Pilot Project

Pilot projects are an effective way of incorporating a reflexive methodology in qualitative research (Sampson, 2004). Sampson (2004) argues that the pilot project before emersion into the field is not a new technique but one that is under-utilised in qualitative research. A pilot project can be used to refine interview questions and trial them with carefully selected participant’s. Participants had to be selected on the basis of continued access beyond a pilot. Bryman (1988), Cassell, (1988) and Hartley (1994) have stressed the importance of maintaining access to participants, especially when researching organisations. For the researcher a pilot project is a good way of engaging with industry specific terminology that may not have been pre-empted. It is acknowledged that verification strategies may be problematic in pilot studies where data are thin. However, the purpose of pilot studies, when used in qualitative inquiry, is to refine data collection strategies rather than to formulate an analytic scheme or develop theory (Morse et al, 2008:20). In the case of this research, prior to the interviews taking place with the firms, five exploratory interviews were conducted with industry informants as a pilot project. These participants are also known as gatekeepers. Gatekeepers are actors who control avenues of opportunity (Trinch, 2001) and are usually in a position of authority having gained experience through interaction with the sector. Rossmand and Rollis (2003) state that almost anyone in an organisation can be a gatekeeper to further information and connections to other potential participants. Likewise, the gatekeepers can also be a source of exploratory knowledge that can inform the interview process and validate the data collection process. However, this knowledge and access is not just a given and requires a level of appreciation and common belief in the cause of the research. Gatekeepers used in the initial enquiry

97 for this research where identified through informal conversations between the CASE partner Liverpool Vision and myself. In addition to formal gatekeepers, the University of Liverpool Management School was a good source of industry connections to Liverpool based firms. Three members of the school where informally approached as gatekeepers, aiding in the approach of research participants and knowledge generation. In total eight gatekeepers were used to access participants.

Strauss and Corbin (1990) argued that the researcher should have a general idea of where to begin and how to go about drawing the data out of the field. This was done in two stages. First, the eight gatekeepers were used in a pilot project to test some of the interview category questions. By testing the category questions for the semi-structured interviews, I could see where the conversations would potentially lead and how the narration of the questions faired under interview conditions. Posing the wrong types of questions, or having a poorly worded question, can lead to less valuable data being collected (Robson, 2005). The interview questions did change based on the evaluation from the pilot project. Certain questions were removed and others changes for clarification in forthcoming interviews. The pilot project also gave me time to reflect on the nature of the terminology used with particular industries. This was particularly the case within the life science industry were acronyms and medical jargon is used. Overall, the pilot project was an effective way of testing out my interview topic areas and my own etiquette in the procedure. In addition, the pilot project allowed me to establish a network of contacts through which other contacts could be approached in the actual research process.

Second, using the secondary data from annual reports and company web sites, plus information gained during the pilot project, I composes a list of firms that where located in the Liverpool city boundary. Life science firms were taken from the ‘Bionow Directory 2011’. Bionow are a spinoff organisation from the former North

98 West Development Agency. The organisation kindly provided a free copy of the directory via post. This was cross-referenced with a document produced by Wainwright (2008) ‘Liverpool’s Health and Life Sciences Offer’ and an Internet based search for firms using key words such as diagnostic, pharmaceutical, medical device, health services firms. The information in both documents was not completely accurate with several firms still listed no longer active or relocated. This was verified using Companies House web site and the company’s web sites. For the video games sector no such directories existed. To compile the list of firms I relied on Internet based searches to begin. Following the closure of the multinational studios in Liverpool (discussed in Chapter 5) there were many press releases following new firm start-ups in Liverpool. This was echoed in the main stream gaming magazine journals. Although the information wasn’t by any means centralised, I was able to use similar techniques mentioned above to verify the existence and status of the firms. The list at this point was short and only had firms from the Internet search or those gained from the newspaper and magazine journals with recent success or exposure. The list grew significantly using the snowballing technique. One noticeable contribution came from a participant who had organised ‘The Indie Showcase’ aimed at gathering local independent developers and video game related service providers to a small conference. The document had a list of firms within Liverpool of freelancers and firms. Unlike the life sciences listing of firms, the video game industry list emerged over time and with the help of one significant gatekeeper passing on their list. Again, once both list were compiled and all firms verified as ‘active1_{’ the industries could be mapped out} with the scale and scope of activities.