Methods of Data Collection

This section explains the methods of data collection applied for this study, namely the semi-structured interviews undertaken with CI analysts in each firm, the self-assessment checklists that were used as part of the interview, the company documentation that was analysed and the scenario analysis that addresses developments in the telecom sector.

4.6.1 Semi-Structured Interview

Newton (2010) characterised an interview as a managed verbal exchange, whereas Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007) see it as interpretation of experience:

“Interviews enable participants to discuss their interpretations of the world in which they live, and to express how they regard situations from their own point of view.”

This was important in the research undertaken; as noted above, the contextual setting or natural setting (see Trochim 2007) was expected to be a key differentiator of CI process development. Cohen et al. (2007) noted several functions of an interview, ranging from evaluating a person in some respect; to effecting therapeutic change, as in the

psychiatric interview; to developing from the interview data some hypotheses; to sampling respondent opinions”. In comparing the value of interviews with surveys, Cohen et al. (2007) noted the opportunities for asking many probing questions in a depth interview approach. Yin (2009) expressed that interview data by pointing at its opportunity to understand meaning instead of closed answers. When researching the telecom’s CI processes, it is apparent that these thematically intervened with

and personal background. These arguments show the importance of choosing a method that enables the researcher to understand. Follow up questions posed during the

interview enable the researcher to better understand. Furthermore, Yin (2009) noted that it is possible to schedule several interviews with the same interviewee. The researcher gained from that opportunity through a follow up interview conducted by email with one of the respondents in 2015 to understand the development of the firms.

In identifying why an interview method was appropriate in this research setting, three considerations applied. First, the adoption of the semi-structured interview sought to achieve in-depth understanding of CI activities and clear insights into the nature of the CI processes of each of the four large-scale telecom firms. Kvale (1996) noted the need to “conduct interviews with as many people as necessary in order to gain the

information sought.” This was done in this study by including at least one CI analyst of each firm in the interview sample; where possible a number of analysts from a firm were included in the study. Second, the researcher adopted what Patton (2002) described as the interview guide approach, which was felt to be appropriate for firm level investigation. Within a semi-structured interview, the interview guide allows flexibility of direction in terms of respondent’s own experience, while ensuring that all necessary topics are addressed in relation to CI activity across firms to permit cross-case comparison of interview data. Third, the versatility of the case study strategy is mirrored in the adoption of a semi-structured interview method when gathering data. A semi- structured approach allows the researcher flexibility to refer to documents that are pertinent to the discussion (see next section); enables further probing (Creswell 2013) of key contextual issues relating to organisational support and the nature and effectiveness of interaction between CI tasks (performed by analysts) and strategic decisions

(performed by management).

Past studies in CI have also successfully used a semi-structured interview approach. Ferrier (2001) conducted a study using the interview method about sequences of competitive actions, which accounted for differences in strategy and performance of two companies across a seven-year period. GIA (2005) conducted 287 interviews within 100 firms, generating some significant insights into the nature and status of CI activities in firms and a better understanding of variation in CI activities across firms in eight

countries. An interview method was seen as useful in this study as a route to capturing variation – the interview guide enables respondents to give their own interpretation of events, and to clarify (Easterby-Smith et al. 2012) what their CI analysis experience means and how that experience might differ across individuals. Phellas, Block and Seale (2012) noted how the interviewer can act on non-verbal clues, and may structure the interview to match respondent experience. Each of these characteristics (flexibility, clarification, adapted structure) were seen as necessary in order to get comprehensive insight into the CI process.

Finally, in this study, the researcher was interested, as stated above, in gathering a more evaluative perspective on the range of CI activities in order to generate some cross-case comparison. In this regard, the format of the semi-structured interview enabled the researcher to encourage respondents to evaluate their own CI processes. This was, in part, achieved by asking respondents to indicate those areas of their CI processes (perhaps elements within the Integrative Framework of CI Activities) that were perceived to be effective and areas that were perceived to be less effective. It was also achieved by means of a self-evaluation checklist.

