Research Methods

While methodology encompasses an approach or philosophy to undertaking research, methods refer to particular research techniques or tools by which the research is undertaken. Although an ontological position often drives a research approach there is also a more practical approach to adopting appropriate tools first for obtaining the best data:

“Methods are selected because they will provide the data you require to produce a complete piece of research. Decisions have to be made about which methods are best for particular purposes and then data-collecting instruments must be designed to do the job.” (Bell, 2005, p. 116)

A multi-method approach was adopted both to add richness and depth to the information gathered and as part of a data triangulation strategy, which will be

Page | 150 described in further detail in Section 4.6 of this chapter which addresses the questions of research validity and reliability.

The primary method employed was the semi-structured, qualitative interview, with topic guides that included static and evolving themes for building up evidence systematically but also having the flexibility to capture some of the changes through a dynamic 14 month period at HAX.¹⁵ Another term used interchangeably with semi-structured interviews is non-standardised interviews which also describes the form of more flexible interviewing where lists of themes and questions are prepared beforehand, but may not all be covered (or even covered in a different order), depending on the context of the interview and how the conversation is flowing (Healy, 1991). Using more open-ended questions was suited to the explorative themes relating to the changing organisational culture at HAX, giving more scope for flexibility, while the set of themes developed around theoretical frameworks could be also integrated into topic guides.

While a popular qualitative technique, the complexity of interviewing can be understated. Saunders et al (2003, p. 252) identify the data quality issues with the use of semi-structured interviews as reliability problems (due to the lack of standardisation); and forms of bias that could negatively affect the research validity. The critical incident technique (Flanagan, 1954; Hertzberg, 1987) which was incorporated in the project interview topic guides, is seen as a way of controlling for bias but the critical incident technique itself can produce the

15 Please see Appendix 2 for an example of an interview topic guide

Page | 151 problem of post-event rationalisation and evaluation (Easterby –Smith et al, 2002).

The first interview with participants was regarded as an ‘ice-breaker’ interview, and in most cases not recorded, since the researcher spent some time summarising the information sheet she had provided to participants prior to the interviews, which included the purpose of the PhD research and key aspects of the research design and methodology.¹⁶ Participants were encouraged to ask any questions about the study at this or indeed any stage of the research process. The confidentiality and anonymity of the interviews was emphasised and formalised in a participant consent form.¹⁷ Thereafter the researcher asked background questions regarding current and previous roles of the participants both within these organisations and in their careers or background in general.

This was designed to help participants to relax, and feel comfortable while starting off with familiar subject matter. At the same time the researcher hoped that her genuine interest at this stage would make participants feel valued and encourage them to be forthright and open in their views on changes in the organisation.

Subsequent interviews were more standardised and although still semi-structured with some open-ended questions, the topic guide was adhered to more scrupulously, and the researcher guided and prompted rather than being actively involved in the discussion as per the ‘ice-breaker’ interview. Where consent was given, interviews were recorded for reliability and audit purposes

16 See Appendix 3. for the Participant Information Sheet

17 See Appendix 4 for the Participant Consent Form

Page | 152 and to authenticate verbatim where employed, but detailed notes were also taken by the researcher, which constituted the bulk of the empirical data collected.

The schedule of interviews is detailed in the fieldwork outline below, but the rationale behind the frequency of meetings related to the varying degrees of strategic influence participants had within the organisation, how distant or attached they were to the broad strategic and detailed operational concerns, how relevant their portfolio or area of expertise was to the research questions relating to the changing community investment programme and sub-cultures at HAX, and indeed to the logistics of scheduling and not wanting to be responsible for interviewee fatigue by interviewing ‘for the sake of it’.

Another research method employed were focus group discussions, which were used to explore the views of groups, particularly transient groups, of participants where one-to one interviews would be less useful, and where the group discussion might make the participants feel more comfortable airing their views.

Examples of these included a task team involved in the restructure of the organisation, and a group of ethnic minority tenants and social housing service users. Saunders et al (2003, p. 478) define focus groups as a “group interview, composed of a small number of participants, facilitated by a ‘moderator’, in which discussion is focused on aspects of a given theme or topic.”

