Chapter 3: Research Methodology and Design
3.3 Research Design
3.3.2 Exploratory Case Study Data Collection
Initial interviews were conducted with established connections, with whom the author had previously conducted research (Matthews 2008; Matthews 2010) or had professional experience with. The nature of the connections provided a foundation on which to secure interviews when the research was in an undeveloped form. Initial data collections served, to a degree, as a pilot, initially exploring research questions and context, while also allowing the relevance of the research to be critically discussed with practitioners (Yin 2009). The previous involvement with these companies provided a rich source of data related to the context under investigation (Reimer 1977), which when combined with the rapport and trust established with the interviewees reduced the risk of interview discussions being misinterpreted (Miller and Glassner 2004).
The primary topics of discussion within the initial interviews were operational practices, process improvement, resolving non-conformances identified by customers and product development. Drawing from Chapter 2, process improvement can be considered the process of identifying an opportunity for improvement, developing a solution, implementing the solution and then maintaining the change. Discussing how the firms addressed non-conformances represents a means of researching process improvement, and if the organisation was able to learn from non-conforming parts and prevent recurrence, it also represents an example of organisational learning (Crossan et al. 1999; Bontis et al. 2002).
Linderman et al. (2003) considered that improvement projects could relate to both processes and products. This is consistent with Juran (1951), who stated that improvements to products could result from improvements to processes and Bayus (1995) who considered process improvement was interlinked with product improvements.
75
Consequently, discussions related to improving products represented an alternative perspective from which to view process improvement. Finally, the role of training, quality management accreditation and general firm performance were also included within discussions on process improvement. Firm performance was defined in general terms in relation to increases in the profitability of work, increases in added value and customer satisfaction, consistent with the benefits SMEs realise from process improvement presented in section 2.3. Following initial interviews, preliminary analysis and reviewing additional literature, an interview protocol was developed that was informed by the protocol used by Anand et al. (2009) (Appendix 3.1). While including defined questions, the protocol was used to provide structure to interview discussions, ensuring key topics were covered (McCutcheon and Meredith 1993), so were often not asked directly. The interview protocol provided greater structure to subsequent data collection, while leaving sufficient flexibility to allow the emergence of additional topics from rich discussions with practitioners.
Initial data collection consisted of three informal interviews with two established contacts and a consultant employed by one of the established contacts. In addition to providing preliminary data on process improvement and organisational learning, the initial data collection also informed the firm selection criteria. Both firms were SMEs (<100 employees), with ISO accredited QMS (although in one, it had lapsed). As stated in section 2.2.5, an externally accredited QMS provides a stronger foundation on which to base discussions due to the presence and continual review of operational procedures. Operational procedures also related discussions indirectly to learning, that was promoted through the repeated use of procedures (Benner and Veloso 2008). The presence of the accredited QMS also inferred there was a requirement to plan, initiate and demonstrate improvements to external parties on receipt of non-conformances (either customers or third-party auditors). The presence of an ISO accredited QMS was considered to provide an important selection criterion for researching both process improvement and organisational learning.
While research previously conducted by the author provided a rich foundation on which to base data collected from the Building Contractor, the complex operating
76
environment and involvement of multiple parties was considered too complex to effectively research. Injection Moulding 1 provided a more appropriate firm type, engaging with tangible operational processes within a single unit. Due to the richness of data collected from the Building Contractor, it remained within the research to extend the range of firms involved in the exploratory phase.
The size of SMEs was considered to assist PhD research, due to its limited time frame and resources. A small group or even a single, appropriately placed individual can be considered representative of the firm as a whole (Lumpkin and Dess 1996) or at least have a relatively complete view of operational activities (Laforet 2011).