4.6.2 Use of checklist

To supplement this and to generate some cross-firm comparison, a checklist was used at the end of each interview. This checklist allowed analysts to identify their own

assessment of the effectiveness and the sophistication of their CI processes using Likert scale choices. In evaluating the specific CI process used by firm, other authors have adopted a checklist approach (Saayman, Penaar, De Pelsmacker, Viviers, Cuyvers, Muller and Jegers 2008; Calof and Dishman 2002). These checklists provided valuable information about the implementation of CI processes and were therefore adopted in this study. One disadvantage of this procedure is that firm-specific issues could not be revealed, but it was hoped that some of the specific circumstances that were relevant in each firm could emerge in the conversation that occurred in the semi-structured

interviews. Both elements – the checklist and the in-depth interview data offered a balanced perspective when gaining a more evaluative perspective on the range of CI activities, as reported by respondents at firm level.

4.6.3 Documents and use of Secondary Data

Cohen et al. (2007) argue that secondary data may be used to supplement primary data and this was considered important in this context. Some past CI studies that gathered and analysed secondary data include the work of Jaworski and Wee (1992), examining the relationship between CI and business performance. One of Jaworski and Wee’s aim was to summarise published literature on the strategic role of CI and report the

empirical evidence of CI benefits. In this study, secondary data was drawn from company reports (Swisscom 2013f; Sunrise 2010; Orange 2011a; Cablecom 2010a); from statistics generated by the Federal Office of Statistics (BFS 2010; Brambilla 2010; SAKE 2010a; SAKE 2010b).Company reports for all four firms were accessed form their web-pages; and some reports for Swisscom were accessed through archives of the Swiss Postal Office. Other company documents such as Swisscom Sharepoint (2010) and MTV mobile (2010) sometimes formed the basis of discussion in the semi-

structured interviews. Ghezzi (2011) used secondary sources to complete the interview data in his study about the Italian mobile phone market. Hall (2010) used secondary data to better understand the culture being studied.

4.6.4 Scenario Analysis

The scenario analysis used secondary data from the Swiss market, identifying the most probable scenario for the sector and then analysing performance for one firm in the light of the identified market scenario. The purpose of the scenario analysis was, as outlined in Objective 3B, to show a methodology for CI analysis with predictive purposes. At the core of the scenario analysis is an evaluation of possible future directions or scenarios, which can then be a basis to develop strategic plans (Maack 2001). Franco, Meadows and Armstrong (2013) noted how scenario analysis can deal with the uncertain future of a firm’s environment, but scenario approaches are limited as the future is unknown (Postma and Liebl 2005). Due to some inherent methodological restrictions of scenario analyses, Postma and Liebl (2005) suggest three alternative ways to construct scenarios – recombinant, context and inconsistent scenarios. The recombinant scenario approach applies trends from indicators, rather than drivers of scenarios, selecting a subset of trends for each scenario. An advantage of this approach is that drivers connote with causality, yet establishing causality among drivers is of limited validity due to the

subjectivity in choice of indicators. Statistics can only show if two drivers are related but not why (Stahel 2007) and verbal reasoning is limited as well, due to the nature of scenario analyses dealing with uncertain future events. A recombinant scenario analysis that seeks to identify and utilise data on the most logical trends was applied following the recommendations of Postma and Liebl (2005) and the recommendations of Gregory and Duran (2001) to:

“use concrete examples, use representative events, use easily recalled supporting

evidence, use commensurate measures across alternative scenarios, even if irrelevant.”

Ringland (2002) noted how: “It may not be necessary to develop scenarios: discussion of

existing ones may provide the desired framework for discussion and decision.”

Ringlands’ (2002) recommendation is followed in this study- a scenario analysis that is based on a previously successful approach by De Man, Lugtigheid, Sardjoe, Budde and van Hemmen (2009) was adapted to the Swiss telecom market. This approach satisfied the requirements of having similar market characteristics as the Swiss telecom market, notably rapid technological development, an oligopolistic market structure, saturated demand levels and a small but developed country. The analysis of the Swiss telecom market from Brändle et al. (2012) was applied to identify these characteristics. The Dutch telecom market was relatively similar in terms of telecom competitive

developments and the scenario analysis from De Man et al. (2009) was used as a basis to be applied to the Swiss market. The identified trends from Lewrick, Schiffer, Jung and Georgi (2010) for the Swiss IT sector were reconsidered in the light of contextual issues in the Swiss market (some noted in the interviews and in the checklist data of respondents), leading to adaptation of the scenario analysis from De Man et al. (2009) to reflect relevant issues (e.g. past data on new entrants in previous three years). This industry level analysis offered information about possible future directions of the Swiss telecoms and could enable some evaluation of current CI processes of a firm against a most probable scenario.