Focus groups are regarded as more natural than some techniques but still contrived to some extent as they are controlled situations. The loosely structured steered conversations are designed to be participant orientated, with

Page | 153 the group setting its own agenda, and this is what the researcher attempted to achieve, through a general topic guide including open-ended questions once again.¹⁸ The researcher was also aware that while focus groups can be a good exploratory tool, social pressures can condition participants’ responses.

Observation and participant observation were additional qualitative research methods employed in this study both formally, for example attending meetings or community events, and also informally, such as the observation of organisational behaviour at the various offices of the case study organisation.

These research methods, which can also be referred to as organisational ethnography were particularly useful in enhancing the understanding of the various sub-cultures at the housing association. In his book on organisational ethnography Neyland (2008) claims the strengths of ethnographic data are in providing a detailed in-depth picture of a group which can be developed around social, cultural and political issues that other methods find intangible. At the same time challenges are recognised such as the participative nature of the researcher’s role which can lead to questions about objectivity, and the researcher influence on outcomes (Neyland, 2008). Some of the other research pitfalls associated with participant observation are that the technique can be time-consuming, requiring the researcher to be accepted by the individuals or groups being studied, and that the group being studied may not be typical thereby affecting lack of generalisability (Bell, 2005). However in the case of this study the defence of its research validity which ties in with the overall methodological approach also stands to bear in the choice of using participant

18 See Appendix 5 for a Focus Group Topic Guide

Page | 154 observation and observation as part of the method strategy in a multi-layered investigation of the case study organisation.

There are a range of roles that can be adopted by the participant observer: the researcher as employee; researcher as an explicit role; interrupted involvement and observation alone (Easterby-Smith et al, 2002). Because of the breadth of organisation which the researcher attempted to capture, her role was more akin to that of interrupted involvement which involves the observer being present over periods of time, moving in and out of the organisation and combining observation with interviews. On occasions where observations were made, notes were taken in the process of the observation where possible, or soon after on the same day. These were then scripted and annotated, in the same way as documentary evidence. In terms of the weighting of evidence, primary results were first derived by the thematic analysis of interviews and focus groups, and these were corroborated by observation notes and documentary analysis.

This documentary analysis of secondary evidence was undertaken before and during the intensive fieldwork stage of the research project. This evidence included annual accounts, company surveys, internal reports, marketing and corporate literature, as well as employee newsletters. Documentary analysis can be used as a supplementary method to check the reliability of evidence given in interviews or even on its own as the primary method of research (Duffy, 2005).

Page | 155 When these documents were considered the researcher had to consider their credibility and authorship, as well as the style and social context of any documents (Bryman, 2001). According to Grix (2008, p. 81) “All documents have been written with a purpose in mind, are based on particular assumptions and are presented in a certain way or style.” The researcher therefore took into account the purpose and original audience of any document analysed. For example the intended audience and purpose of a staff newsletter differed from the annual accounts produced, which itself was dissimilar to a company survey produced for senior executives.

As a summary of the multiple research methods described, Table 4-2 cites the research objectives as outlined in the introduction of this thesis, with the research methods adopted to fulfil those objectives.

Table 4-2: Research Objectives and Methods

Research Objectives

Research Methods

Documentary analysis

Interviews Focus groups

Observation / Participant Observation

1. Explore emergent strategy and influences through the example of key strategic and operational changes in CI over the duration of the research project.

X X X

Page | 156

2. Explore key changes and critical incidents in the development of the organisation’s CI strategy over 2 years as part of overall changes at the organisation.

X X X

3. Identify (changing) sub-cultures i.e. shared values and multiple identities/ visions of the same organisation as well as the regional vs centralised bias of these sub-cultures.

X X X X

4. Reveal participants’

perceptions on the core purpose and identity of the organisation, and changes in strategy and culture.

X X X

5. Uncover the range of views for why and how CI is done/ should be done and relate to organisational culture and perceptions of the identity of the organisation.

X X X

Page | 157 Research Objectives

Research Methods

Documentary analysis

Interviews Focus groups

Observation / Participant Observation

6. Link each mini-case study to a driving institutional logic i.e. local

accountability or efficiency, or balance of

logics.

X X X X

Source: The Author (2008)