Design Considerations & Process Map

The logical question for designing the field work for this study was to identify and substantiate the most suitable (or combination) techniques to enable the author obtain primary data that best address the research questions set.

Respondent selection (sampling), negotiating access, collection and management of empirical data, ethical issues, limitations and contingency plans were some practical considerations addressed as part of the research design. These processes are discussed separately in the next sub-sections. Figure 3 below is a process map detailing the specific aspects for the empirical work and the respective components discussed separately.

(Source:Authors‘ - 2007)

Figure 5 above, is a map route of the identified processes or aspects for the empirical study. The framework was guided by the various stages adopted, showing how the various aspects related. 3.4.1 Participant Selection and Recruitment Process

The selection considerations made for this study were based on a number of factors including cost, time and relevance to the research objectives and anticipated outcomes for the research questions set. The principal methodology preferred for this study applied a qualitative dimension (even though, some quantitative approaches were employed, simply to have a basis to help focus the research questions – secondary data analysis of the LABS 2006/2007).

The sampling approach mode was based on a ‗quota‘ system, a non-probability sampling technique that was based on the judgement of the researcher. The decision was to create a strata of 4 key categories (qualification, generational, gender and type of business) as these were the aspects of interest to this study. Once the ‗quotas‘ have been set, the researcher then actively sought to establish contacts via professional contacts, snowballing, referrals and other informal method of finding participants that ‗fit‘ the set quotas. A total of about 36 contacts were made of which 30 participants were selected based on the quotas

Figure 5: Research process: path model

econdary S Interviews (4a) Sampling Approac h h (1) Primary Interview Process (2) Data Collection (Field work) (3)

Data Analysis & Interpretation (4) Challenge Assumptions (5) Draw research Conclusions& Recommendations (6)

set. In some cases, preliminary (informal) discussions were held to filter appropriateness for the quota framework.

The BACE owner managers selected needed to fit the parameters set by the research aims and objectives with a view to answering the research questions. It was therefore necessary to apply a purposive sampling technique to select the respondents for the in-depth interviews, which focused on a small number of BACEs - 30 cases; whilst this is not a representative population of BACEs in London, 30 cases purposely selected across the various lines of enquiry for this research provides some useful indication based on quota selections –type and levels of qualification attained, age, generation and ethnicity. Majority of the cases were London based entrepreneurs (with the exemption of 1 case who moved to the midlands during the course of the field work). There was a larger representation from the ‗ethnic enclaves‘ spread across some of the inner London Boroughs characterised by marginalised ethnic communities: Lambeth, Southwark, Lewisham, Newham and Brent. The logic behind these targeted geographical locations was to have participants that had a connection with the research questions under investigation.

Part of the research questions was to explore the impact and or relevance of BACE‘s human capital in terms of relevant qualifications; experience and usage of support services which influence the chances of successfully accessing external finance. In order to find answers to this specific question, the selection for the BACE owner managers were based on a set quota. However, it is worth noting that unlike a stratified sample, the sampling of the purposely selected individuals is not carried out randomly, since the final selection of the BACE owner managers was targeted by the interviewer. The quota considered three key grouping; one group comprised of respondents with relevant postgraduate (up to masters and above) level in a recognised management and/or finance degree and has run a business for over three years or more.

The second group comprised of BACE owner managers with lesser degrees (degrees from a non-finance/business management field, at first degree level or less). The logic for this quota grouping of respondents is a systematic choice of sampling technique which is dependent on the feasibility and sensibility of

collecting data to answer the specific question(s) and to address the objectives of the research. In essence, this technique provides the opportunity to carefully reach difficult-to-identify groups in a wider population. The resource of the purposive sampling list was gathered from existing contacts; snowballing network; and via other web-based directories.

