Analyse BHT-Teams

2009

Analyse BHT-Teams

2010 Analyse BHT-Teams

2010 online

Discussion of developed Theory Grounded Theory Approach

(Open Coding, Axial Coding, Selective Coding)

This approach will provide a wider scope of coverage and a fuller picture of the phenomena under study (compare Bonoma (1985), Eisenhardt (1989), and Strauss & Corbin (1990)). Triangulation across various techniques of data collection is particularly beneficial in theory generation as it provides multiple perspectives on an issue, supplies more information on emerging concepts, allows for cross-checking, and leads to a stronger substantiation of constructs (e.g., Eisenhardt (1989), Glaser & Strauss (1967), and Pettigrew (1989)). It will be applied where necessary.

Table 9 below is based on Yin (2003) and specifies the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen sources of evidence.

University

of Cape

Town

PhD Thesis Peter Weimann 94

Table 9 - Data Collection Methods

Sources of Evidence Strengths Weaknesses

Documentation Stable – can be reviewed repeatedly Unobtrusive – not created as a result of the case study

Exact – contains exact names, references, and details of an event Broad coverage – long span of time, many events and many settings

Retrievability – can be low Biased selectivity – if collection is incomplete

Reporting bias – reflects (unknown) bias of author

Access- may be deliberately blocked Focused Interviews Insightful – provides perceived causal

inferences

Bias – due to poorly constructed questions Response bias

Inaccuracies – due to poor recall Reflexivity – interviewee gives what interviewer wants to hear

Structured Questions as part of a Survey

Targeted – Focuses directly on case study topic

Efficient way of collecting information

Bias – due to poorly constructed questions Quality and quantity of data depends on the ability and willingness of the respondents

Direct Observation Reality – covers events in real time Contextual – covers context of event

Time consuming

Selectivity – unless broad coverage Reflexivity – event may proceed differently because it is being observed

The interview is an important data gathering technique involving verbal communication between the researcher and the participant. There is a range of approaches to interviewing, from the completely unstructured, in which the participant is allowed to talk freely about whatever they wish, to highly structured, in which the participant’s responses are limited to answering direct questions (Fox, 2006). Group interviews, sometimes known as focus groups, are only really appropriate for qualitative approaches, and can be used where there is some benefit in getting a group story about a setting or incident (Morgan, 1998).

Semi-structured interviews of individuals and small groups were the primary source of data of my research study. These allow the researcher to access the participants’ interpretation regarding the actions and events which have or are taking place (Walsham, 2002). Interviews remained open-ended and assumed a conversational manner. In the context of virtual project teams it also seems appropriate to investigate certain issues in a focus group interview.

Each respondent or group of respondents was interviewed for not longer than 1 hour and care was taken to keep the balance between excessive passivity and direction. By avoiding over-direction, the data obtained will retain a richness that will be exploited when the data are analysed and interpreted. Furthermore, by not being excessively passive, the researcher will demonstrate an interest in each respondent’s answers (Walsham, 2002). Special care was taken to elicit the

University

of Cape

Town

PhD Thesis Peter Weimann 95

respondent’s views and experiences in his or her own terms, rather than to collect data that are simply a choice among pre-established response categories (Kaplan & Maxwell, 1994). In the preparation of the interview the subject matter and the purpose of the interview was carefully analysed to avoid unnecessary and long interview transcripts (Kvale, 1996).

In case study based research, a maximum variation sampling strategy is often recommended, which requires that the investigator obtains a broad range of data and perspectives on the subject of study (e.g., Guba & Lincoln (1989) and Eisenhardt (1989)). By looking at this broad range of perspectives, preconceived (and developing) understanding of the phenomenon under study is purposefully challenged (Paré, 2004). This is only partly in line with the theoretical sampling that is recommended as the main principle in the grounded theory approach (see Corbin & Strauss (2008) and Glaser (1978)). In theoretical sampling the participants are selected according to the needs of the emerging concepts and categories in the analysis of the data so far collected (see Charmaz (2006)).

Other types of sampling methods in grounded theory as described by Morse (2007) are:

 Convenience sampling: the selection is done on the basis of accessibility.

 Purposeful sampling: as indicated in the initial analysis of the interviews, participants are selected depending on how they partition themselves according to the emerging phenomena.

