Chapter 5. Research Methodology 5.1 Introduction 5.1 Introduction
5.9 The Process of Research Design: Selection and Application of Methodology and Methods Application of Methodology and Methods
5.9.5 Triangulation for Data Validation
It is agreed that any particular research technique may have limitations which could eventually cast doubts on the validity of the data collected. It is therefore
170 fundamental that appropriate techniques are used to guarantee the validity of the data collected and analysed. This could sometimes mean combining two or more research techniques where viable. Triangulation is a research study approach where two or more research techniques are employed. As Dainty (2008) notes, “Qualitative and quantitative approaches may be employed to reduce or eliminate disadvantage of each individual approach whilst gaining the advantages of each.” Dainty (2008) also refers to triangulation as the application of quantitative research to corroborate qualitative research (or vice versa). It doesn’t only mean combining qualitative and quantitative methods but could be a combination of several qualitative methods, for example using focus group to gain an overview of ideas and get an insight into a problem which can be followed by individual interviews (Gray, 2009; Gibson and Brown, 2009; Flick, 2006; Corbin and Strauss, 2008). Other considerations of triangulation are the desire to validate or obtain various data on the same problem, such as combining interview and observation, then perhaps for the purpose of verification, adding another source of data (Corbin and Strauss, 2008). This approach is inherent to help neutralise biases of a single method.
During the observations conducted in this research, there were certain details not comprehensively understood which needed a secondary clarification. This research applied a triangulation approach by using follow-up interviews as a second method to validate the data collected through the observations. As a result, expert judgement was sought on areas that were unclear. This was accomplished by interviewing selected experts (i.e., seeking expert judgement) to shed light on those areas. The follow-up interviews were not only relevant as a triangulation method but created an atmosphere where more data was generated in line with the observations. They also served as a mechanism for the researcher to authenticate the data collected as all those interviewed were participants in the meetings observed. The data was presented allowing the interviewee to comment on its completeness and provided rectifications were necessary.
171 5.9.6 Analysis and Evaluation
Thematic analysis method was used for the analysis of the data collected (Swenden, 2006; Boyatzis, 1998). It is regarded as one of the most common approaches to qualitative data analysis which often attracts a coding approach (Bryman, 2008). Coding involves the breaking down of data into separate pieces and regards the creation of categories and classification of data by grouping them together in a sort that can enable them to be regarded as the same (Charmaz, 2006). Themes are more or the less the same as codes and the process involves constructing themes and subthemes which are often generated after thorough reading of the transcription and field notes that make up the data (Gray, 2009; Bryman, 2008).
The data collected were thoroughly examined and categories established.
Similarities in the data were identified which resulted in the grouping of similar data under different categories. These categories were further classified, coded and sub-divided into different key themes relevant to providing answers to the investigation. Table 5.4 shows a tabulation of the different themes under which the analysis was conducted. These themes formed the basis of the analysis in Sections 6.2 and 6.3 upon which the emerging theory was based. As an analysis method, grounded theory was also applied on the data in order to derive new ideas and theory for better approach to requirements management.
A critical aspect of this research was the mechanism to test and evaluate the Framework and prototype which included industrial input and assessment. It was thought to be relevant and also appropriate to involve industry experts and practitioners to interact with the tool so as to determine its relevancy to industry. The population of the evaluation was stakeholders of the case study projects. Subsequently, a sample of project managers (i.e., both client and consultant project managers) was generated. In order to plan for the focus group evaluation, invitations were sent out as Emails to all the three construction managers, three client project managers and the consultant
172 project manager of the case study projects. Out of the seven invitations, four responded expressing their willingness to attend. As a result, the focus group comprised of participants (three client project managers and the consultant project manager) from the case study projects (Table 5.3). This was convened at the offices of the participants to whom a demonstration of both the Framework and prototype was made. The reason for selecting these project managers was based on the fact that they were directly in charge of managing the client requirements in the case study projects and would be perfect to evaluate the applicability of the Framework and prototype system which was developed based on observations and theory generated from them.
Table 5.3: Participants at the evaluation Participant role Organisation
Client Project Manager A Case Study A Project Client Project Manager B Case Study B Project
Client Project Manager C Case Study C Project
Consultant Project Manager
Responsible for all case study projects
A questionnaire (Appendix E) was designed and developed to enable the participants of the focus group to give their feedback. The questionnaire was design into two parts. The first part centred on evaluation of the Framework and the second focused on the prototype. Each part contained open-ended statements with a likert-scale of 1-5 (where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Undecided, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree) on key criteria factors which facilitated the participants to gauge the Framework and prototype. Text area was left towards the end of the questionnaire for evaluators to make further comments and suggestions in free text as additional information to the evaluation process. All the participants completed the questionnaires which were used for the analysis coupled with the
173
Change request tools To identify the different tools or techniques used for requesting requirement changes.
Communication of changes
To identify the different mechanism/channels of communicating changes.
Errors in changes To find out if errors occur during the change process and to identify the sources of such errors.
Dependency checking To understand how dependencies between requirements are traced and impact analysed.
Delays To find out if delays are caused during the change request process and the causes for such delays.
5.10 Summary
This chapter presented a review of the various research techniques and philosophy in the quest to select the most appropriate for use in this research.
Consequently, this research primarily adopted a qualitative research methodology and qualitative data collection methods. However, a mixed method approach was utilised for the data collection, analysis and evaluation.
This approach followed a review of research philosophy in order to determine how best to design and execute the research. Interpretative and qualitative
174 methodology was selected because of the nature of the research. Case study method was used as the research strategy with observations, interviews, questionnaire, focus groups and document analysis as the data collection methods. Thematic analysis was used for the analysis of the data with some element of grounded theory to develop new ideas and theory;
recommendations for better approach to requirements management, and defining implications for the Framework.
The methodology was also informed by various industries where requirements management has been successfully applied. Even though these are different industries, adoptions have been made in those areas (tools and techniques) deemed to suit the construction industry.
Methodically, the next phase of the research was to implement the research that was designed in this chapter. As a result, the case studies were conducted, data collected and analysed which are comprehensively presented and discussed in the following chapter.
175