One of the main challenges for filling the quota has to do with the values of the researcher, having being embedded in the research, therefore, a degree of bias in selection of participants may be prone to questioning. Also, because the choice of respondent is left to the interviewer, the proponents of probability sampling argue that a quota sample cannot be representative. Secondly, in quota sampling, the samples have not been chosen randomly, which makes it impossible to determine the possible sampling error. In the case that BACEs are somewhat difficult to access means that selected participants may be biased to an extent. But the purposive nature of the identified 30 participants selected does provide a ‗fit‘ into the criteria/characteristics being investigated was deemed appropriate within a qualitative methodology. It is undoubtedly cheaper and quicker than interview surveys on a comparably small probability sample, as it is in the case of this study.

3.4.2 Data Gathering & Reliability

This sub-section looks at the justification of the three staged technique (as itemised in section 3.2 earlier) for gathering qualitative data which is an original approach to help drill down from the tripartite investigative perspectives (the demand, supply and intermediary participants).This stage allowed the researcher generate ‗qualitative data‘ and then triangulate findings in a way that help explain and discuss research conclusions. The approach adopted a non- standardised one–to-one interview with the BACE owner manager, where a list of semi-structured and detailed questions was asked. The interview with each respondent varied; based on the themes and responses they gave, leading to prompts that helped obtain detailed and useful information from their experiences and beliefs.

The nature of the questions, prompts and the ensuing discussions required that the interview data needed to be recorded (with the respondents permission) by audio-recording (in some cases where the respondent agreed to this) the conversations and/or notes were also recorded. There were a number of benefits to the use of this non-standardised, semi-structured interview style: firstly, it suited the purpose of this research which was seen as exploratory and secondly; the information collected were useful for explanatory purposes – finding explanations for generalisations and assumptions.

Essentially, where it was necessary to understand the reasons for the decisions that the participants have to take, or to understand the reasons for their attitudes and opinions, the best method for achieving this was by conducting qualitative interviews. This technique also affords the researcher (interviewer) an opportunity to hear oneself ‗thinking aloud‘ about issues that may not have been previously considered. The rich and detailed set of data collected were then analysed using content analysis technique.

Another key benefit of this interview technique is the significance of establishing personal contact rather than the use of a questionnaire. The interview provided the respondents the opportunity to reflect and express themselves on events, experiences and beliefs rather than needing to write this down. Healey (1991: 206) also makes the point that ‗the interviewer has more control over who answers the questions‘ in comparison with a questionnaire, which may be passed from one person to another.

3.4.3 Data Quality Issues

Some considerations were given to the reliability of data obtained and certain ‗interviewer behaviours‘ were effectively managed to reduce and or control forms of bias: listening and being very attentive to what the BACE owner manager was saying or even not saying (by observing body language). The lack of standardisation in this type of interviews may have led to concerns about

reliability (Easterbysmith et al., 2002; Healey and Rawlinson, 1994). It is possible that the researcher/interviewer may have inadvertently presented own beliefs

through the questions asked; the manner or sequence in which they were asked. On the other hand, there is also a small likelihood of the interviewee or response bias to have occurred as a result. This type may have been caused by perceptions about the interviewer, as referred to previously, or in relation to perceived interviewer bias. These problems of bias are inherent of this method and are largely that of subjectivity and communication dynamics, nonetheless, efforts were made to control occurrence of these limitations on the data quality. These possible limitations were best managed by the approach and style of the interviewer, given the interviewee ample freedom to express themselves freely (Ghauri and Gronhaug, 2005; Healey and Rawlinson, 1994; Robson, 2002) without intrusion and undue pressure by the researcher.

The control and/or management of the limitations and reliability of the adopted methods ensured that, the findings derived from using the non-standardised research technique, were not necessarily intended for replication. Since the findings reflect reality at the time the research was conducted, in a situation which may be subject to change (Marshall and Rossman, 1999). The possibility for other researchers to come up with similar findings has a significant likelihood, if the research is conducted under the same conditions. But of course, social behaviour and perceptions constantly change with the changing socio- political environment. For the purpose of this study, the researcher made and retains notes relating to the design, the reasons underpinning the choice of strategies adopted, methods chosen and data collected on the field (empirical work/interview transcripts/notes etc.).