Table 3.3: Nottingham Population Profile
Firm Sector Rubbers and Plastics Engineering Services Nottingham 19 358 Firm Size Not given 1-20 21-100 101-250 >250 82 261 71 16 8
Additional firms were identified using a business directory (Applegate8) from the
sectors of ‘plastics & rubber’ and ‘engineering services’ sections in the Nottingham area (Table 3.3). This selection criterion was consistent with those of survey-based research related to process improvement. For example, fabricated metal, rubber, and measuring, analysing and controlling instruments were well represented within related research (see Kaynak 2003; Tu et al. 2006; Swink and Nair 2007; Zu et al. 2008). Defining the search criteria as engineering-oriented allowed the inclusion of firms operating as primary or secondary contractors. With such contractors not owning the materials they work on, by definition, they can be considered service providers (Roth and Menor 2003; Pawar et al. 2009), meaning they could be excluded if a strict manufacturing selection criterion was employed. Due to service-oriented firms often engaging with the same process
77
improvement methodologies as manufacturing firms (Antony et al. 2007), their inclusion was considered appropriate. This selection criterion also meant the Building Contractor could be included. The engineering-oriented criteria also ensured sufficient competences were present within each firm to undertake process improvements internally, without the need for external support.
Details of all firms with company websites included within the directory, with less than 250 employees were documented (~100). From this list, five firms were selected at random, and introductory letters outlining the proposed research were sent to managing directors (or equivalent) of each firm by email and post (Appendix 3.2). This was repeated four times, with follow-up emails and letters sent to firms that had already been contacted. This resulted in a single response from a firm that was unable to be involved in the research at that time. Although the economic climate may have affected the response rate, the level of response may also reflect the amount of requests firms receive, the low impact of relatively impersonal letters and the limited resources of SMEs to direct to non- revenue generating activities. This was illustrated by two Directors involved in the exploratory phase receiving, reading the letter and being interested in the content, but not responding, which provided some evidence for this tendency. However, this was likely to be one of many possible explanations for non-responses. Following this low level of response, an alternative strategy of contacting firms directly was pursued, including some of those already contacted.
Firms were selected from the initial database and contacted by telephone. Firms were chosen that described their business on their website in a manner that covered topics of process improvement and stating that they held an ISO accredited QMS. For the firms that had already been contacted, the initial letter provided a basis for the discussion, allowing the topics to be fleshed out and highlighting the potential value of the research. By maintaining a broad selection criteria, diverse perspectives on process improvement could be acquired, which is important for exploratory research (Siggelkow 2007). Out of 15 selected firms, contact was made with appropriate individuals (primarily the Managing Director) in eight firms; four of these firms were involved in the research. With all willing
78
companies being interviewed, although implicit bias of firms interested in improvement may have been present, diversity of the exploratory cases companies was maximised.
The exploratory interviews were directed by the research protocol (Appendix 3.1) to promote the repeatability of interviews. Consistent with McCutcheon and Meredith (1993) “Interviews may be structured to ensure coverage of key topics but the interview
format is generally open-ended, allowing the interviewer to explore areas that come to light during the course of discussion”, (p.241), rather than a tightly defined interview
script. The structure of the protocol allowed the impact of process improvement activities to be considered from a number of different perspectives and related to a range of benefits firms were able to realise from process improvement. This approach to interviewing also addressed an issue raised by Mihaly Csikzentmihalyi (1996) in relation to exploring an area of interest with experts:
“I felt, however, that it would be insulting, and therefore counterproductive, to
force these respondents to answer a mechanically structured set of questions. Because I hope to get genuine and reflective answers, I let the exchanges develop around themes I was interested in, instead of forcing them into a mould.” (p.16)
The discussion topics covered numerous operational levels, from individuals receiving information about non-conforming parts to organisational processes being changed. This provided rich details of process improvement activities necessary for addressing research question 1. By covering numerous organisational levels, involvement of external parties and the ability to improve over time, data was also collected that was able to address research question 2. As stated previously, it was considered important not to pose questions specifically about process improvement or organisational learning, as without being directed to draw from their experiences, response richness may have been limited (Radnor 2001, p.103).
As stated in section 3.2, the interview moved away from closed ended questions, instead aiming to elicit rich stories about concrete episodes of process improvements (Kvale and Brinkman 2009). This allowed interviewees to describe how they perceived activities in their own terms, important for interpretive research (Radnor 2001). In
79
comparison to this approach, Yeung et al. (2007) asked questions such as “Do you believe that an employee’s ability to learn is the key to improvement?” (p.2475). Asking such direct questions, while providing data specifically related to aspects of interest to the research, implies the importance of particular topics to interviewees, leading interviewees and potentially biasing responses. To address this issue, interviews had similarities with therapeutic interviews, where through a process of reflection, interviewees were able to develop a better understanding or indeed “verstehen” of their own processes (Kvale and Brinkman 2009, p.39-40). While data collection instruments were not related to eliciting particular data, the link or chain of evidence (Yin 2009, p.123) between interview topics, interview questions and research questions is presented in Table 3.4. This provides justification for related broad discussions on topics related to process improvement to addressing research questions related to process improvement and organisational learning.
