QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUES

After realising the research direction, methods and sampling, the next question concerned how the data was collected. This was dictated by the research design (Yin, 2011) and as this is a qualitative research study, the focus is on qualitative data collection techniques.

Studies show that there are different ways to collect data in qualitative research, but the most common techniques are interviews, participation, documentary and observation (Bryman, 2001; Punch, 2005; Yin, 2011). It should be noted that semi-structured interviews were used for the first stage of the investigation as an obvious option to explore expert experiences (Yin, 2011). The main stage involved case studies, which used various techniques such as observations, interviews and documentary for data collection (Stake, 1995; De Marrias, 2004; Donalek, 2004; Yin, 2011).

All the data collection techniques applicable to qualitative research and the applicable sampling techniques are discussed below to understand the justification for the techniques preferred.

4.7.2.1. INTERVIEWS

Interviews can be classified as structured, semi-structured and unstructured. Structured

interviews are often close-ended and are usually employed for quantitative purposes, while

semi-structured and unstructured are mostly employed in a study for qualitative purposes (Yin, 2011),and are therefore termed ‘qualitative’ interviews (De Marrais, 2004; Britten, 1995; Yin, 2011). Qualitative interviews are defined as a method of gathering in-depth information about a phenomenon, experience or set of experiences (De Marrais, 2004).

95

This type of interview was used for experts during the first stage of the investigation as well as for the owner-managers during the main investigation stage. Semi- structured interviews were preferred as they helped draw on the respondents’ views without derailing from the research focus. For example, it is clear that the ERP experts (consultants) have vast experience of the ERP system especially within retail SMEs but the research focus was on retail small family business and semi-structured interiews were useful in guiding their thoughts and responses without leading the answers. Also, owner-managers have vast knowledge of their business and have a tendency of going beyond the research scope as found sometimes in cases 1 and 3’s interview transcripts, so semi-structured interviews were used to keep them on track. Semi-structured interiews contain open-ended questions which are loosely planned around a topic area to allow for detailed probing (Britten, 1995). Semi-structured interviews are the medium between structured and unstructured interviews. Although there are no rigid sets of questions which are to be in a closed manner, it involves the use of prompts to keep the participant on track (Yin, 2011). Some studies suggest this type of interview does not allow for a fully detailed response as the reply is being controlled, albeit slightly. Although there are prompts in a semi-structured interview, these are not rigid and could change based on a participant’s response. Also, participants are allowed to raise issues in addition to the ones in the prompt (Punch, 2005).

Purposive sampling was used at the first stage of the investigation to identify the ERP experts that were considered to have the knowledge required to answer the research questions. Literature on the family business suggests that three out of any five SMEs in the UK are family owned and about 98% of these family SMEs are small businesses. ERP experts dealing with SMEs in the UK are expected to have some experience with family SMEs and especially small family businesses. Based on these reasons, ERP experts for SMEs in the UK were targeted at the first stage. Of the 20 experts identified and contacted, three of them were deemed as both fit for purpose, willing and eventually investigated.

Also, the family members with the required knowledge and authority to respond to the interview questions were decided purposively. In all of the cases the family manager were found to be with the qualities stated above. However, in case 2 another member of the family was notimated for the interview and the member was deemed to be fit for purpose due to the wealth of business knowledge shared.

96

 Unstructured interviews, also known as in-depth interviews (Britten, 1995), often

contain one or two areas in which the participant is allowed to engage fully offering great detail. The detail obtained in an unstructured interview would be greater than in a semi-structured interview as the engagement of the participant is less controlled and they are allowed to fully express their views on the phenomenon (Yin, 2011; De Marrais, 2004). Yin (2011) argued that an unstructured interview aids the detailed exploration of an important research question, and it would be detrimental for a researcher to get a one-word answer or controlled response for such a question. It could be argued that if an in-depth interpretive research study is to be conducted, an unstructured interview could serve such a purpose. However, with unstructured interviews, it is more difficult to get a participant back on track if they move away from the research focus (Bryman, 2001; Yin, 2011).

The distinction between the two types of qualitative interview does not suggest that they are mutually exclusive. Bryman (2001) indicated that the initial stage of questioning in interviews could be unstructured to give broader details of the phenomenon and then the later stages would be semi-structured to stay within the research focus.

The adaptability of qualitative interviews is a notable advantage as they are also flexible, using face-to-face, non-verbal or textual techniques depending on the accessibility of the participants (Denscombe, 2007; Yin, 2011). However, the time consuming and stressful nature of planning interviews remains the main disadvantage (Bryman, 2001). Looking at the characteristics of qualitative interviews, it suggests why this research would utilise this data collection technique for both the preliminary stage and part of the main investigation stage of this research.

