Limitations

In acknowledging the limitations of qualitative approaches to research, it is usual for the researcher to situate themselves in the study. By so doing the researcher acknowledges the effect that their life experience and world-view may have on the design choices and interpretation of data. The formal techniques learned through meticulous post-graduate historical research, experience in a specialized SME research centre, as well as postgraduate-level familiarity with business-related issues in other contexts have been applied to this research to the relevant SME policy-related archives, other documentary material as well as the interviews of key participants. This was important in terms of the research attempted to construct a meaningful historical narrative that contextualises the changes and developments in New Zealand SME policy.

As is evident from the previous justification of interview choices, any perceived shortcomings associated with interviews as a data collection method are significantly outweighed by the benefits. The research has extensively employed the individual interpretations and personal insights of informants to better inform the analysis itself. Possible informant memory lapses, confusion, post-hoc elaborations or bias must, however, be acknowledged. Nevertheless, this study addresses these risks and enhances its credibility through active and rigorous

A potential limitation had been the possibility that not all interviews could be conducted face-to-face, and considerable efforts were made to maximize the number of face-to-face interactions. In the event, only one interview required the use of telephone. Although this presented particular challenges, including reducing the speed at which a good rapport could be established with the interviewee and the inability to take into account non-verbal cues, the interview nevertheless proceeded in an easy, conversational manner with a high level of substantive engagement.

As with any historical analysis, this study confronted the same challenges and shortcomings, inviting alternative interpretations through which to record the period, the characters and the events that helped shape SME policy. Inevitably the passage of time also poses particular difficulties for the researcher in identifying informants associated with the earlier period of this study. Those who were found might have their recollections dimmed or distorted by hindsight and their original positions might be altered or re-calibrated by the passage of time and the benefits of reflection. This is not seen necessarily a shortcoming, however, as reflection on SME policy and the context in which it was developed is advantageous for the objectives for this research project.

A final limitation relates to the scope adopted for the study which did not allow for the analysis to extend to evaluating policy outcomes, nor for the SME grouping to be broken down into the various components, such as high-growth, micro-enterprises, family SMEs, Māori, migrant and women SMEs.

4.8 Concluding Comment

The adoption of a non-positivist, qualitative approach should not be interpreted as ‘anti-positivism’. As the literature review made clear, studies grounded in paradigms complementary to the traditional essentialist accounts, have already served to expand the knowledge in the field of SMEs. The use of qualitative research tools in this study was deemed appropriate for initial content analysis of text-rich data. Historical methods were also considered useful in making sense of the combined archival material, recollections of key players from the past, and the historical context prevailing when SME policy was developed. The following chapter examines the context in which SME policy was developed in New Zealand, the main influences on its development and the principal outputs that resulted.

Preface to Discussion and Analysis, (Chapters 5-7)

Participant G is a key informant whose own SME research experience spanned 25 years of the 30 years covered by the current study. His comment on government policy draws attention to the changing outlook of, and some of the external influences brought to bear on, New Zealand SME policy development. In so doing, his observation appears to confirm the relevance of the decision to give due consideration to the country-specific research streams in the literature review. Additionally, the quotation serves to illustrate the potential value of primary data obtained directly from individuals who were themselves influential in the way SME policy developed. In one brief observation, Participant G sums up an array of contextual factors and provides a starting point for discussion and analysis. The research design outlined in the previous chapter served to highlight both the reason for approaching this research question qualitatively, and the methods employed. The purpose of the following three results and discussion chapters is to present participant insights into the context of the development of SME policy, their perceptions and recollections of the main influences upon that development during the period 1978 to 2008, and to capture their knowledge about the policy outputs that resulted. Data from the fourteen interviews are brought together with

archival research and the analysis is framed by the three relatively distinct phases or periods identified in Chapter 1.

Each phase forms the basis of a corresponding chapter. Chapter 5 begins in 1978, when the Small Business Agency – the most visible SME policy output during this initial phase – was established. The period concludes in 1983, the last year of protectionist economic policies, and the year the Closer Economic Relations (CER) Treaty was signed with Australia. Chapter 6 spans the period 1984 to1998 when the country underwent radical economic change. The intensity of these changes had consequences for all areas of policy development, including SMEs. In turn, Chapter 7 covers the period 1999 to 2008, where the economic direction of New Zealand established in the previous phase was consolidated under the leadership of the Fourth Labour Government. Each chapter highlights participants’ insights into the economic context of the period; the influences on SME policymakers at the time; the development of SME policy; and identifies the key principal policy outputs that emerged in each case.