80
Table 3.4: Chain of Evidence from Protocol to Research Questions Interview Protocol
Topic Contribution Case Study Analysis Framework Research Question Addressed
Nature of your job Rich contextual information Supported by website information
n/a allowed findings to be located within practice
Process improvement initiative in place
Confirms they have an ISO
system in place Supported by website information
n/a locates findings within previously collected data, process improvement and organisational learning
Training
Individual focused learning activities in place
Compare process improvement topics
and 3 models of OL RQ1 & RQ2
Analyse in relation to 3 OL Models RQ2
Process
Improvement Identifies practices
Describe process improvement
activities RQ1
Analyse in relation to 3 OL Models RQ2 Structured approach
to problem solving
Policies specifically related to process improvement
Process improvement topics and 3
models of OL RQ1 & RQ2 New Product
Development
Represents more exploratory types of learning
Process improvement topics and 3 OL
models RQ1 & RQ2
Analyse in relation to 3 OL models RQ2
Process Review
How is employee performance assessed?
How are employees engaged with the operating system?
Describe how this contributes to
process improvement RQ1 Analyse in relation to 3 OL models RQ2
Compare process improvement topics
and 3 models of OL RQ1 & RQ2 How is the ISO
system perceived?
Overall insight of how the operating systems are perceived
Compare process improvement topics
and 3 models of OL RQ1 & RQ2
Analyse in relation to 3 OL models RQ2
Performance
How do PI activities affect performance?
Compare process improvement topics
and 3 models of OL RQ1 & RQ2
Analyse in relation to 3 OL models RQ2
Due to the firms identified from the Applegate database being new contacts for the author, the development of trust and credibility with each firm had to be given attention, to assist in securing further involvement (Stuart et al. 2002). Following the initial interviews with new contacts, a brief company-specific report was prepared and returned to each firm, offering an outline of the topics discussed (for example report see Appendix 3.3). This allowed initial feedback before the transcription of interviews and in-depth analysis was carried out. The report had four purposes; firstly, the report ensured that any primary data collection and initial interpretations of the firm were captured, similar to a contact summary form (Miles and Huberman 1994) that was employed by Guinery (2006). Secondly, it allowed the researcher to articulate the topics of the discussion, and by returning them to the interviewee, could ensure the interpretation was accurate, improving internal validity (Kvale and Brinkman 2009; Yin 2009). Thirdly, the reports
81
allowed each of the firms to appreciate how they could benefit from further involvement in the research. Finally, the report provided quick feedback for participants that is often not possible with qualitative research (Leonard-Barton 1990). When combined with the practical experience (in engineering and quality management) of the author, these practices were considered critical to building trust with companies, which led to further engagement. This was demonstrated by one participant commenting on the attention the author gave to relationship management and each firm agreeing to be involved in further interviews both within and outside the management team.
Details of each of the six firms are presented in Table 3.5, including interviews conducted with the two established contacts.
Table 3.5: Exploratory Case Study Summaries
C o m p a n y Na m e Sta ff Indus tr y M a rk et Q M S N um be r o f In terv iew s In terv iew p a rti ci p a n ts T o ta l ti m e A d d it io n a l D a ta S o u rc es BC 49 Construction Residential/ Care homes/ Various IS O 9 0 0 1 4 Managing Director (MD), Quality Consultant, Project
Managers 9h
Website, Customer and supplier interviews, site tours, 10 site meetings, follow-up meeting IJ1 73 Injection Moulding Automotive/ Various IS O 9 0 0 1 lap sed 3 Production manager, project manager, assistant
operations manager 5h 30m
Website, Site Tour, 2.5 years professional involvement as a customer, follow-up meeting IJ2 35 Injection Moulding Double glazing/ Various IS O 9 0 0 1 4
MD, Project manager and production Manager 6h Website, follow-up meeting SI 25 Advanced Manufacturing Equipment Manufacturing Companies IS O 9 0 0 1 3
2 x Directors and Project
Engineer 7h 40m
Website and associated website
EM1 23 Sheet Metal Various IS
O 9 0 0 1 4 MD, General Manager, project Engineer 5h
Website, Site Tour, follow- up meeting
EM2 10
Compression
Plastics Oil/ Gas/ Various IS
O 9 0 0 1 2 MD 3h
Website, initial meeting, site tour, second informal meeting 1 year on
20 36h 10m
When numerous interviews were conducted within a firm, the research protocol (Appendix 3.1) was re-administered to promote consistency (McCutcheon and Meredith 1993; Yin 2009). However, company-specific changes were made to the protocol for follow-up meetings on the review of interview recordings and the summary report. This
82
process allowed both the exploration and confirmation of specific topics, while also demonstrating the interest of the researcher in the company. Interviews were on average over 2 hours in length, ranging from 1h 20m to over 3 hours. All formal interviews were recorded with the explicit consent of the interviewees.
