Data Collection Procedures and Justifications

The data collection procedures and their instruments depend on the availability of facilities, time, costs, the degree of accuracy, the expertise of investigator, and other data gathering resources and techniques (Sekaran 2003). The procedure gives a snapshot of a single fixed time point of the

phenomenon selecting different units in different contexts with in-detail data analyses of how other variables differ across these units that is known to be a cross-sectional research compare to a longitudinal research with multiple time points of the phenomenon selecting a small number of units (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe & Lowe 1991; Petrie & Sabin 2000; Cooper & Schindler 2003; Burns & Bush 2006; Neuman 2006). The cross-sectional design time dimension was consistent with the descriptive research approach and due to time and cost constraints for this research study. A top-down approach was selected as the most appropriate method for executing the questionnaire due to the nature of information and data required can be best provided by the owners/managers of firms under research (Mahemba & De Bruijn 2003; Martinez-Roman, Gamer & Tamayo 2011).

4.5.6.1 Interview and Questionnaire Survey Types

The selected survey research strategy and type depends on a balance of features and elements in all research situations, which have advantages and disadvantages (Emory & Cooper 1991; Allen & Rao 2000; Hair, Bush & Ortinau 2003; Sekaran 2003). The advantages of the survey approach are the ability to accommodate a large sample size and to increase the generalisability of the results, the ability to distinguish small differences, the ease of administrating and recording questions and answers, the capability of using advanced statistical analysis, and the ability to tap into factors and relationships not directly measurable. However, the disadvantages are the difficulty in developing an accurate survey instrument, the limited in-depth details of data structure, the lack of control over timeless and potential low response rates, and the effort in determining the respondents’ bias.

A survey research strategy has two types of data collection techniques that include interview and questionnaire (Cooper & Schindler 2003; Zikmund 2003). Interview is a direct verbal interaction between the interviewer and the respondent to collect information satisfying the objectives of the research study, which provides depth and detail of the available information (Cooper & Schindler 2003). Examples include personal-administered (face-to-face interview) and telephone interview. Alternatively, the questionnaire is a list of questions and statements in that the answers are filled by a respondent, which provides quantifiable data from a representative sample (Ticehurst & Veal 2000; Zikmund 2003). Examples include self-administered (drop-and-collect), mail questionnaire, fax questionnaire, and web survey. Cobanoglu, Warde, and Moreo (2001) found that the fastest questionnaire survey type is fax survey with four days respond rate, followed by web survey with 5.97 days respond rate, and the lowest is mail survey with 16.46 days respond rate. Ticehurts and Veal (2000) suggest the following types of survey instruments that are used with questionnaires:

household, telephone, mail, hand-delivered, captive group, web, and organisation. A comparison of the type of surveys and their features are provided in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8: Type of surveys and features.

Features / Elements Type of Surveys

Personal-Administrated (Face-to-Face Interview) Telephone Interview Self-Administrated (Drop-and-Collect)

Mail Web Survey

Administrative Cost Expensive Moderate Expensive Cheap Cheapest Administrative Speed Slow/Moderate Fast Moderate Slowest Fastest Length of Questionnaire Longest Short Moderate Moderate Moderate Respond Rate Highest Moderate/High High Lowest Moderate

Visual Observation Yes No No No Yes

Visual Aids Yes No Limited Limited Yes

Obtain Sensitive Information Low Moderate High High High

Interviewer Bias Worse Some Some No No

Anonymity of Respondent Worse Some Yes Yes Yes Respondent’s Reading Skills No No Yes Yes Yes Sample / Quality Control Highest Moderate High Lowest Low

Source: Adopted from De Vaus (1995); Ticehurts & Veal (2000); Cobanoglu, Warde & Moreo (2001); Cooper & Schindler (2003); Zikmund (2003); Aaker, Kumar & Day (2004); Burns & Bush (2006); Neuman (2006).

