Authored by David McHugh

Bryman & Bell, Business Research Methods,

2
nd
edition, Chapter 16
The nature of qualitative research
qualitative research subsumes several diverse research
methods that differ from each other considerably.
Authored by David McHugh
Features of Qualitative Research
An inductive view of the relationship between theory and research,
whereby the former is generated out of the latter

An epistemological position described as interpretivist, meaning
that, in contrast to the adoption of a natural scientific model in
quantitative research, the stress is on the understanding of the
social world through an examination of the interpretation of that
world by its participants; and

An ontological position described as constructionist, which implies
that social properties are outcomes of the interactions between
individuals, rather than phenomena `out there' and separate from
those involved in its construction
Authored by David McHugh
Main Research Methods Associated With
Qualitative Research
Ethnography/participant observation
Qualitative interviewing
Focus groups
Language-based approaches: conversation
analysis; discourse analysis
Collection and qualitative analysis of texts and
documents
Authored by David McHugh
The Main Steps in Qualitative Research
1. General research questions


2. Selecting relevant site(s) and subjects


3. Collection of relevant data


4. Interpretation of data


5. Conceptual and theoretical work


6. Writing up findings/conclusions
5a. Tighter specification of the
research question(s)
5b. Collection of further data
Fig. 16.1
Authored by David McHugh
Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research
External reliability - the degree to which a study can be
replicated
Internal reliability - whether, when there is more than
one observer, members of the research team agree
about what they see and hear
Internal validity - whether there is a good match
between researchers' observations and the theoretical
ideas they develop
External validity - the degree to which findings can be
generalized across social settings
Based on: LeCompte and Goetz
(1982)
Authored by David McHugh
What is Triangulation?
Triangulation:

entails using more than one method or source of data in the study of
social phenomena.

is an approach that uses `multiple observers, theoretical perspectives,
sources of data, and methodologies (Denzin)

has tended to emphasise multiple methods of investigation and sources
of data

can operate within and across research strategies

can to refer to a process of cross-checking findings deriving from both
quantitative and qualitative research (triangulation of methods)

may often allow access to different levels of reality
see Key concept
16.4
Authored by David McHugh
What is Respondent Validation?
Respondent (or member) validation - a process whereby researchers provide
the people on whom they have conducted research with an account of their
findings.

Forms:

researchers provide each research participant with an account of what they have
said to the researcher in interviews and conversations or of observations of
participants in observational studies.
the researcher feeds back to a group or an organization their impressions and
findings in relation to that group or organization.

Practical difficulties:

respondent validation may occasion defensive reactions and even censorship on
the part of research participants.
it is highly questionable whether research participants can validate a researcher's
analysis, since this entails inferences being made for an audience of social
science peers.
see Key concept 16.3
Authored by David McHugh
The Critique of Qualitative
Research
Qualitative research is too
subjective
Difficult to replicate
Problems of generalization

Lack of transparency

Ethnography and participant
observation

Participant Observation Studies
Beynon (1975) for five years studied the Ford Motor
Companys Halewood assembly plant in Liverpool to
describe the experience of people who worked on the
assembly lines and the way they made sense of
industrial politics; the process whereby people became
shop stewards; the way they understood the job and
the kinds of pressures they experienced.
Delbridges (1998) study of the impact of new
manufacturing techniques on worker experiences in a
Japanese-owned consumer electronics plant, Nippon
CTV and a European-owned automotive components
supplier, Valleyco.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the
Covert Role in Ethnography
Advantages:
Reduces the problem of access
Reduces the problem of reactivity


Disadvantages:
The problem of taking notes
The problem of not being able to use other
methods
Anxiety
Ethical problems
Practical Tip: Micro-ethnography
If you are doing research for an undergraduate project
or masters dissertation it is unlikely that you will be able
to conduct a full-scale ethnography as it may involve you
in spending a considerable period of time in an
organizational setting. Nevertheless, it may be possible
for you to carry out a form of micro-ethnography
(Wolcott 1995). This would involve focusing on a
particular aspect of an organizational culture, such as
the way the organization has implemented TQM, and
showing how the culture is reflected through this. A
shorter period of time (from a couple of weeks to a few
months) could be spent in the organisation, either on a
full- or a part-time basis, to achieve this more closely
defined cultural understanding.
ACCESS TACTICS
Use friends, contacts, colleagues, academics to help
you gain access
Try to get the support of someone within the
organization who will act as your champion
Usually you will need to get access through top
management or senior executives
Offer something in return (e.g. a report). This helps
to create a sense of being trustworthy
Provide a clear explanation of your aims and
methods and be prepared to deal with concerns, e.g.
suggest a meeting


