Justification for the Triangulation Strategy

Based on the pragmatic philosophy adopted for the study, the mixed strategy has been used to assess the impact of both MC and ET on the performance of MSEs (Morgan, 2007; Creswell, 2014). Thus, the study adopts both the quantitative and qualitative strategies to underpin this study. In the extant literature explored in microfinance studies such as Coleman (1999); Chowdhury et al. (2005); Mayoux (2005); Coleman (2006); Hermes and Lensink (2007); Kim et al. (2007); Morduch (1998); Schreiner and Woller (2003), it has been observed that these studies were conducted using experimental, quasi-experimental research and survey designs which are all quantitative in nature using either cross-sectional or longitudinal data. On the other hand, other studies such as Goetz and Gupta (1996); Schreiner and Woller (2003), Zapalska et al. (2007); and Kanak and Liguni (2007) were observed to

118

adopt the qualitative strategy in conducting such studies. A review of the methodological approaches of the above studies reveals that the researchers have adopted either the quantitative or qualitative analysis even though different statistical methods or data analysis were used. However, most microfinance studies which employed mainly quantitative methods including econometric analysis have been criticised for not taking into consideration the context and dynamics involved in a microfinance programme (Besley & Coate, 1995; Armendáriz de Aghion, 1999). Also, when qualitative methods are also used, these studies tend to examine only segments which lack a comprehensive analysis of microfinance programmes (Armendariz de Aghion & Gollier, 2000). A mixed strategy is therefore preferred in undertaking a microfinance study of this nature where both quantitative and qualitative dimensions are effectively explored to address the research problem (Mahmood, 2013). It is prefered because microfinance research usually concerns poverty reduction. However, since the role of MSEs and poverty issues can be complex and multidimensional in nature, a mixed method is best suited to understand the intricacies in managing an MSE particularly in a less developed environment like Ghana. Therefore, this study using a cross-sectional data due to time constraints, adopt the mixed research strategy to examine the impact of both MC and ET on the performance of MSEs in Ghana.

The mixed strategy is chosen because there is the need to test the proposed model relating to the impact of MC and ET on the performance of MSEs as well as the need for an in-depth understanding of the impact of MC and ET on the performance of MSEs as delivered by FNGOs (see Figure 6.3). Fielding (2012) argues that the mixed strategy should be adopted for the purposes of illustration, convergent validation or for ‘richness' of a study. Considering the complexities of a microfinance

119

research of this nature, the mixed strategy is more appropriate to answer the research questions of this study. Moreover, it is also important to validate the quantitative data collected using the qualitative study (Fielding, 2012). Thus, a quantitative data were collected in the first instance and a qualitative data collection followed after three (3) weeks of quantitative data collection. A quantitative data using a self-administered questionnaire was collected in April 2017 involving 506 MSEs in Ghana and this was followed by a qualitative study with 10 MSE managers. The two processes are explained in detail below.

Firstly, because there is an available literature from which the conceptual framework and the hypotheses were developed, the quantitative study is appropriate for testing the model underpinning this study which is the first phase of the explanatory sequential triangulation strategy where the self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from the 506 MSEs in Ghana. The assumption being hypothesised for this study, which requires the use of quantitative strategy, is that "effective delivery of both MC and ET provided by FNGOs to MSEs has an impact on the performance of MSEs. With the quantitative study, the study was able to establish the relationship between MC and ET and the performance of MSEs in the above-mentioned areas. Thus, the proposed model was tested using the quantitative strategy. The use of the quantitative strategy is therefore justified to be appropriate for this study. In effect, the quantitative strategy helped in providing answers to the question “what is the relationship between MC, ET and MSE performance?”

Secondly, the qualitative data collection phase was the second phase of the explanatory sequential triangulation strategy where the study explored the views of the 10 selected MSE managers on the impact of MC and ET on the performance of their MSEs. The interviews were facilitated with a questionnaire as a data collection

120

instrument. The qualitative data helped the researcher to have a rich and an in-depth description of the impact MC and ET on MSEs. Apart from finding out the relationship between MC, ET and MSE performance, the study also wanted to find out the views of the managers of the MSEs on the impact of MC and ET on the performance of their MSEs. The quantitative strategy was unable to explain why and how MC and ET contribute to the performance of MSEs. This, therefore, demands the use of the qualitative approach to providing further explanation of the outcome of the quantitative study. In effect, the qualitative approach helped in addressing the “how” of the research question. Thus, how MC and ET impacts on the performance of MSEs in terms of employment generation, sales growth, and profitability growth. In summary, the research design of this study is pragmatism which uses both inductive and deductive approaches through a survey and interviews. Questionnaires were used to collect both the quantitative and qualitative data which were analysed with both quantitative and qualitative data analysis techniques respectively.