As stated in section 3.2, interview questions were not tightly defined or closed ended due it being important for the interviewer to allow interviewees to described practices in their own terms. This process was supported by the length of interviews that allowed the important aspects of process improvement to emerge from discussions on the topics included in the interview protocol. Consistent with a funnel model of interviewing (Voss et al. 2002), more sensitive topics were introduced at the end of interviews, for example the general perceptions of the ISO 9001 initiative. Recordings were transcribed verbatim (resulting in over 750 pages of transcription) with the resulting interview data being combined with observational data collected during site visits to make up the case study database. The additional sources of data are considered important for validating interpretivist research by providing “interpretive renderings of sounder quality” (Radnor 2001, p.51). Such an approach to data collection could also be considered a form of opportunistic research (Reimer 1977), where more subtle insights could be gathered than those available through interviewing alone.
When interviews were conducted with organisational members outside the management team, the context of the interview needed to be carefully considered (Miller and Glassner 2004). Without developing trust and appreciating power dynamics that may be created by the researcher’s previous contact with management, the data collection process may be affected (Kvale and Brinkman 2009, p.33-34). To address this, questions were tailored to account for the specific role of interview subjects, to assist in focusing data collection on operational practices and developing trust with interviewees. Rather than discussions about impersonal processes, discussions were oriented around the practitioner’s responsibilities, such as “what’s your involvement…?” or “how did you get
into…?”. This process was considered important for the author not to undermine the
practical abilities of the research subjects, who may perceive academic research in a particular light (removed from practice, IJ1, P.142). The professional experience of the
83
author played an important role in addressing this issue, which was commented upon by interviewees, due to the author’s ability to relate to and contribute day-to-day operational stories to interviews (for example, one interviewee said “it’s good you’ve worked in
similar sort of surroundings” (MD, EM2)).
The aims of the exploratory case studies were to explore how each company undertook process improvement (RQ1) and determine the applicability of the identified models of organisational learning (RQ2). To ensure aims were achieved, it was considered appropriate to return to the exploratory case companies following analysis. This enabled the validation of findings by ensuring they were relevant to those operating within the exploratory case companies, thus confirming face and internal validity (Yin 2009). Findings were validated within follow-up workshops by presenting findings and discussing them with previously interviewed research participants. The follow-up interviews allowed the emergent themes to be discussed, critiqued and extended, based on the interviewees’ perceptions of the different topics. These were initiated via emails, letters, telephone calls or site visits, which resulted in meetings with five of the six firms, four of which were conducted as interviews, recorded and used to augment the discussion section of the exploratory phase. The fifth meeting was informal, and although a follow- up was verbally arranged, no formal interview was conducted.
Each firm was provided with a copy of their firm-specific case report (including those not involved in follow-up interviews) to allow them to benefit from the research. Firms were also provided with initial cross-case analysis (based on Chapter 5), to allow them to assess their practices against other, similar firms. With the pretence of the research originally being access to comparative information of firms within their domain, sharing cross-case findings were considered important for ‘rounding off’ the engagement. This has been stated as good research practice (Squire 2011).
Follow-up interviews were oriented around exploring how each firm had progressed since the exploratory interviews. They covered topics of recruitment, new business development and general business, but primarily focused on process improvement during the period following initial data collection. These interviews lasted from half an hour for the unrecorded interview to between 90 and 140 minutes, resulting
84
in a further 7 and a half hours of recorded interviews. Each of the formal interviews was