 Theoretical group interviews: these group interviews are used to expand and to verify the emerging theory. Participants in these interviews are exposed to the preliminary findings and asked to discuss them. The analysis of the discussion is used to modify and saturate the emerging theory.

During my research I started with convenience sampling as this method is often used at the beginning of a research study (Morse, 2007). After the analysis of my first interviews, I pursued the principle of theoretical sampling with regard to concepts that seemed relevant to the problem and came up during the previous interviews (e.g. team size, tool restrictions, Internet access, security, experience in virtual team work, project type, and project sponsor). The boundaries of my theoretical sampling go in line with the limitations of my research (e.g. student teams, organisational restrictions of the universities, team and project experience, and degree of virtuality). Regarding the advantages of theoretical sampling Corbin & Strauss (2008, p. 145) point out:

University

of Cape

Town

PhD Thesis Peter Weimann 96

Theoretical sampling is concept driven. It enables researchers to discover the concepts that are relevant to this problem and population, and allows researchers to explore the concepts in depth. Theoretical sampling is especially important when studying new or unchartered areas because it allows for discovery.

As a means to capture everything that was said and to spot salient points at a later stage while transcribing, a data recorder was used. However, prior permission was requested from the interviewees (Yin, 2003).

Direct Observation was undertaken by making field visits to the research site, for example, to observe the teams during their kick-off meeting or during a project’s face-to-face meeting.

As a mean to support and supplement the evidence obtained from the various sources, documentation was used. Examples of documents that proved relevant to the study include minutes, proposals, progress reports, emails, etc. However, these documents were not accepted as literal recordings of events that have taken place, and were used carefully (Yin, 2003). If the documentary evidence is contradictory rather than corroboratory, the topic was further investigated, in for instance, the interviews. All required documents were examined in a systematic way.

A survey is one of the most important methods of questioning or surveying people and recording their responses. The broad area of survey research encompasses any procedures that involve asking questions of respondents. A "survey" can be anything from a short paper-and-pencil feedback form to an intensive one-on-one in-depth interview (Cooper & Schindler, 1998). Surveys therefore can be divided into two broad categories: the questionnaire and the interview. A survey using a questionnaire is a popular data collection instrument in a quantitative research approach.

The strengths of conducting a survey via a questionnaire are its versatility and efficiency. Data of all kinds can be gathered by questioning others. A questionnaire distributed via email, mail, the Internet or fax as the medium of communication can cover a large geographic area or population at a fraction of the cost and time of an interview or an observation (Cooper & Schindler, 1998). It therefore supports a quantitative research approach to studying natural phenomena through large representative samples. The major weakness of questionnaires is the quality and quantity of data, depending on the ability and willingness of the respondents to cooperate (Cooper & Schindler, 1998).

In my research I used questionnaires to measure frequent occurrences, for instance, of which web-based tools are being used, how often they are used and for what purposes. The figures arising from the answers helped me to identify specific usage patterns in the different project teams as well

University

of Cape

Town

PhD Thesis Peter Weimann 97

as to explore, during interviews, the social, cultural, and organizational reasons behind these technological usage patterns. The combination of survey questionnaires and interviews enabled me to identify usage patterns and technological preferences but it also took into account the fact that the pure measure of quantitative outcomes often neglects social, cultural, and organizational aspects (Lyytinen, 1987). Table 10 shows a summary of the above discussed data collection methods, relates them to research problem and explains the intended role in my data analysis.

Table 10 - Summary of the Different Data Collection Methods in my Research Approach Data Collection

Methods

Use in the Research Approach related to Research Problem

Role in the Data Analysis

Questionnaires Measure frequent occurrences, for instance, of which web-based tools are being used, how often they are used and for what purposes

Identify tool usage patterns and technological preferences; identify technological problems; relate the tools to work items/tasks

Project

documentation

Studying protocols, team reflective essays and course results to verify collaborative work characteristics and assess team performance

Relate work characteristics and performance to team characteristics and tool usage pattern as well as during their kick-off meeting or during a project’s face-to-face meeting to assess performance; determine team characteristics and collaborative work characteristics

Identify team characteristics; identify collaborative work characteristics organi-zational reasons behind technological usage patterns; relate the tools to work items/tasks