Research methods selection

In terms of methodology selection, the options of research method related to two main research paradigms have already been noticed and outlined in Table 3.1. The Research methods in this thesis have been determined in Section 3.3.2. Hence, the research started from semi-structured Interviews with a small number of relevant cases, which are then analysed to inform questionnaire items for a broader survey. The SNA was applied to supplement the typical methods of analysis by qualitative and quantitative approaches. The methods selection of semi-interview and questionnaire survey are justified below, the part of their implementation and all the relevant parts of SNA will be discussed in Section 3.6 to 3.8.

(1) Interview

Interviewing is a frequently used method in social research. It is the interactional exchange of dialogue (Mason 2005), and it is the most natural thing in the world (Silverman 2010). The fundamentals of interviews and interviewing are maintaining and generating conversations with people on a specific topic or range of topics and the interpretations which social researchers make of the resultant data. In addition, interviews also yield rich insights into people’s biographies, experiences, opinions, values, aspirations, attitudes and feelings. This method of data collection is highly suitable for exploratory and inductive types of study as it matches very well with their purposes. Interviews are often considered the one of the best data collection methods (May 2011). In business and management context, in-depth interview aims to use language data to gain insights into social and organizational realities, from organizational members whether they are managers or employees. This takes place through discovering the views, perceptions and opinions of both individuals and groups through the language they use (Easterby-Smith 2012).

There are multiple typologies for qualitative interviews but very little consensus among those typologies (Flick 2007). The most recognized formats of interview include structured, semi- structured and unstructured interviews (ESDS 2012). It is important to be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of the different ways of conducting interviews. While

110

structured interviews follow high degree of standardization of questions and answers, semi- structured and unstructured interviews tend to be flexible about interviewees’ responses but more difficult to interpret (Ghauri and Grønhaug 2002; Bryman 2012). This thesis applied semi-structured interview method to collect the exploratory data, because this method can well meet the needs of answering the research questions RQ1 and 2 RQ2 revisited in Section 3.3.1.

Semi-structured interview sits between the unstructured and structured methods, and utilizes techniques from both. Semi-structured interviewing is more flexible than standardised methods such as the structured interview or survey, this method allows for the exploration of emergent themes and ideas rather than relying only on concepts and questions defined in advance of the interview (ESDS 2013). On the other hand, semi-structure questions are normally specified, but the interviewer is freer to probe beyond the answers in a manner which would appear prejudicial to the aims of standardization and comparability (May 2011). The assumptions underlying semi-structured interview are that questions need to be worded differently for different respondents if they are to have the same meaning for all respondents, and that the order in which questions are presented should depend on the specific context of each interviewer-respondent interaction (Thomas 2004). Thus, the interviewer would usually exploit a standardised interview schedule with set questions which will be asked of all interviewees. The questions tend to be asked in a similar order and format to make a form of comparison between answers possible (Bryman 2012). Besides, the interviewer is allowed to formulate unplanned questions to follow up ideas that appear during the interview, pursue and probe responses, and ask participants for clarification, further elaboration or providing relevant information, through such additional questions (Arskey and Knight 1999).

(2) Questionnaire survey

Questionnaire survey can be a good way of collecting data about the opinions and behaviour of large numbers of people, as long as it is done well. Survey research employs a methodology that has logical similarities to that used in the nature sciences (Williams 2000). Questionnaire survey involves asking each interviewee the same set of standardised questions. The order of questioning is fixed and wording is usually specific, in which there is little scope for probing or deviating from the specified agenda. The questions and the responses given tend to fit into

111

predetermined categories, confirming or disconfirming the hypothesis the researcher is pursuing (ESDS 2012). Unlike the limitation of interview, the questionnaire survey can measure facts, attitudes or behaviour, through which the hypotheses can be operationalized by the quantifiable data collected (May 2001). Survey data can be collected either through self-completion questionnaire, or can be administered by interviewers face-to-face or over the telephone. More recently, advances in communications technology have brought a variety of new options within the scope of researcher in business and management. For example, survey can be undertaken through e-mail or web-based software. The choice between them will depend on many factors, so that there is no single best way (Easterby-Smith 2012). This thesis applied self-completion questionnaire method through e-mails and posts to answer the research questions (3) and (4) revisited in Section 3.3.1, because this method is more efficient and can well confirm and further explore the information received from the semi-structured interview. The correlation between service complexity, business relationship strength and value generated, which cannot be objectively analysed in the interview, can be measured through questionnaire survey. By doing this, SNA can also be operationalized to provide multiple research outcomes.

On the other hand, the research started from semi-structure Interviews with a small number of expert participants and gained some initial conclusions. By applying questionnaire survey which aggregates the information from a broader population can often result in a better outcome. This point can be supported by the concept of “Wisdom of Crowds” came from a book written by James Surowiecki. It is about the aggregation of information in groups resulting in decisions, which are often better than could have been made by any single member of the group, even better than expert’s decision. The book presents an interesting case that:

“… the crowd at a county fair accurately guessed the weight of an ox when their individual guesses were averaged. Unexpectedly, the average was closer to the ox's true butchered weight than the estimates of most crowd members, and also closer than any of the separate estimates made by cattle experts… “(Surowiecki 2004)

112

However, not all crowds (groups) are wise. Consider, for example, mobs or crazed investors in a stock market bubble. According to Surowiecki (2004), the key criteria separate wise crowds from irrational ones can be summarized as: diversity of opinion; independent opinion; and some mechanism exists for turning private judgments into a collective decision. Accordingly, care related to these points was taken in the implementation and analysing stages of the questionnaire survey.

(3) Mixed methods and triangulation

Mixed methods combining qualitative semi-structured interview and quantitative

questionnaire survey were applied in the thesis. By applying such combined qualitative and quantitative methods, the research can obtain several benefits as Bryman (2012) notes:

 Quantitative and qualitative research might be combined to triangulate findings in order that they may be mutually corroborated.

 The research methods associated with both quantitative and qualitative research have their own strengths and weaknesses so that combing them allows the researcher to offset their weakness to draw on the strength of both.

 Quantitative and qualitative research can each answer different types of research question. The researchers can bring together a more comprehensive account of the area of enquiry in which they are interested if both quantitative and qualitative research are employed.

 One of the two research methods is used to help explain findings generated by the other.

 When one method generates surprising results that can be understood by employing the other method.

Triangulation was conceptualized by Webb et al. (1966) as an approach to the development

of measures of concepts, whereby more than one method would be employed in the development of measures, resulting in greater in greater confidence in findings. There are principally four types of triangulation (Patton 1987; Denzin 1989) including: data, investigator, theory and methodological triangulation. However, the emphasis has tended to be on methods of investigation and sources of data (Bryman 2012). Triangulation can operate within and across research strategies. Increasingly, triangulation is also being used to refer to a process of cross-checking findings deriving from both quantitative and qualitative research

113

(Deacon et al. 1998). Moreover, through triangulation with multiple means of data collection, the validity can be further increased (Bryman 2012).

This research has included two main types of triangulation, which are methodological triangulation and data triangulation. Semi-structured interviews lead to new and creative concepts, followed by questionnaire survey and SNA to confirm and measure these concepts. Further, the source of data (samples) investigated by questionnaire survey are more diverse than the ones examined by interviews. Such two types of triangulation will rise the validity of the research.