Note that an open-ended questionnaire could also have been useful for this research, however, it would not have provided the chance for as much probing of the respondents as would benefit this research.

Although interviews have been mainly discussed, it is worth noting that observation and participation are an important part of interviewing in this study. Most studies suggest that researchers should fully participate in interviews through listening and encouragement but without much intervention (Bryman, 2001; Yin, 2011; Creswell, 2009). It is also suggested that everything is observed in the course of interviewing as the participant’s reaction or environment may speak more than the actual words.

97 4.7.2.2. THE DOCUMENT ANALYSIS

This data collection technique was used in case 2 where the researcher was given a rare access to the ERP contract document solely to ascertain the nature of the system within the business. However, no permission was given to reproduce this document for research purpose. However, the researcher was able to obtain a snapshot of a similar system from the

provider’s website as provided in the appendix. This data collection technique is useful for case study research as a qualitative research technique. Creswell (2009) suggests that

documents, such as archival records, web pages and company files, for example, are possible documents to be analysed using this type of data collection technique. This technique is suitable for a content analysis type of qualitative research. It, thus, explains why it is useful in investigating small family businesses. However, while some of the business cases investigated did not grant enough access to study documents, others did not keep the kinds of records, such as historical files or system usage documents, that could have benefitted this research. System usage documents were studied in only one retail SFB case study as explained above.

For this research, historical records of businesses would have ensured that details such as family ownership and the generation of business were confirmed from such documents as well as through interviews. While ERP experts made archival data on cases of ERP usage available, not enough evidence of ERP to benefit this research was found from the records. 4.7.2.3. OBSERVATION/PARTICIPANT-OBSERVATION

This data collection technique was used as it was found to be important for case study research as it allowed the researcher to be embedded into whole the Small Family Business system and see things happen without having much influence on events (Stake, 1995; Jerring, 2001; Baxter and Jack, 2008; De Massis and Kotlar, 2014). It is understandable, however, that participants may present an artificial environment to influence the research and threaten the reliability of findings (Foster, 1996). This study made efforts following Foster’s (1996) recommendations to limit the possibility of an artificial environment during data collection. The researcher visited the businesses mostly as other customers would and the businesses were also visited at different times to study earlier observed behaviours before such observations were recorded as accurate. Questions were also asked as if the researcher was a concerned customer when need be and, at the end of the observation period, follow up interviews were conducted with the business managers to clarify and ascertain the observation findings.

98

With observations, the nature of the phenomenon is studied in its natural setting while the researcher observes and takes any necessary notes (Stake, 1995; Yin, 2003). In the case of an intrinsic case study, all details are treated as important but with instrumental cases, the details relevant to the problem are treated with more importance than others (Stake, 1995). With this study using the instrumental case study method, it focused mainly on the details that were important to answering the research questions. Details, such as family attributes, everyday operations, customer relationships, employee conduct and management, decision-making and competitive strategy were focused on based on the theoretical framework. While other aspects of the businesses were paid attention to, the focus was on the aspects of the business identified in the literature as important to ERP adoption in SFBs and retail small businesses. This research used theoretical sampling during the second investigation stage to determine the businesses to be studied to holistically understand the business processes and family involvement. Coyn (1997) suggests that in theoretical sampling, a purposive sampling of the most knowledgeable people in the field is first used to lead to further sampling based on the codes and patterns discovered. The purposive sampling of ERP experts was done during the first stage as described above. The findings at that stage as well as from the literature led to the need to investigate individual small family businesses. However, as this research is in the UK, there was the need to consider and appreciate the diversity across regions (Stake, 1995). Of the 20 businesses contacted, five retail small family businesses from across different regions in the UK were studied. De Massis and Kotlar (2014) also suggest that theoretical sampling is more appropriate for family business case studies. For this research, UK retail businesses that fulfilled the ONS’ definition of small businesses were identified. Of these businesses, the ones that fulfilled the definition of a family business, based on Chua et al. (2003) and PWC’s definitions, were deemed suitable. However, only the busineeses willing to be included were investigated.

4.7.2.4. FOCUS GROUPS

This method was not adopted for data collection in this research due to the understanding from the first findings in chapter 5 that only the owner-managers in UK retail small family businesses may have the authority and knowledge required to be investigated and the verbal agreemenet reached not to distrupt daily operations in the course of studying the cases.

Focus group simply refers to questioning or interviewing people in groups (Creswell, 2009; Henderson, 2009). There are diverse views on the appropriateness of this method for

99

research. Some believe that information such as organisational strategy is better discussed in person rather than in groups (Creswell, 2003; Yin, 2003). Others, for example, Henderson (2009) think people feel more comfortable discussing in groups as the attention will not be solely on them.