Issues of Validity and Reliability

The criteria of validity and reliability were initially developed to evaluate the quality and rigour of quantitative research and later adopted by qualitative researchers. There is, however, an ongoing debate between positivists and interpretivists around the relevance of these two concepts for assessing the quality of qualitative research (Bryman, 2016). While there are those who continue to use the same two concepts with little alterations to suit qualitative research designs (e.g. Yin, 2009), others employ different terms, such as credibility, transferability, authenticity and dependability (Lincoln and Guba, 1985). Nevertheless, Bryman (2016: 384) argues that concepts in both sides of the debate are parallel to each other (e.g. reliability parallels dependability, and external validity parallels transferability). Therefore, this thesis uses the most widely used concepts to judge the quality of an exploratory qualitative research, which are: reliability, construct validity and external

validity16 _{(Yin, 2009: 40). Each of these three elements is considered as a test to judge the}

quality of a piece of qualitative research. The table below summarises the tactics used by the researcher to pass these tests (criteria).

Table 5. 3: Reliability and Validity Tests

Tests/Criteria Tactics used

Reliability -Providing concise descriptions of the

procedures followed (i.e. access issues and data collection).

-Developing a case study database (for both firms).

-Using systematic analytical techniques. Construct

Validity

-Using data triangulation

-Applying clearly defined theoretical concepts External Validity -Applying the theoretical replication logic

-Providing thick description

Source: based on Yin (2009); Bryman (2016)

The criterion of reliability refers to ‘whether your data collection techniques and analytic procedures would produce consistent findings if they were repeated on another occasion or if they were replicated by a different researcher’ (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2012: 192). The previous two sections presented detailed descriptions of what types of data were collected, and how they were collected and analysed, which taken together allow for other researchers to repeat the same study in the future. Nevertheless, without in-depth access to case studies, there is a significant probability that the information revealed in this study cannot be replicated by other researchers. The most challenging aspect of the fieldwork for this research was gaining the participants’ trust. For example, when HR managers in both firms were first interviewed none mentioned any information on avoiding state policies. Instead, it was HR specialists and workers from different departments that allowed the researcher to access such information. Therefore, the researcher himself is a key aspect that determines to a large extent whether findings can be replicated by other researchers or not.

16 _{Yin (2009: 40) points out that the concept of internal validity is ‘for explanatory or causal studies only’.} Therefore, it was disregarded in this research.

Construct validity refers to the ability to develop a set of objective measures to collect data. For this test, the researcher used ‘data triangulation’ (Yin, 2009: 116) through collecting information from multiple sources of evidence (interviews, observation and documents) to corroborate facts and events in both case study firms. In addition, the researcher used clearly defined theoretical concepts (e.g. control, resistance and wasta) when reviewing previous literature. For example, forms of workers’ resistance, such as turnover and sabotage, were specifically identified based on previous labour process research.

The criterion of external validity refers to ‘the degree to which findings can be generalised across social settings’ (Bryman, 2016: 384). The general consensus is that qualitative case study research should not aim for generalisation, as quantitative research does; rather, it should aim at analytical generalisation (i.e. findings supporting a broader theory). Therefore, in order to overcome this validity test, the researcher used the ‘theoretical replication logic’ developed by Yin (2009), where the two case studies chosen were expected to produce similar results in most respects. Based on the comparison between the two case study firms, the researcher was able to generalise the theory of labour process to the Saudi context (see the discussion chapter). Another strategy deployed was ‘thick description’ (Geertz, 1973 as cited in Bryman, 2016: 384). The descriptive framework strategy was used with both firms to provide details on the key dimensions of work and employment, and the cultural and physical settings. This thick description of the two case studies provides other researchers with the data necessary for making decisions about whether the findings can be witnessed in other social settings or not.

5.6 Conclusion

It is acknowledged in the literature review that the patrimonial capitalism model overemphasises the macro-national level at the expense of the micro-workplace level, which necessitates a bottom-up view (i.e. labour process) in order to better understand the specificities of Saudi capitalism. The critical realism philosophy, adopted in this research, asserts that each phenomenon requires particular methods for investigation. Therefore, in order to achieve the aims of this research, the qualitative multiple-case study design was chosen. The two case study firms in this research were selected according to a set of criteria,

namely workforce size, sector and ownership structure. Rich and in-depth data were gathered by different methods, i.e. interviews, observation and documentary analysis from a range of key informants and levels. Managers in different hierarchical levels, HR specialists and shop-floor workers of different nationalities were interviewed to increase reliability and validity. The data collected were organised and analysed drawing on three strategies: the descriptive framework strategy, template analysis and cross-case synthesis. The findings are presented in the following two chapters.