Data Collection Method

A mixed methods approach is the most appropriate method of investigation to study an under- researched area (Silverman, 2000), and this research considers RL in the MB context as an under-research area. Mixed methods allow the researcher to draw upon the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative methods, shadowing their weaknesses (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004). As mentioned in Table 5.3, data can be collected using both qualitative and quantitative approaches under a mixed methods approach. Accordingly, both qualitative and quantitative modes of data collection were used for the first phase study.

Among the qualitative data collection methods mentioned in Table 5.3, a qualitative semi- structured interview was deemed appropriate, and among the quantitative data collection methods, again mentioned in Table 5.3, quantitative survey method was deemed appropriate for the initial phase study. The rationale for using these modes of data collection method and the way they were carried out will be outlined in the sections below.

5.7.2.1 Survey

Survey is a research method under the quantitative approach that studies a sample of subjects taken from a defined population (Collis and Hussey, 2009). ‘A survey design provides a quantitative or numeric description of trends, attitudes, or opinions of a population by studying a sample of that population’ (Creswell, 2009), which was a suitable method to collect the numeric data on the RL behaviour of the defined population. In the past, various researchers such as Daugherty et al. (2005), Skinner, Bryant and Richey (2008), Chiou et al. (2012) and Hsu, Tan and Zailani (2016) have used surveys as data collection method for their studies related to RL.

A structured questionnaire under the survey method was designed for collecting data (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2012). The survey questionnaire was based on the literature on RL and MBs. As outlined in sections 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.7 and 2.8 of the literature review, the survey questionnaire was designed to explore some essential aspects that would affect the RL process in MBs. In which categories are the goods likely to accumulate? In what volume do goods accumulate in the various categories? Do firms keep track records of the accumulated goods? What disposal options are used? What motivates firms to manage goods in the reverse channel? How much

97

time is required to manage these goods? These were the type of questions asked in the survey questionnaire – see Appendix B for the survey questionnaire. To acquire the desired response rate, a clear and to-the-point cover letter stating the reasons for the study was used (Bryman and Bell, 2011) (see Appendix A). To help increase the response rate, the questionnaire was designed to be short, with closed questions (Collis and Hussey, 2009) and an attractive layout with clear instructions (Bryman and Bell, 2011).

The questionnaire was pretested and revised in two different phases: firstly, with peers and academics, and secondly with real businesses. Surveying MBs can be a complex problem – busy MB owners mean that it is hard to gather respondents (Karagozoglu and Lindell,1998), and even when you do, the data validity is questionable. Nevertheless, the survey was sent to 500 micro retail firms over the internet (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2012) which was deemed the most convenient means of distributing the survey (Bryman and Bell, 2011). The web-based survey software Qualtrics was used to send the questionnaire. What constitutes a good response rate varies among researchers; for example, 20% (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2012); 50% (Roth and BeVier,1998); 60% (Fowler, 1984) and 80% (De Vaus,1986) are all posited as being optimal rates of response. 30 out of 500 respondents filled out their questionnaire via the internet.It was expected that a good response rate would be achieved within the first six weeks, as the time frame of two to six weeks for internet/intranet responses and four to eight weeks for postal responses can be allowed to collect the data using the survey method. The required timeframe, however, may also depend upon the extent of the survey and what geographical area is to be covered (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2007). 30 valid responses out of of the 500 questionnaires were received within the first six weeks. This means the desired response rate was not achieved within the first six weeks. This could be due to the demerits attached to the web-based questionnaire; for example, perhaps the respondents did not fill out the questionnaire because they did not understand the question or felt that the questions were not relevant to them (Bryman and Bell, 2011) or being micro in size they did not had enough time to fill it out. Follow- up emails were sent to achieve the desired response rate (Sekaran and Bougie, 2009), but this did not seem to work either. The researcher then approached 100 respondents with the paper based questionnaire for self administered survey, out of which 90 valid responses were received. This means that the researcher for this study made extra effort to achieve a good response rate (Campion, 1993). This action also adheres with the notion that questionnaires can be both ‘self-

98

completed’ by the respondents, or ‘interviewer-completed’ by the researcher (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2012, p.420). Overall, a valid response rate of 20% (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2012) was achieved using both the internet and the self-administered survey.

