Evaluations of the Methodology

The research was both theoretical and empirical in nature. The research used both conceptual and constructive approaches as well as features of action-oriented approach. The main goal of the study was to show that a model for developing a supply network with the help of benchmarking is possible to construct and that such a construction is feasible. In this context the connection between knowledge creation and benchmarking concept was explored.

The conceptual foundation in the second part of the study was based on concepts of supply chain, its management, knowledge management, and benchmarking. By means of this conceptual foundation a new theoretical construction of Group Benchmarking was created. Moreover, the knowledge creation concept was used to show how this new theory strengthens the existing theories of knowledge management.

In hermeneutic research approach the verification of results is based on the understanding of the result of the study and the way it has been achieved so that its validity is convincing (Olkkonen, 1994). To the standard truth claims based on the correspondence theory of truth, the constructive research approach adds the theory of truth advocated by pragmatism, fundamentally arguing, “what works is true” (Lukka, 2003). Lukka (2003) adds that the test of pragmatic truthfulness is going through provided that the developed new construction is attempted to be implemented, and should be regarded as rather demanding one. It is argued that

160 in order to increase the probability of being practically feasible, the constructive researcher should try to make the innovated construction relevant, simple and easy to use (Kasanen et al., 1991, 1993). According to pragmatism, the validity of construction should be searched from the practical functionality of the constructions (Kasanen et al., 1991). In this research two empirical case studies were performed in order to show the workability of the construction.

9.4.1 Validity of the Research

In quantitative research the question of validity concerns often merely the choices in the use of parameters and the question of the representativeness of the sample. In qualitative research the question of validity is theoretical and varied. It is related to the locating the target group, and to the researcher’s ability to create a functional setting for research. The question of validity is related to the truthfulness of the interpretation in the research. (Lukka, 2003) Kasanen et al. (1991) present two market tests for validation of the construction. The weak test sets a question about if there is a manager of a company willing to use the construction in his/her decision- making. The strong test asks whether financial results of business units have improved after using the construction. Are the financial results better in the comparable companies using the construction?

The validation of the construction according to the weak market test is evident. A company has decided to use the new construction twice in order to validate the model both as a unit case study as well as a longitudinal study. The validation according to the strong market test is difficult to make because the financial results of the development made through the construction are not measurable unambiguous. There might be many other variables causing the improvement in financial results as well as variables overturning the positive effects of the construction. However, the improvement in networking ambitions is shown in the longitudinal research.

9.4.2 Reliability of the Research

Reliability is usually considered as a concept belonging to quantitative research in which it means the capability of the research method to give non-random results. In qualitative research the term reliability refers to the reliability of processing and analyzing of the data. While writing the research report two criteria related to reliability of a qualitative research should be taken into consideration: the credibility of the analysis and the possibility for evaluation it. The possibility for evaluation of the analysis means that the reader has an opportunity to follow the researcher’s reasoning process and to evaluate it. Credibility refers to the fact that after reading the report the

161 reader is convinced that the presented interpretations were actually done as described. (Lukka, 2003)

Also a criterion of repetitiveness has been proposed for a qualitative research. Especially in case studies the requirement of reliability is often understood as a requirement for repetitiveness of analysis. (Lukka, 2003)

In this research the reliability can be evaluated from the research itself and the case studies separately. The two above mentioned criteria of research report; credibility of the analysis and the possibility to evaluate it, are considered as well. The result of this research is a construction which is based on theoretical studies of existing literature. The construction is built stage by stage during its development. The descriptions of the separate methods of the model together with the examples of interpreting the graphs (Figures 6.3 and 6.4) are to follow the construction of the model. The examples of interpreting the graphs and discussing about their results in case studies are for analyzing the credibility of the interpretations done in the research.

Some information about the repetitiveness of the construction has been obtained while testing it twice. Although the case studies have not been identical, there have been the same unit methods used and the same kind of interpretation of analysis. This proves that the unit methods are repetitive as well as the results of qualitative measures in model are possible to transfer as quantitative measures for further analysis repeatedly. The longitudinal study is an evaluation of the consequences of the usage of the construction. Although the usage of the construction may be affected by many other things in the company and its environment as well, they are, however, consistent with the actions caused by the first case study and noticed during the second study. Therefore, we can assume that the analyses are repetitive in the construction and in the cases.

As often is the case in researching human behavior, some random mistakes may occur in understanding questions and answers, writing down the answers or saving the information to computer. In this research the understanding of the questions in Form was secured by the researcher who explained them during the examination and offered the people filling the Form an opportunity to ask when necessary.