Qualitative data sources

Yin (2003) describes six sources of evidence most commonly used in case studies, as well as espousing the highly complementary nature of the sources and the virtue of combining as many sources as possible. The relative strengths and weaknesses of the most common sources of evidence are outlined below (see table 4.3).

Source of evidence

Strengths Weaknesses

Documentation Stable – can be reviewed repeatedly

Unobtrusive – not created as a result of the case study

Exact – contains exact names, references and details of an event Broad coverage – long

span of time, many events, and many settings

Retrievability can be low Biased selectivity if

collection is incomplete Reporting bias – reflects

(unknown) bias of author Access – may be

deliberately blocked

Archival records [same as above]

Precise and quantitative

[same as above]

Accessibility due to privacy reasons

Interviews Targeted – focuses directly on case study topic

Insightful – provides perceived causal inferences

Bias due to poorly constructed questions Response bias

Inaccuracies due to poor recall

Reflexivity – interviewee gives what interviewer wants to hear

66 Direct

observations

Reality – covers events in real time

Contextual – covers context of event

Time consuming

Selectivity – unless broad coverage

Reflexivity – event may proceed differently because it is being observed

Cost – hours needed by human observers Participant observation [same as direct observations] Insightful into interpersonal behaviour and motives [same as direct observations]

Bias due to investigator’s manipulation of events Physical artefacts Insightful into cultural

features

Insightful into technical operations

Selectivity Availability

Table 4.3: The six most common sources of case study evidence, taken from Yin (2003)

The Harmonic case study conducted during this stage of the research utilised four of the six most common sources of qualitative case study evidence as described below.

Interviews

Interviewing is a technique often used in case study research and is designed to elicit detailed descriptions of the participant’s perspective on the research topic (Saunders et al., 2007). It is an effective qualitative method for encouraging people to articulate their opinions, experiences and even feelings on particular subjects. In this research, attention was given to the relationship participants saw between the culture and structure of the organisation and its ability to effectively and sustainably co-create value with its customers.

All five members of the Harmonic Exec team (see table 4.4 below) were interviewed separately to identify their individual perspectives on how value is created through services and what is required of a business looking to excel in co- creating value with its customers.

Exec member Managing Director Finance Director Services Director

67 Head of Human Resources

Head of Business Development

Table 4.4: The Harmonic Exec team interviewed during the case study

The interview transcripts were codified and analysed against the DoC themes laid down from the conceptual framework for both synergies and contrasting opinions (Strauss and Corbin, 1990). The analysis conducted on the interview transcripts in described below in the ‘Qualitative data analysis section (4.7.2).

The data collected during the interviews provided particular insights into the cultural and structural constructs of the framework. The findings emerging around the cultural elements of the organisation were particularly insightful in not only shaping the cultural constructs but were crucial in informing the decision to reduce the cultural second order constructs from six to one which is further explained in the Findings chapter (chapter 5).

Direct and participant observation

Participant observation allows the researcher to gain a close and intimate familiarity with a given group of individuals and their activities or practices through an intensive involvement with people in their natural environment, usually over an extended period of time (Mack et al., 2005).

Data collected from participant observation provides contextual understanding and is invaluable in understanding and interpreting the data collected through other methods. Hence, what we learn from participant observation can help us not only to understand data collected through other methods (such as interviews and quantitative research methods), but also help to understand the

phenomenon being studied. Participant observation, along with the other qualitative data sources used in the Harmonic case proved crucial in providing the contextual understanding needed to interpret and refine the second order constructs derived from literature and used to populate the conceptual framework.

During the course of the case study both internal meetings and meetings with customers were observed. The internal meetings consisted of regular operational meetings and one-off planning/strategy meetings. These meetings provided valuable input to generating the second order constructs associated with the

68 structure and culture capability dimensions (two of the first order constructs). The customer meetings were account review meetings, organised by Harmonic, to review performance and explore future opportunities with customers. The synthesised notes taken from these meetings were thematically grouped to inform the second order constructs particularly in the areas of congruence of expectations, complementary capabilities, behavioural alignment, and learning from experience.

In addition to observing meetings the researcher observed internal workshops to gain insights into the transition Harmonic was undertaking. The workshops allowed the perspectives and opinions of groups of individuals to be discussed and captured. Workshops are not only an efficient means of gathering evidence but provide the valuable opportunity to discuss and investigate the level of synergy amongst a group on specific subjects.

Eight workshops were observed over the course of two years involving staff from across the business. A list of workshops, their purpose and dates is contained in Annex A.

Specific workshops were held on subjects covering:  Selling

 Contracting  Service delivery

 Organisational structure and governance

Notes taken during the workshops were examined for insights that not only aided the transformation of the Harmonic business (helping meet the commercial objective of the KTP project) but provided the operational level detail needed to identify many of the second order constructs, especially in terms of process alignment, congruence of expectations and complementary capabilities (three of the first order constructs).

Artefact review

Complete and open access was granted to all company documents during the course of the case study. This level of access allowed the review of a variety of document types and the opportunity to observe how documents/reports evolved during the two years over which the case study took place.

69 The types of artefact reviewed include:

 Strategy papers

 Organisational design documents

 Service development process and guidance  Engagement management process and guidance  Contracting guidance

 Market proposition framework  Call reports

 Customer plaudits and complaints