ONGOING ACCESS
People will have suspicions about you,
perhaps seeing you as an instrument of top
management
They will worry that what they say or do may
get back to bosses or to colleagues
They may go along with your research but in
fact sabotage it, engaging in deceptions,
misinformation, and not allowing access to
`back regions'


Classifications of
Participant Observer Roles
Complete participant

Participant-as-observer

Observer-as-participant

Complete observer
What is `Going Native'?
Going native' refers to a plight that sometimes afflicts
ethnographers when they lose their sense of being a
researcher and become wrapped up in the world view
of the people they are studying. The prolonged
immersion of ethnographers in the lives of the people
they study, coupled with the commitment to seeing the
social world through their eyes, lie behind the risk and
actuality of going native. Going native is a potential
problem for several reasons but especially because the
ethnographer can lose sight of their position as a
researcher and find it difficult to develop a social
scientific angle on the collection and analysis of data.

Other Forms of Sampling
Time:
the ethnographer must make sure that people or
events are observed at different times of the day
and different days of the week

Context:
people's behaviour is influenced by contextual
factors so that it is important to ensure that such
behaviour is observed in a variety of locations
Interviewing in qualitative
research
Before the Interview I
Find:
a quiet, private space in which to conduct an interview uninterrupted (e.g. a
suitable spare room that is not being used)

Be careful of:
agreeing to interview someone in their own office
frequent telephone calls or interruptions
traffic, aircraft, machinery or background noise making recorded speech
inaudible

Think about:
closing doors or windows
turning off noisy heaters, fans etc
the comfort and convenience of your interviewee
Before the Interview II
Spend some time:
getting hold of a good tape recorder and microphone
checking the room prior to the interview
doing a speech recording to test acoustics and carefully positioning the
furniture
positioning the microphone as near to your interviewees as possible (and
make sure that they are unlikely to knock it!)

Prepare yourself by:
not being afraid to explain what you need in order to conduct the interview
compromising when it comes to actually getting it
making yourself familiar with the setting in which the interviewee works, lives
or engages in the behaviour of interest to you
cultivating as many of the criteria of a quality interviewer suggested by Kvale
as possible (see Tips and skills p484)

After the Interview
Make notes about:
how the interview went (was interviewee
talkative, cooperative, nervous, well-
dressed/scruffy, etc.?)
where the interview took place
any other feelings about the interview (did it
open up new avenues of interest?)
the setting (busy/quiet, many/few other people
in the vicinity, new/old buildings, use of
computers)

Authored by David McHugh
Formulating Questions for an Interview Guide
Fig. 18.1
Formulate
interview
questions
Specific
research
questions
General
research
area
Interview
topics
Review/revise
Interview questions
Pilot guide
Identify novel
issues
Revise interview
questions
Finalize guide
Authored by David McHugh
Criteria for Successful Interviewers I
1. Knowledgeable: thoroughly familiar with the focus of the interview;
pilot interviews of the kind used in survey interviewing can be useful
here.

2. Structuring: gives purpose for interview; rounds it off; asks whether
interviewee has questions.

3. Clear: asks simple, easy, short questions; no jargon.

4. Gentle: lets people finish; gives them time to think; tolerates pauses.

5. Sensitive: listens attentively to what is said and how it is said; is
empathetic in dealing with the interviewee.

6. Open: responds to what is important to interviewee and is flexible.

7. Steering: knows what he/she wants to find out.
Authored by David McHugh
Criteria for Successful Interviewers II
8. Critical: is prepared to challenge what is said, for example, dealing with
inconsistencies in interviewees' replies.

9. Remembering: relates what is said to what has previously been said.

10. Interpreting: clarifies and extends meanings of interviewees'
statements, but without imposing meaning on them.

11. Balanced: does not talk too much, which may make the interviewee
passive, and does not talk too little, which may result in the interviewee
feeling he or she is not talking along the right lines.

