Reflections on the Entire Research Project

On the following, I present my biggest challenges before and during the project, as well as some surprises I had as a person and researcher. I also report my learning about SSCs, and I talk about what went well in the project and what was not so good. Finally, I conclude by commenting on how my assumptions and personal values may have

—————————————————————————————————————

187

influenced the nature of my research, especially in the discussions of the Action Learning Set.

5.2.1 My Biggest Challenges

Since I started the DBA, I knew that the subject of my research would be the SSCs in the public sector. After all, they have been my object of study since my academic masters in 2010, and I wanted to deepen my knowledge and research in this area. However, it is when we put our hands at work that the real difficulties arise. From the existence of few studies carried out around the research sought, to the choice of approaches and methods, passing through the research locus. These three circumstances frightened me for some weeks and represented, perhaps, my great challenges, as I share below.

Only a few studies on Shared Services Centre – The existence of only a few studies

on SSC was a challenge (even less in the public sector). Mainly, by the absence of references to having as a starting point on which to build. However, the challenge is increased when there are nearly no quantitative studies in the SSC universe, with conceptual models and measurement scales previously developed and empirically confirmed. Some may argue that this is also a great opportunity, which is true. However, it ends up taking a longer time than one might initially think to develop a conceptual model from scratch. This challenge led me to have at least three extra months on schedule about what I had planned.

Choice of approaches and methods – During the planning of this thesis, I was a little

surprised by the suggestion of my first supervisor to adopt an AR approach, not only qualitative but also quantitative. I was preparing myself for over two years for an

—————————————————————————————————————

188

eminently qualitative approach and, I must confess, surprise caught me. I was reluctant initially to follow her suggestion, mainly because the quantitative approach was out of my comfort zone. Then, I realised it would be an opportunity for learning and development, for example, of my statistical skills, and went ahead to include the quantitative approach. This was indeed a wise decision, and I feel today a more complete researcher, able to conduct research using qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods.

Research locus – One concern that accompanied me during the months that

preceded the research planning was, as an independent management consultant, not having an organisation where I could act as an inside researcher. This upset me a lot until I discussed it with my supervisor and proposed to involve people from other organisations, through an Action Learning Set, that could help in the development of knowledge, validate its applicability and turn that knowledge into action. In the end, this path proved to be very useful, both in generating new knowledge and in addressing actionable knowledge. It was also a way to bridge the theory-practice divide.

5.2.2 What Surprised Me

Two things surprised me in the cycle from the preparation to the completion of the research. The first was the ethical and technical rigour demanded by the University of Liverpool for conducting management research involving people. The legitimate concern with adequate information and obtain authorisation of the participants, a guarantee of anonymity, mandatory password and other care with information stored in a computer, etc. Similarly, the Ethics Committee authorizing the protocol and accompanying the development of the research, caught my attention. It was a valuable learning experience that I will take for the entire career of a researcher. The second

—————————————————————————————————————

189

surprise was the degree of seniority of the participants in the Action Learning Set. I decided to seek out the best, but I was unsure whether I would succeed. For example, I invited an SSC expert, renowned and pioneered in SSC deployment in the UK public sector, and he accepted the invitation. I also invited other senior executives and teachers and obtained seven ALS members who had all the seniority, knowledge, and experience requirements I defined as critical factors for the quality of knowledge generated in this research. This level of expertise was providential and wonderful.

5.2.3 What Went Well and What Went Less Well

As an example of what went well, I mention the back-up of high-level professionals at the University of Liverpool as my first and second supervisors and examiners. Also, the support offered, that is, all software required for research, availability of knowledge bases, access to practically all the knowledge on management existent, etc. As an example of what went less well, I mention my delay in recognising that it would need to expand the project scope of the public-sector SSC to public and private sector SSCs. The expansion of scope only occurred when I realised that just with public sector SSCs, I would not have the minimum number of respondents to ensure a quality sample for the quantitative part of the survey. I lost months in this indecision until I expanded the scope and it worked and got, even more, respondents than I needed (see Section 3.6 Method of Survey). I should have set a deadline for a decision-making if I did not have all the required sample.

5.2.4 Personal Assumptions and Values Influencing the Research

All research is subject to direct influences of the researcher's way of being and thinking, which to some extent, is natural. On the other hand, we must avoid the occurrence of the so-called 'researcher bias,' which occurs when the researcher obtains

—————————————————————————————————————

190

from the research the results that he or she would like to obtain (Burke, 1997). To avoid such a bias, I followed the whole protocol established for the quantitative part of the research and detailed the entire qualitative research procedure, to ensure external validation, as recommended by Creswell (2013). I also applied critical self-reflection (Burke, 1997), Checking systematically whether any potential bias or predisposition of mine occurred during the process or conclusion of the research. For example, in analysing the qualitative part of the research, I attempted to identify technically, through content analysis, what the respondents were saying and not what I thought I understood at first what they meant. These ways of minimizing the chances of researcher bias to occur were also a great learning experience, which is worth noting here.