4.5.6.2 Questionnaire Administration

A survey questionnaire can be administered through two approaches: interview-completed, where the interviewer reads the questions and the statements and records the respondent’s answers; and respondent-completed, where the respondent reads and fills out the questionnaire without help (Ticehurst & Veal 2000). Other elements of questionnaire administration are that the investigator considers the quality and rate of responses and the practicalities and problems of administration to be able to reduce the possibility of non-response bias and common method bias (De Vaus 1995; Podsakoff et al. 2003; Malhotra 2004). Thus, the self-administrated (drop-and-collect) and mail questionnaires and respondent-completed techniques were selected in this research study to obtain information from the respondents and informants, the owners and/or the managers of firms, and were conducted using the method of successive waves where responses were created by a follow-

up reminder (Armstrong & Overton 1977). The rationale behind this selection was to be able to offer benefits, as shown in Table 4.8, such as reduction of interviewer bias, accommodation of long survey, and to obtain a large sample. The self-administrated survey was used due to the sampling group in recognised locations in the Dubai marketplace with the intention to allocate enough time for the respondents to complete the questionnaire and ask questions for clarification (Creswell 2003; Sekaran 2003; Zikmund 2003). The researcher was present upon request to probe any incomplete answers and to clarify any unclear questions (Sekaran 2003). The possibility of using the mail questionnaire was also considered, upon request, to increase the response rate.

The self-administrated (drop-and-collect) survey was used with the advantages of: administrative speed, response rate, questions and items clarity, motivation, anonymity, and sample and quality control (Baruch & Holtom 2008). The information was kept confidential and the research study outcomes were provided upon request. The disadvantages include: administrative cost, interviewer bias, and data collection length. These disadvantages were minimised where possible and did not outweigh the benefits provided by high response rates in a short period of time. Then again, the face-to-face interview has cost and time constraints. The intention is to gather data from across Dubai and the privacy and anonymity issues are other reasons for not using this type of survey (Cooper & Emory 1995; Zikmund 2003). Further, telephone interview has a low acceptance rate among respondents with issues related to privacy and excludes individuals without telephones. Mail questionnaire has a low response rate with the possibility of misunderstanding questions, while web survey has an unrepresentative sample issue and excludes individuals without Internet access. In this research study, small and medium firms were initially contacted representing a mix of manufacturing and service industries (O’Dwyer, Gilmore & Carson 2011), for the intention was for 600 firms to participate forming the sample size. Data were collected in two waves (Armstrong & Overton 1977). All contacted firms were sent survey questionnaires by drop-and-collect and/or mail. Procedures for the survey questionnaire administration are detailed below:

 Obtain a list of firms with name, address, telephone number, and email address from the Dubai Chamber of Commerce and Industry commercial database.

 Contact potential firms by telephone or email to encourage them to participate.

 If agreed, survey questionnaire was dropped at the firm’s premises and collected three weeks later.

 Questionnaire was given to the respondents with a covering letter describing the conducted research study (i.e. researcher, research institution, objective, and instruction).

 Respondents were given the option to post back the questionnaire providing them with a self-addressed return stamped envelope.

 Undertake telephone and email follow-up, call-back and email were used when necessary to non-respondents two weeks after first delivery.

 Initial contact and cut-off day for returned survey questionnaires were conducted over a five month period.

4.5.6.3 Response Rate

The response rate refers to the percentage of the total completed attempts in gathering information by the investigator (Ticehurst & Veal 2000; Sekaran 2003) and is calculated by the number of completed survey questionnaires returned divided by the total number of eligible respondents who are contacted or are requested to participate in the research study (Zikmund 2000, p.203). The response rate is important for validity and analysis leading to statistical inference and bias in terms of data reliability and quality (Cooper & Schindler 2003; Zikmund 2003). Baruch and Holtom (2008) discover that the average response rate for a research study that utilises data collected from individuals is 52.7% (+/- 20.4) and the average response rate from firms is 35.7% (+/- 18.8). The response rate for the survey questionnaire technique is found to be between 10% and 50%, which is fairly typical for a large sample of firms (Burns 1994). This is further supported by Baruch (1999) that for a research study directed toward top management or representative of firms, the norm may be 36% (+/- 13).

