Data collection techniques

There exist two main sources of data that is primary data and secondary data. Primary data is the fresh data that is collected for the purpose of the study undertaken while secondary is that which already exists in books, reports, organisational reports and so forth (Collins and Hussey, 2003).

There are various data collection techniques for collecting primary data such as interviews, journals, observations and questionnaires (Zohrabi, 2013; Saunders et al., 2015). Primary data collected in this study was qualitative in nature because of the purpose of the study was to assess the risk management practices in EAM. Secondary data relevant for this study was collected from EAM documents, journals, reports and text books.

The study employed the following data collection techniques. 3.5 .1. Document review

Several EAM documents, reports, journals, books were reviewed as source of secondary data. This helped to compare the collected/primary data with the secondary data in addition to aiding triangulation of the research findings (Kothari, 2008; Crowther and Lancaster, 2012; Saunders et al., 2015).

3.5.2 Face to face interviews

Interviews are extensively used for collecting qualitative data. This is mainly because they help the researcher to get information directly from the

respondents in addition aiding the researcher to understand what and how people perceive the world around them (Zohrabi, 2013). As Saunders et al. (2015) suggest, interviews could be either structured, semi structured or unstructured or in-depth interviews. Contrary to this, Zohrabi,(2013) categorise interviews as informal conversation, interview guide approach, structured open- ended or closed response interviews.

Owning to the interpretivist philosophy adopted and the purpose of the study in addition to the exploratory nature of the study, a semi-structured and an in- depth interview (interview guide approach) was found to be suitable. This approach provided an opportunity to the researcher to enter the world of the participants and gather in-depth information on risk management in EAM relevant to the research questions and objectives (Pitney, 2009; Saunders et al., 2015). The approach further gave the researcher a chance to compare and contrast the collected data. Further, the process was organized, conversational, flexible and enabled great amount of data to be collected (Zohrabi, 2013).

The in-depth and semi-structured interviews enabled the interviewees to discuss freely their feelings and attitudes and provided an opportunity to gather more information not previously considered (Lai and Lau, 2012). Other benefits of the in-depth and semi-structured interviews included the ease to arrange data, the flexibility in ordering and type of questions (open/probing/specific questions) to ask the interviewees (Fisher, 2011; Saunders et al., 2015).

An interview guide was developed to aid the data collection process. The guide had four sections as shown on Appendix II; each containing questions on risk management aspects that were considered important in answering the research questions. Section A covered the respondent’s profile while B, C, and D tackled potential risks, the current risk management practices, and critical success factors for an effective risk management in EAM respectively. The respondent profile captured respondent’s current position, number of years they had worked in EAM and their experience in risk management. The questions on the

interview guide facilitated an exploration into the key themes on risk management practices that were deemed necessary to answer the research questions and objectives (Broom, 2005; Bryman, 2008). Both open and closed ended questions were used though the closed ended questions were followed up with probes where necessary (Pitney, 2009).

The interview guide was pilot-tested in another organisation before the actual data collection. This helped the researcher to refine the questions in addition to familiarizing with the tool and gaining confidence (Bryman, 2009)

The one on one, face to face interviews were conducted in a convenient and comfortable place where respondents had freedom to express themselves without distraction. Each interview started with a brief introduction about the research and its objectives. The respondents were assured of anonymity and confidentiality (Saunders et al., 2015). Each interview took about thirty to forty five minutes. A total of seven-teen respondents were interviewed face to face. The researcher made notes as the interview was progressing. However, in a few cases, audio recording was done concurrently with note taking in order to provide a backup after permission to record was granted. Follow-up interviews with some respondents was conducted to ensure what the researcher captured was similar to what the respondents had said in order to check on validity (Saunders et al., 2015). However, after all the scheduled interviews were complete all the responses were put together for each question in which the respondents’ identifies were concealed to ensure confidentiality and anonymity of the respondents.

c.) Self- administrated Questionnaires

Questionnaires can be either structured, unstructured or a mixture of both. Despite the fact that structured questionnaires are more effectual because of their easiness of analysis unlike the unstructured questionnaire, the researcher chose to use unstructured self-administrated questionnaires. This was due to the qualitative nature of the study in addition to the fact that the responses to

the questions in an unstructured questionnaire could truthfully reflect what the respondent wanted to say (Zohrabi, 2013).

The researcher used questionnaires to gather data from seven respondents who were neither available for a face to face or telephone interviews. The questionnaires were emailed to respondents with the help of the EAM management. The questionnaires were sent with an information sheet as shown on Appendix III explaining the purpose of the study. The questions on the questionnaire as shown appendix IV were carefully constructed with some explanations provided on some questions in order to obtain adequate responses. The respondents took about two weeks before responding and as Saunders et al. (2015) argue, this allowed the interviewee ample time to reflect on the questions before responding. The respondents sent the filled questionnaires (an example shown on Appendix V) directly to the researcher. The respondents gave the researcher freedom to call back for any clarification to validate responses.

d. Telephone interview

Although non-standardized interviews are best on face to face basis, one respondent was interviewed on telephone (Saunders et al., 2015). This was due to time and cost constraint on the side of the researcher owing to distance in addition to the respondent’s unavailability. The interview took twenty two minutes and the researcher took notes as the interview progressed.

Philosophy

Approach

Strategy

Time Horizon

Data collection Techniques

Figure 3.2 Summary of the research process (adapted from the Research process onion (Saunders et al., 2015)