12. Ethically sensitive: is sensitive to the ethical dimension of interviewing,
ensuring the interviewee appreciates what the research is about, its
purposes, and that his or her answers will be treated confidentially.
1-10 Kvale; 11-12 Bryman
Authored by David McHugh
Practical Tip: Interviewees and Distance
Sometimes you may need to contact interviewees who are a
long way from you perhaps even abroad. While
interviewing in qualitative research is usually of the face-to-
face kind, time and money restrictions may mean that you
will need to interview such people in a less personal context.
There are two possibilities. One is telephone interviewing.
The cost of a telephone interview is much less than the cost
involved in travelling long distances. Such interviewing is
touched on in the context of the structured interview in
chapter 8. Another possibility is the online interview in
which the interview is conducted by e-mail.
Focus groups

Authored by David McHugh
Distinctions Between Focus Group and Group
Interview Techniques
Focus groups typically emphasize a specific theme or topic
that is explored in depth, whereas group interviews often
span very widely

Group interviews, unlike focus groups, are often carried out
to save time and money by carrying out interviews with a
number of individuals simultaneously

Focus group practitioners are interested in the ways
individuals discuss issues as members of a group, rather than
as individuals. Focus group researchers are interested in how
people respond to each other's views and build up a view
out of interactions taking place within the group
Authored by David McHugh
What Is the Focus Group Method?
The focus group method is a form of group interview where:
there are several participants (in addition to the moderator/ facilitator)
there is an emphasis on questioning on a particular, fairly tightly defined topic
the accent is upon interaction within the group and the joint construction of
meaning


The focus group contains elements of two methods:
the group interview, in which several people discuss a number of topics, though in
a less tightly defined fashion than a focus group
the focused interview, which may involve individuals or groups and where
interviewees are selected because they `are known to have been involved in a
particular situation' (Merton et al. 1956: 3) and are asked about that involvement

see Key concept 19.1
Authored by David McHugh
Issues in Conducting Focus Groups
Need for tape recording and transcription
How many groups?
Size of groups
Level of moderator involvement
Selecting participants
Asking specific questions
Authored by David McHugh
How Many Groups?
More groups where:

it is unlikely that just one
group will suffice the
needs of the researcher
there is always the
possibility that the
responses are particular to
that one group
the kinds and range of
views are likely to be
affected by socio-
demographic factors such
as age, gender, class, etc
Less groups where:

too many groups will be a
waste of time
when the moderator
reaches the point where
they are able to anticipate
fairly accurately what the
next group is going to say
(as in theoretical
saturation)
more groups will increase
the complexity of your
analysis
see Research in focus 19.4
Authored by David McHugh
Selecting Participants
Who should participate in a focus group?

those who will find the topic relevant
those who can represent:
specific occupational or organizational groupings with an interest in the
topic concerned
a wide range of organizational members
stakeholders from different organizations
stratifying criteria within the organization such as age, gender,
occupation, profession, hierarchical position or length of service

The aim is to establish whether there is any systematic variation in the ways
in which different groups discuss a matter, raising the question of
whether:

to select people who are unknown to each other
to use natural groupings
Authored by David McHugh
Asking Questions
How far there should there be a set of questions that must be
addressed?:
there is probably no one best way:
use just one or two very general questions to stimulate discussion,
with the moderator intervening as necessary
or
inject more structure into the organization of the focus group sessions,
using more questions


style of questioning and moderating is likely to be affected by
various factors such as:
the nature of the research topic
levels of interest and/or knowledge among participants in the research
Authored by David McHugh
An Example of a Focus Group Topic Agenda I
1. Introduction (15 mins.)

Introduce the research team and
roles
Aim and format of the focus
group
Conventions (confidentiality,
speak one at a time, recordings,
everybodys views,
Open debate, report of
proceedings)
Personal introduction of
participants and their
businesses.
2. Discussion Topics

i) Current trading climate (15 mins.)
(e.g. comparative order levels)
ii) Main challenges in the
business environment (20 mins.)
(e.g. exchange rates, recruitment,
raising money)
iii) Government policies and
small firms (20 mins.)
(e.g. the minimum wage, entry into
the Euro)
iv) Topical issues (20 mins.)
(e.g. business succession and exit
strategies)
Fig. 19.1; Blackburn and Stokes 2000
Authored by David McHugh
An Example of a Focus Group Topic Agenda II
3. Summing Up

Thanks for
participation and
report back
Invite back to next
event in 6 months
Reimburse expenses
4. Lunch

Sandwiches and drinks
Close
Authored by David McHugh
Limitations of the Focus Group Method
The researcher probably has less control over proceedings than with the individual
interview

The data are difficult to organize and analyse

Recordings may be more time-consuming to transcribe than recordings of
individual interviews

There are possible problems of group effects, e.g.:
dealing with reticent speakers and those who hog the stage
emerging group views may suppress perfectly legitimate perspectives held by just one
individual (Asch, 1951; see Research on focus 19.7)
group members may think uncritically and develop almost irrational attachments to a
shared group view (Janis, 1982)

Focus groups have a potential to cause discomfort among participants (Madriz,
2000) :
when intimate details of private lives need to be revealed
when participants may not be comfortable in each other's presence
when participants profoundly disagree with each other