Data Collection Technique 85

- 86 -

3.10.1.1. Interviews

According to Amaratunga et al. (2002), interviews are deemed to be the best method for data collection in case study. The interviews became the most important sources. Furthermore, the researcher can clarify any unclear answers with experts during the interview (Kumar, 2011). Saunders (2016) noted three ways to conduct interviews, namely, structured; semi-structured or unstructured. For structured interview, the interviewees' responses are limited; hence less richness of the data. For the unstructured interview, the interviewees express freely without restriction; but analysing the data might is more difficult due to the absence of consistencies (Myers, 2013). In the case semi structured interview, valuable information of real experiences, interviewee’s interpretations, and recommendations are expressed freely and in detail. The following

table lists varies interview types (structured, semi-structed and unstructured) that can

be used within the research study. The semi-structured interview was used.

Table 3-8: The characteristics of interview types (Opoku, 2016)

Structured Interview Semi-structured interview Unstructured interview Mainly for quantitative data Mainly for qualitative data Mainly for qualitative data Captures data speedily Captures data slowly and is

time-consuming

Captures data slowly and is time-consuming

Uses random sampling Uses purposive sampling Uses purpose sampling Uses strict interview format Uses flexible interview

format or schedule

Uses flexible interview format or schedule Data usually easy to analyse Data may sometimes be

difficult to analyse

Data may sometimes be difficult to analyse Tends to positivist view of

knowledge

Mixture of positivist and interpretivist view of knowledge

Mixture of positivist and interpretivist view of knowledge

The researcher prepared semi structured interview questions for the interviewees. The questions was sent to the PhD Supervisor team for their feedback. After receiving the PhD supervisor's feedback. The revised questions were sent to main contact in San

- 87 -

Francisco as part of approval process for interviews to take place. Once questions were revised, a list of potential interviewees was sent back to the researcher. No Pilot study group was used in this study.

3.10.1.2. Sampling of Participants and Interviewees

Sampling is required for research since there is limitation to research the entire population (Saunders, 2016). When deciding sampling technique, the researcher must consider time limitations, financial, and accessibility to the resources. Two strategies can be used in sampling: random sampling / probability sampling and non-random sampling / non-probability sampling. In random sampling, the chance of each element being selected from the population is usually equal, while, non-random sampling doesn’t give an equal chance to each element being selected. The sampling in the qualitative research is not significant, whereas a sample is used to represent the study population in a quantitative research (Kumar, 2011).

In qualitative research sample size is not an important as in a statistical research (Kumar, 2011). The researcher should attain an adequate size for data collection. Saunders (2016) recommended non-random minimum sample size which is illustrated in Table 3-9.

Table 3-9: Minimum Size for Sample

Minimum Size for Non-Probability Sample (Saunders, 2016) Nature of Study

Minimum Sample Size

Semi-structure/in-depth Interviews 5-25

Ethnographic 35-36

Grounded Theory 20-35

Considering a homogenous population 4-12

Considering a heterogeneous population 12-30

Nineteenth invitations where sent out by Deputy Program Manager, Neighborhood Empowerment Network, San Francisco in researcher's behalf on November 9, 2016.

- 88 -

Fourteen individuals (Project Managers and Community Leaders) responded to be interviewed over SKYPE, Google Hangout and Phone.

Table 3-10: List of San Francisco Interviewees

San Francisco Interviewee Position Group ID

Community Consultant Community Leader SF_C_8

Project Manager with experience from Federal Government, Peace Corps, SF Chamber of Commerce, Public Affairs Consulting Company, Accenture Consulting

Project Manager SF_P_11

Manager for Shopping Center Community Leader SF_C_13

Non-Profit Consultant Project Manager SF_P_1

Community Leader Community Leader SF_C_2

Community Worker Community Leader SF_C_3

Community Leader Community Leader SF_C_4

Community Leader Community Leader SF_C_5

Chief Operating Officer, Senior Center Community Leader SF_C_12

Community Leader Community Leader SF_C_6

Environmental Program Manager, San Francisco Project Manager SF_P_7

Project Manager Project Manager SF_P_9

Manager, Community NGO Community Leader SF_C_10

In the case of Christ Church, 30 invitations were sent via contacts, cold calls, and referrals in Wellington and Christ Church, New Zealand. Only 11 individuals were interviewed over SKPE, Google Hangout and Phone in February and March 2017, and October and November 2017. Those who said no were from Engineering and Architectural companies indicated their work centered on buildings and infrastructure not the community. The four individuals interviewed worked on Central Library reconstruction, Town Hall reconstruction, Community revitalization, and multiple community reconstruction. These individuals offered a wealth of information. One individual provided three hours of interviews over a three consecutive weeks. This individual provided a great deal of information of community engagement within Christchurch and active involvement of government in the process. The researcher is extremely grateful of the information and insights presented through the interviews.

- 89 -

Table 3-11: List of Christchurch Interviewees

Christchurch Interviewee Position Group ID

Project Manager – Town Hall Project Manager NZ_P_2 Project Manager – Central Library Project Manager NZ_P_1 Project Manager – Youth Development Project Manager NZ_P_3 Community Development Manager Community Leader NZ_C_4 Program Manager – Community Centres Project Manager NZ_P_7 IAP2 Practioner – Community Centres Project Manager NZ_P_5 Stakeholder Engagement Advisor – Earthquake Monument Community Leader NZ_C_6 Disaster Insurance Consultant – Ministry of Business,

Innovations

Community Leader NZ_C_8 General Manager – Regenerate Christchurch Project Manager NZ_P_9 Former Minister of Earthquake Recovery Community Leader NZ_C_10 Project Manager of Live in Space (Community Initiative) Project Manager NZ_P_11

Project Management and Community Leaders were interview based upon a set of interview questions addressing the PhD objectives.

3.10.1.3. Data Collection Techniques and Research Objectives

This section presents the various data collection techniques (section 3.9.1.1) to meet the research objectives. Table shows the comparison between data collection techniques and objectives used in the study.

Table 3-12: Data Collection Techniques versus Research Objectives

Data Collection Techniques

Research Objective Literature

Review Case Study – Interview Validation Community Response √ √ √ Community Strategies √ √ √ Community Empowerment √ √ √

Project Manager Empowerment √ √ √

Factors for Empowerment √ √ √

Project Manager Framework √ √ √