The response rate can be influenced by a number of factors such as: survey introduction, content, time, design, and burden on the respondents (Platek 1977). Failure to obtain a response from a sample respondent is due to several reasons: respondents could not be contacted, or respondents are contacted but are unable to complete the questionnaire because of language problems or time constraints, respondents refuse to complete the questionnaire, or respondents refused to answer some questions and items for confidentiality reasons (Neuman 2000, p.266). Having the intention of increasing the response rate, the combination of self-administered (drop-and-collect) and mail questionnaires were used to obtain information from respondents. The response rate has also been increased by various strategies including pre-notification of respondents by telephone and email to participate in this research study, supportive covering letter from the Business School at Southern Cross University, post-notification of respondents one to two weeks after delivery, offering the results to respondents, and assurance of anonymity and confidentiality of firms for sensitive issues

(Lambert & Harrington 1990). Dillman’s (2007) Total Design Method (TDM) was followed in order to increase the response rates. Table 4.9 summarises the TDM approach applications.

Table 4.9: TDM applications.

TDM Step Applications in Research Study

Maximise Reward Respondent were told that they are selected to take part of a major study across Dubai and their feedback is important. The cover letter explained the relevance of this research study to their business using real signatures in all letters. Questionnaire was made interesting and outcomes will be shared with respondents.

Minimise Cost Respondents were told of average questionnaire completion time. Multi-item scales were used to reduce the mental effort in answering questions and effort was made to eliminate chances of embarrassment and implications of subordination. Pre-addressed, stamped envelopes were provided with each questionnaire.

Establishing Trust The university logo was used in the cover letter and questionnaire. Outcomes will be shared with respondents and confidentiality was assured at all times.

Questionnaire Design/Printing A graphic design company was used to set the questionnaire in a booklet format and printed in colour. Questions Format Questions are grouped into sections divided by clearly marked headings and bold letters were used when relevant. Lower case was used for questions. One to seven interval scales was used for the majority of the answers and each question was followed by an answering scale. Clear directions for answering were provided after each question.

Front Page Contained title page, university logo, and name, address, and contact details of the researcher. Back Page There were remaining sections of the questionnaire and some space for respondents to add additional

comments. Statements of confidentiality and gratitude in italic were inserted at the very end. Pre-testing Questionnaire was tested on SMEs owners/managers, academic researchers, industry/ market experts,

and colleagues.

Pre-notice Letter/Email A pre-noticed letter/email with university logo noting that a questionnaire for an important survey will be arriving and their input was essential to the success of the overall study.

Cover Letter A letter with university logo emphasizing usefulness, importance of study to target group, confidentiality and gratitude, length of time to complete questionnaire, and university ethics approval. Questionnaire Pack It included questionnaire, cover letter, and stamped white A4 addressed envelopes using regular mail. Letter/Email Reminder Reminder letter/email was sent after two weeks.

Appreciation Thank you letter/email was sent to participating firms.

Questionnaire Outcomes Respondents were promised to receive the outcomes of the research study.

Source: Developed for this research with parts adopted from Dillman (2007) and Kenny (2009).

4.5.6.4 Ethical Consideration and Anonymity

The guideline provided by the Southern Cross University’s Human Research Ethics Committee (SCU-HREC) is followed in this research study. The University’s Expedited Ethics Committee approval document numbers were ECN-10-094 and ECN-12-088. Further, the confidentiality of

this research study was assured to the respondents to encourage their participation and honest responses. The introductory and covering letter to the respondents included anonymity promise according to the SCU-HREC’s regulation. The survey questionnaire did not include questions and items identifying the respondents firms, names, or addresses and pre-paid envelops in the mail survey did not include the respondents names and addresses.