Pilot study

A pilot study is considered as a part of a good research strategy that tests the feasibility of the instruments used by detecting the associated deficiencies in either the proposed instruments or in the intended procedures. As a result, any problems can be addressed in order to enhance the quality and the feasibility of instruments before proceeding to the main study that is targeted to large sample. Therefore, a pilot study is always concerned about the validity and reliability of the instruments as it is generally involves fewer respondents compared to main study.

As the pilot study did not point towards any material amendment in the instruments, the findings considered to be appropriate to be incorporated into the findings of the main study. However, the researcher have not included them in the main study.

3.12.5.1 Data collection and sample technique for pilot study:

The sample information was obtained from various websites of governmental institutions in Jordan such as, Companies control department (2006) and (Department of Statistics, 2011, Ministry of Industry and Trade, 2011). Initially, for the purpose of pilot study a random sampling technique for the main study will be used (Saunders et al., 2009).

The questionnaires were distributed to auditors, and financial managers who works within SMEs that match the definition of IASB.

For the purpose of pilot study the following numbers of questionnaires have been distributed to each sample group as illustrated in table (3.10):

133

Table 3.10: number of questionnaires distributed and returned in the pilot study.

groups No. of questionnaires distributed No. of questionnaires returned Percentage Financial managers 32 21 65.6% Auditors 30 21 70% Note:

Two questionnaires from financial managers have been not included as the companies converted to public companies.

Table (1) does not include the retested questionnaires.

3.12.5.2 Validity and reliability in the pilot study.

The same procedure in section (3.12.3) have been undertaken to ensure both validity and reliability of questionnaire except those attributed to factor analysis as this statistical test requires a large sample (Field, 2009).

Regarding the reliability that refers to the consistency of the findings over time and under various situations, for instance, different group of respondents (Saunders et al., 2009, Field, 2009), Cronbach’s Alpha test was undertaken to measure the internal reliability, the results are summarised in table (3.11).

Table 3.11: results of Cronbach Alpha in the pilot study.

Question Cronbach’s

Alpha

No of

Items Note

All questions to managers .913 118

All questions to auditors .913 118

Question about how the users use your enterprise's financial information that is common

between groups.

.701 8

Three questions have been deleted

to increase the reliability from .629

134

Question about the problems facing SMEs that is common

between groups.

.967 24

Question about the agreement of the general concept of IFRS

for SMEs that is common between groups.

.728 3

Question about the relevance of omitted topics, this question

is common between managers and auditors.

.88 8

Question about the differences between IFRS for SMEs and full

IFRS that is common between managers and auditors.

.874 21

Question about the probable contribution of IFRS for SMEs

that is common between groups.

.917 37

Question about obstacles that are likely to impede the effective implementation of IFRS for SMEs. This question

is common between groups.

.923 12

Question about obstacles that could result from the differences between Jordan and advanced countries that probably hinder the effective implementation of IFRS for

SMEs. This question is common between groups.

.935 6

Notes:

1. The test has been performed to each individual question (construct) separately in order to ensure their reliability before conducting the test for all questions across groups of sample.

135

2. Because of using different questions across groups, reliability test has been conducted for each group separately, and also for only common questions among groups when performing this test for more than one group.

3. Retest responses have not included in cases when internal consistency has been tested by using Cronbach’s alpha.

The reason is that to enable comparison for each group between the internal consistency results and test-retest result after replacing the former cases with the retested responses for the same respondents.

Although Cronbach’s Alpha is not robust when there is a major amount of missing data, it is considered as the most widely used test to estimate reliability which is a coefficient for internal consistency. The cut-off point of .7 and more is appropriate and indicates good reliability (Field, 2009). According to the above table, the instruments (questionnaires) are reliable for targeted groups of sample, all Alpha scores for all groups and all constructs were more than .7 and for most constructs and groups, they exceed .90 which indicates excellent reliability.

Regarding the test re-test reliability, the same questionnaires were allocated to the same respondents after three months from the initial responses (two respondents from each group of sample) and a Cronbach’s Alpha test was undertaken to measure the answers’ consistency of the same questionnaire allocated twice to same respondents.

As the number of retested questionnaires is small, the method used to achieve this purpose was performed by comparing the result illustrated in table (1) that are associated to internal reliability with the results obtained after replacing the former answers with the new answers for the same cases. The outputs of test-retest reliability are shown in table (3.12) below.

Table 3.12: results of Cronbach Alpha to reflect to chick the reliability through test re-test reliability. Questions Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency Cronbach’s alpha for retest after replacing the cases N of items differences All questions to managers .913 .914 118 .001

136

According to table (1), there are slight differences between results before and after conducting the same questionnaire one more time for same randomly selected respondents. This indicates that the recompleted questionnaires after three months from the same respondents demonstrate a high degree of answers’ consistency. Therefore, the test-retest reliability has been recognized.