Sample Selection

Sampling for this qualitative study was purposive and sought to achieve maximum variation in relation to types of event related organisations represented by the informants. “Purposive sampling is based on the assumption that the investigator wants to discover, understand, and gain insight and therefore must select a sample from which the most can be learned” (Merriam, 2009, p.77). The researcher was required to actively select the most

66

productive sample to address the research question and this strategy was based on the researcher’s practical knowledge of the research area and the available literature and evidence from the study itself. In other words, I (as the researcher) had become the tool/instrument for choosing the most knowledgeable informants according to my own personal judgement in accordance with Janesick (2000, p.386) who stated that “qualitative design requires the researcher to become the research instrument.”

3.4.1 Sample Size

The population of the study consists of the total number of all event planners and venue managers from events related organisations that are based or located within the Klang Valley, Malaysia. Klang Valley is the most developed area in the country comprising Kuala Lumpur and Selangor, the former being the capital city of the country. This location has been chosen to portray the general view of Malaysian case study (Malaysian context) because most event management organisations (as well as most businesses, social and political activities) are based here; a good comparative metaphor of Kuala Lumpur to Malaysia is like London in relation to the UK. Hence, the population sampling would refer to the event practitioners who have direct involvement on safety issues in the event project planning. Event practitioners consist of those working in the event industry ranging from the event planners/managers to all the heads of department related to the event management field such as event coordinators, event executives, project coordinators, health and safety personnel, safety officer, etc. These include the event entrepreneurs who run event management companies and those who are employed in various governmental and private organisations related to event business. Others that are also transcending in this definition are venue managers from event venue providers such as conference and exhibition centres, stadiums, hotels, tourism boards and local councils who own parks and dedicated spaces for public and private events. This is supported by Sweaney (2005) as well as Beaven and Laws (2007) who observed that venue managers and hosts are responsible to keep their venues safe and secure within a broad risk management perspective because similar to event organisers, these host organisations are also subject to any liabilities and legislation

67

aspects of an event been organised. The study focuses on researching organisational facets based on the view from Shrivastava (1995) who stressed that ‘other than to optimise production and maximise profits, corporations must manage risk variables, such as…..public safety.’ A list of selected organisations was obtained from the Ministry of Tourism Malaysia and its subsidiary Tourism Malaysia, Ministry of Information, Communication and the Arts, Malaysia Association of Convention and Exhibition Organisers and Suppliers (MACEOS), Registrars of Companies (SSM), convention and exhibition centres.

Most qualitative undertakings cannot pre-determine a specific number of respondents as noted by Marshall (1996, p.523) who argued that “an appropriate sample size for a qualitative study is one that adequately answers the research question”. Although the initial estimation stated in the proposal was to obtain approximately 40 – 45 participants for reaching the stage of data saturation but in this case, the researcher managed to recruit a total of 33 representative samples of interviewees, selected from various event organisations within the Klang Valley, Malaysia. The sample of informants came from various types of event-based organisations such as event management companies, cultural performance companies, exhibition and trade fair organisers, concert organisers and promoters, professional conference organizers (PCO), professional exhibition organisers (PEO), conventions and exhibition centres including hotels, meeting planners, auditoriums and halls, tourism boards and government event-related agencies/divisions. Interview participants from these broad organisations were stratified according to two main classifications which were categorised based on organisational types and functions, namely event organisations and event venue providers. To be more specific, the sample was drawn from event planners and venue managers who had direct involvement with risks and safety issues in event project planning.

3.4.2 Sample Strategies

Being an exploratory study made it quite difficult as the “sampling strategies can only be guessed, and the researcher at the very least makes the procedures and criteria for

68

decision making explicit” (Marshall and Rossman, 2011, p.104). Before the interviewing process commenced, I identified a number of criteria on which I wanted data – from respondents who were involved directly in planning and managing the overall operations of an event and/or respondents who are responsible for the risk and safety aspect for any particular event. “One needs to learn as much as possible from those who know most. The fact that they may also be the most misinformed and most misinforming does not rule them out” (Stake, 2004, p.111).

According to Stake (2004), choosing the right person to ask is actually one of the first steps. In this case, the event managers and event venue managers were asked important key questions in relation to the research objectives: (i) identify the risk concepts and theories that can be applied to event management functions; (ii) explore how Malaysian event practitioners perceive the importance of risks and safety in event project planning; (iii) identify the type of major risks involved in event management that can affect the safety of event employees and attendees.

Hence, it was also equally important for me to learn their perceptions of risk and safety concerns based on their daily job in the event management industry in Malaysia.

There were also other factors to think about in the process of selecting and recruiting the data sources (respondents). Hence, I also chose data sources partly on the basis of a presumed high likelihood of cooperation (Stake, 2004). This was necessary as Malaysians are quite sceptical about interviews and the interviewing process. This was also one of the reasons I opted for face to face one-to-one interview as I would not have enough time to organise any focus group interviewing or to conduct participant observation (although later I managed to organise one focus group interviewing session). Another concern was due to the intermittent nature of event management work itself. It was just not a daily basis job, a factor that automatically mitigated against participant observation.

Thus, I have adopted judgement sampling, also known as purposeful sampling (or convenience sampling), as my sample strategy to recruit my participants for this study. This strategy required me as the investigator to actively select the most productive sample to answer the research question (Marshall, 1996; Marshall and Rossman, 2011). According to Marshall

69

(1996), this strategy is based on the researcher’s practical knowledge of the research area and the available literature and evidence from the study itself, something that seems pertinent based on my previous experience as Head of Department and lecturer for Bachelor of Event Management (Hons.) at Universiti Teknologi Mara Malaysia. Although I was more like an event academician rather than an event practitioner, I did have substantial professional knowledge on the risk and safety aspects from my experiences and involvement in both event management academia and industry as well as my initial work towards preparing the proposal, and also my on-going effort to engage with this specific area of inquiry that has become my long term commitment of mine since 2008. Apart from that, I have also utilised (or taken advantage of) the interviewees’

contacts by extending the sample through snowballing technique which invited them to introduce me to the next respondent at the end of each session (Yin, 2009). I subsequently found that recruiting respondents was relatively easy, compared to my pilot phase.