Research Design, Phases and Process Steps

Figure 24 depicts the ‘research design’, which is characterised by a continuous theory and thesis development and (re-)writing process. This was based on a mix of a top-down and bottom-up approach (Dunleavy, 2003).

Figure 24: Research design

The author’s basic consideration (appendix 4.3.1) initiated the initial literature and technology review. Factory-, factory planning- and area system-related sources were examined, which led to the identified gaps in factory planning theory and practice. Furthermore, the conceptual framework, ROs, initial research results and rough body of work were developed.

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Three phases dominated the research project: In ‘phase 1’, the initial theory and model were developed. At the end of this phase, the basic model-functionality was known and a basic understanding of the known associated concepts given. This means that the BFPSs were known and that an eBFPC leads to different impacts within different BFPSs. Not all concepts and categories were known, and particularly not their complete interplay. The developed initial theory and model helped to create reasonable and focused interview questions (IQs), since relevant events and framework conditions with regard to factory planning were considered.

In order to increase the chance to consider the most important aspects, one-to-one conversations with twenty-four factory planning experts were conducted prior to the interviews. The most important aspects of these communications were considered in each subsequent communication. With twenty-two of these experts, two or more communications took place. The development of the initial theory and IQs was supported by this approach, which involves advantages of the Delphi technique (Häder, 2014) and increased the validity and reliability of the research results (see theoretical sampling in subsection 4.6.1).

‘Phase 2’ was dominated by semi-structured interviews which were guided by the initial theory and model (Patton, 2002). The research elements were either validated or developed further, while new ones emerged from the interviews. No assumption was rejected or disproved. The interviews helped to explore and develop relevant issues. Real-world data from the interviewees led to the validation of the basic model-functionality, which could be further developed based on this data. Furthermore, the initial theory could be validated and extended to form the final theory. The transcribed interviews were, against the backdrop of the author’s

‘knowledge-to-date’, read and analysed several times during the research process.

Data to develop the new concepts and to identify their importance emerged from the interviews (mainly through real-world factory project cases and their impacts, which were explored through numerous follow-up/probing/specifying questions).

Several cause-and-effect relationships could thus be identified. The grounded theory-based approach and further analyses of cause-and-effect relationships (e.g.

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

during the analyses of the interview transcripts) supported this process. Thus, the concepts and the model could be developed and their interplay examined.

In ‘phase 3’, all research contents were finalised. An understanding of how all concepts interact with one another and the model (extended model-functionality) was acquired (mainly based on the interview data and the grounded theory-based approach; see subsection 4.3.2 and chapter 5). The relationships and importance of concepts changed partly and became more specific and clear-cut (Corbin and Strauss, 2015). The theory could be finalised.

Figure 25 provides an overview of the main process steps of the three phases with the main emphasis on the interviews.

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Section 4.7 provides details about the development of the questionnaire and IQs and the criteria for the selection of interviewees (as well as further information).

The pilot interview was conducted to check the readability and comprehensibility of the interview documents (Roberts, Wallace and Pfab, 2008). This interview was transcribed and analysed (Lamnek, 2005) in the same way as the first interview. To avoid the risk of focusing on less important topics (Schlegel, 2015) and to reduce the risk of getting lost in the data (Roberts, Wallace and Pfab, 2008), the subsequent interview analyses took place after several interviews had been completed (David and Sutton, 2011). Nevertheless, new topics/issues which came up during the interviews were considered in subsequent interviews (Lamnek, 2005).

The literature and technology review and the data collection and analyses took place continuously. Besides coding and grounded theory-related elements, ‘concept maps’ (Maxwell, 2013) were used to develop codes, categories, “concepts and the relationships among these”. Furthermore, ‘process maps’ which depict the main operating steps and their outcomes were developed (p. 54). Thus, cause-and-effect relationships could also be analysed and stored.

The model (i.e. a BFPS and eBFPC in combination with a factory concept) indicates the required actions (mainly the ‘what’, the ‘where’ and the ‘when’). The understanding of the other concepts (particularly fundamental enablers) and their interplay with the model is required to highlight the ‘why’. This understanding came to the author throughout the phases 2 and 3. Thus, the basic functionality of the model was clear after phase 1, but it was not completely clear how the model and some concepts interact (because some concepts were provisional or incomplete, and also because new ones emerged from the interviews, interview analyses and the grounded theory-based approach). The interviews validated the basic model-functionality and led to new data by which the extended model-model-functionality could be examined and developed to its final status in phase 3, in the same way as the theory.

The research process was complex, as its elements are interlinked. For a proper understanding of the research process, model- and concept-related information

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

must be provided within the following subsections, as the model and associated concepts were required to achieve the ROs.