Data instruments, techniques and analysis method

Blumberg, et al. (2014) elucidate that semi-structured interviews usually start with a specific question, but allows the interviewee to follow his or her own thoughts later on. Bertram and Christiansen (2014) note the advantages of interviewing as being that the researcher is present during the interview with the respondent, the researcher can ask more questions, it is easier for the respondent to talk to the researcher than to write long responses in a questionnaire, the researcher can collect detailed descriptive data and it is a good tool for gaining in-depth data from a small number of people. This research study used semi-structured interviews. The structured questions or topics were developed by the researcher to guide the interview and they were based on Chapter 2’s reviewed literature. Other questions were anticipated during the interview to probe for more answers. The participants were asked the same questions or guided through the same topics. However, the

106

interviewer adapted the formulation, including the terminology, to fit the background of the enterprise and educational level of the owner-managers or entrepreneurs (Welman, et al., 2005).

The researcher wanted to understand the informants’ perspectives on the application of risk management processes and to confirm the insights and theory of risk management from the informants’ perspectives. The semi-structured interview guide consisted of the following sections aligned with the literature reviewed in Chapter 2:

• Section A: Business context: This section covered the perceptions on critical challenging factors or obstacles faced by the small and micro retailers. The aim of the section was to understand whether the owner-managers were able to identify and discern between internal and external factors, to confirm the challenges with those in literature sources and those observed by the researcher, and identify possible risks based on the perceptions. It assisted with credibility and dependability.

• Section B: Business information: This section covered the perceptions of the number of people employed, period of existence, experiences and skills acquired. The aim of this section was to obtain perceptions in order to categorise the cases, confirm their training on risk management and the availability and shortage of skills for their enterprises.

• Section C: Business objectives: This section covered the intentions, objectives, business plans, market research, innovation, networking and location. The aim of this section was to obtain perceptions on the objectives formulated by the business and to confirm whether the participants used tools, such as market research, business plans, innovation, location strategy and networking. The tools are interrelated, thus, when they are put in a sequential form, they can validate or invalidate the existence or the adequacy of the other related tools.

• Section D: General knowledge on risk and risk management: This section related to the awareness of risk and risk management. It related to the definition

107

of risk, types of risk and risk management, the perceptions of risk and governance for small businesses, and views on their importance.

• Section E: Risk management process (identification, assessment and treatment): This section covered the perceptions related to risk identification, assessment and treatment. The aim of this section was to collect data that could provide feedback on the effectiveness of the application of risk management. 3.3.4.2 Administration of interview procedures

Blumberg, et al (2014) emphasise that interviews are the most widely used source for collecting information for evidence. Two interviews took place at the owner- managers’ site of business, while one interview took place at a place that was convenient for the participant. The participants were reminded of the interview days before and a day before the interview by email. The participants were telephonically informed in advance of the scheduled interview in addition to the email that was sent in this regard.

The interview schedule/guide was piloted to at least five employees in the environment of risk and compliance audit to ensure that the questions asked were clear and understandable. It provided the researcher with the necessary feedback to achieve the objectives of the study. The piloted interview schedules were received back with coaching notes on some of the questions and layout. Once received, the interview schedule/guide was refined to make sure that the questions were clear for conducting the interview. This was done to reduce the risk of errors, irrelevant questions and to address ambiguity.

On the day of the interview, the participants signed the Attendance Register. This also confirmed the existence of the participants, therefore, the source of the data. English was used for all the discussions, however, the researcher could not stop any remarks made by the participants using their language of choice, especially when they were unable to answer the question or when they wanted to indicate the

108

seriousness of the challenge or issue faced. However, such remarks were disclosed in the evidence collected. In some instances, questions could not be answered logically and with clarity, hence, some of the cases struggled with providing answers, especially on risk and risk management. The researcher had to explain some of the questions as a means of providing clarity and to probe the answers that were provided. This prolonged the engagements, but addressed credibility at the same time. The participants also asked questions in order to get clarity on the questions being asked by the researcher. Primary data was kept separate from the data collected during the observations. A folder or a database was created on the computer for evidentiary purposes.

Field notes were taken on the same day of the interview and all the field notes were numbered to ensure a complete number of pages. After the interview, the field notes were converted into write-ups. Field notes were documented for each interview. When the audiotape was used, the interview was transcribed into text before it could be subjected to similar processes of field notes. After all the audios were converted into write-ups and transcripts, the content of the three documents were then put in one MS Word document, which allowed the researcher to compare the similarities and differences in the answers to specific questions. This was documented and saved for audit trail purposes.

3.3.5 Data analysis techniques and methods