Rubio, Chamorro and Miranda (2008), in reviewing the RL research from 1995-2005, found that research on RL was the focus of developed countries like the Netherlands, Germany and the USA, as the former two countries were influenced by legislative take-back, and US firms were influenced by large customer return rates due to liberal returns policies provided by the firms. However, authors in recent years have also started focusing their RL studies on developing countries (Cruz-Rivera and Ertel, 2009; García-Rodríguez, Castilla-Gutiérrez and Bustos-Flores, 2013), as these issues have not remained untouched in these countries. This means the study of RL is becoming popular in both developed and developing countries. Nevertheless, study on MBs has been conducted both in developing countries (Banki and Ismail, 2015) and developed countries (Jones et al., 2014) where there also becomes possible to make study on MB RL in any of these countries. Furthermore, the current study is the first to concentrate on MB RL using a pragmatic approach, as the most appropriate manner for data collection (Brannen 2005; Creswell and Clark, 2007). Consequently, the researcher for this study believes that the research can be conducted in either area, and samples can be chosen from wherever possible. Since there was no specific reason to choose samples from a specific area, the geographical area chosen for the survey was Devon and Cornwall in the UK, which was in convenient proximity of the researcher (Emerson, 2015). The survey was conducted first, which helped in the selection of respondents for the interview stage (Rogers and Tibben-Lembke, 2001).

5.7.2.2 Semi-structured Interview

Interviews can be ‘unreliable, impressionistic, and not objective’ (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000, p.12) if they are not planned in a proper way (Hannabuss,1996). Hence, to get effective results and to ensure construct validity, careful consideration in planning the interview has been given (Doyle, 2004). Unit of analysis is the basis of understanding the interviewees for the semi-structured interview for this study. The unit of analysis in this study is UK Micro Retailers and their RL process (Yin, 2009). Hence, the owner/managers who were the central people of the firm were interviewed. To have a pre-understanding of what questions to ask in the interview (Gummesson, 2000), the interview guidelines were again based on the RL and MB literature. In designing the semi-structured interview, a framework of themes was developed using some of the fundamental

99

aspects concerning RL. These aspects were also used in designing the survey questionnaire. The aspects, as outlined in Appendix B, considered for interview were: volume of the goods accumulation in the reverse channel; record keeping of these goods; disposal options (Bernon and Cullen, 2009; Cullen et al., 2013); time required to extract value from these goods (Lieckens and Vandaele, 2007; Sonya Hsu, Alexander and Zhu, 2009); and motivation to deal with these goods (Ravi, Shankar and Tiwari, 2005). Interview guidelines were pretested and revised in two different phases, first with peers and academics, and second with real business owner/managers. The wording and arrangement of all the questions in the interview were made consistent so that any variations in the answers would be due to the variations in the respondents’ view, and not because of the types of questions asked (Gordon, 1975). Again, this would ensure the validity and reliability of the data collected (Denzin, 1989). In due course, as outlined in Appendix B, rather than providing a structured questionnaire format, a set of questions accompanied with themes, concepts, words and phrases as an interview guide, were used (Reuter et al., 2010). A face-to-face interview was used which enables the capture of small utterances and visual cues, and ‘prompting and probing’ was used to get the answer out of the interviewer (Stephens, 2007, p.9). However, to avoid an impact on the respondent that could create bias in the data collected (Charmaz, 2006), the researcher concentrated on the objectivity, rather than the subjectivity of the issue as much as possible. To avoid putting off the interviewee, a considerable amount of time was allocated for the interview (Hansen, 2006). Hence, the interview was made to last for no more than an hour for each business. Interview recording was carried out using the very common audio recording method (DiCicco-Bloom and Crabtree, 2006). Memos and notes compiled from the semi-structured interviews were also used to record the data. Recording and keeping track of the interview process was kept similar for all the interviews to ensure the construct validity. Rapport and trust were established with the respondents with a few advanced visits, which helped to extract answers for the interview questions (DiCicco‐Bloom and Crabtree, 2006). A combination of purposive and convenience sampling technique was used for the interview in the first phase study. Fifteen owner/managers were chosen from those that were surveyed, who gave their consent for the interview during the survey.

100

Figure 5.2 The First Phase Research Design