Pilot study

3.4.1. Pilot study relevancy

A pilot study is pre-testing of data collection instruments before the beginning of the main field work. Piloting a research project is regarded by various researchers to be helpful in ensuring the main research process is able to address research questions and objective (Teijlingen and Hundley, 2001). A pilot is also important in trying to reduce problems that the researcher could experience if such pilots are not performed. Some of the objectives of piloting a research study could arguably be to ensure answerability of research questions, determine the usefulness of the research instruments, minimise ambiguity and further determine the relevancy of the research instruments. The other reason for piloting a research is that the pilot also helps the sampling process of the research project and many other related motives.

Before the beginning of the main field work in South Africa I conducted a pilot using initial research instruments. The pilot study was performed in particular to determine whether the data collection instruments were suitable to fetch information that would

68

enable me to answer research questions. The process of this pilot study was initiated based on the availability of potential participants around United Kingdom (particularly West Midlands).

The pilot was a simulation of my main study since government and non-government officials were interviewed. The interview guides expected to be used during the main study to collect data were utilised for the pilot study. Using these guides helped me to update some of the topic guide based on the response of the pilot interviewees in the main study.

3.4.2. Pilot process

The approach adopted in the pilot study was not to create any assumptions about potential responses prior to the interviews being conducted. Basically I did not pre-empt my pilot interviewees perspectives and response to both the practicality and relevancy of my interview guides. It is perhaps important to also indicate that only one-on-one semi structured interviews were conducted. Basically no numeric data were collected for both the pilot and main study.

The pilot study did not involve sending questionnaires since the main study was not based on questionnaires and I also had fewer respondents to interview. Even though the scope of availability of potential interviewees was later increased when I travelled to the area where the main study took take place, South Africa, I still thought it was not necessary to collect data through questionnaires.

The similar interview topic guides were used to interview all the interviewees during the one-on-one interview with changes made as a result of the pilot. All of the interviewees were told that the study was a pilot of envisaging the main study about accountability in South African provincial governments. It was important for them to know about the pilot as they made valuable contributions on how to improve to main study instruments. In total six interviews were conducted with six different participants for the pilot study. Three of these interviews were conducted in the United Kingdom (UK) and the other three were conducted in South Africa (RSA). The participants in the UK were mainly sourced from the University of Birmingham (Government and society) through references. I needed to at least identify participants extensively familiar with the South

69

African government administration processes. It was important that their responses would take into account their working background.

The other three participants were interviewed during my visit to South Africa just before the beginning of the main study.

The pilot study participants were also identified based on their availability and my short stay in South Africa. The process of conducting the pilot took two calendar months which included updating the initial research instruments subsequent to data analysis. The pilot and related data analysis was conducted between May 2011 and June 2011.

3.4.3. Summary of pilot issues

In summary the pilot study’s findings were related to both the structure of data instruments and the experiences on accountability by the interviewees. The following were some of lesson noted from the study:

 The relevancy of the research

All participants hinted to me that government accountability as a research area is worth exploring as there was not much research work being done in the area of performance accountability in South African provincial context. Some participants mentioned that government institutions charged with enhancing performance accountability like the Office of the Auditor General have not been rigour in doing their work. As a result this study was seen as to be effective in resurrecting the role played by the accountability institutions.

 Academic participants’ response

Some of the participants were responding from the researcher’s point of view as opposed to their working experience in government. For example one participant responded to the structure of the research as opposed to the content of the questions (e.g. she asked me, why I am using the PATIGAHAR model to assess accountability). Such questions were also helpful in giving substantiation for using principal-agent model with four themes, taking to account, giving an account, holding to account and redressing in the thesis and how

70

it relates to literature.

 Ambiguous and general questions

Some participants hinted that there were questions they could not answer due to such questions being unclear or being too general.

For questions such these I had to explain to them what they meant or had to repeat the questions. One participant further suggested that I make some questions specific to the point in order to get expected responses. This comment allowed me to go back to specific questions that were seen as either general or unclear and made them specific.

 Citizens not clear about their role in accountability

There is a common theme from all of the participants that citizens do not have knowledge as to why they should be engaged in government activities. Lack of citizens’ awareness on the government accountability process was substantiated by the recent rapid increase with regards to citizens’ complaints about lack of accountability and service delivery. According to interviewees many government institutions are perceived to be imposing government plans and activities on the citizens.

 Service users’ versus citizens

Further views were noted that some government departments at times focus on service users as opposed to citizens when giving account on its activities. This is due to arguments that some of the service users are organised institutions with necessary capacity to demand such accountability. In addition to that it was relatively easy to engage organised groups of societies from a government point of view. The recent citizens’ riots in various parts of the country concerning poor government services delivery were cited to indicating that there were an inadequate number of citizens’

consultations.

 Availability of accountability frameworks

71

National government developed accountability frameworks through the country’s constitution. All provinces are also given autonomy to enhance such mechanisms to suits respective provinces’ needs. Some participants argued that there are also constitutional institutions charged with enhancing accountability by the government institutions. They further argued that given the short length that the post-apartheid government had governed South Africa, much has not been done in ensuring that proper frameworks are in place.

 Communication gap

One of the participants who had an experience of working for the institutions regarded as an accountability institution, raised concerns that certain government departments do not see it important to engage with its citizens for the purpose of accountability. She further argued that her institutions made numerous recommendations to government departments and other institutions to improve the process in place to consult citizens for accountability and other purposes.

As a result of the summary of these pilot findings the main data collection instruments were improved.