(BQ) Part 2 Research methods for business students has contents: Collecting primary data through observation, collecting primary data using questionnaires, analysing quantitative data, writing and presenting your project report,...and other contents.
Chapter Collecting primary data through observation Learning outcomes By the end of this chapter you should: • • • • appreciate the role of observation as a data collection method; be able to differentiate between participant observation and structured observation, and understand their differing applications; be aware of approaches to data collection and analysis for each type of observation; be able to identify threats related to validity and reliability for each type of observation and appreciate how to reduce these 9.1 Introduction Observation has been a somewhat neglected aspect of business and management research Yet it can be rewarding and enlightening to pursue and, what is more, add considerably to the richness of your research data Technological changes even mean that observation may become a more popular research method, as the opening vignette suggests If your research question(s) and objectives are concerned with what people do, an obvious way in which to discover this is to watch them it This is essentially what observation involves: the systematic observation, recording, description, analysis and interpretation of people’s behaviour Two types of observation are examined in this chapter Participant observation (Section 9.2) is qualitative and derives from the work of social anthropology early in the twentieth century Its emphasis is on discovering the meanings that people attach to their actions In contrast, structured observation (Section 9.3) is quantitative and is more concerned with the frequency of actions In other approaches to research, those who take part are called either respondents or participants Those who complete a questionnaire are usually called respondents Those who agree to take part in most forms of qualitative research are usually called participants These labels don’t work for observation since it is the researcher who is participating in the environment of other people, responding to the ways in which they carry out their usual activities In observational research, those who agree to be observed are usually called informants (Monahan and Fisher 2010) This is the term that we will use throughout this chapter 340 A common theme in this book is our effort to discourage you from thinking of the various research methods as the sole means you should employ in your study This is equally true of observation methods It may meet the demands of your research question(s) and objectives to use participant observation or structured observation in your study as either the main method of data collection or to supplement other methods Barack Obama is the first President of the United States of America to have an online video diary produced of his presidential activities, known as the White House Blog or ‘West Wing Week’ (Vaidyanathan 2011) Edited and approved footage is posted weekly on the White House website and also on YouTube This provides coverage of the previous week’s events at the White House, or from the places where the President has visited (West Wing Week 2011) The producer of this online video diary, Arun Chaudhary, has been given extensive access to the President This means being able to film inside the Oval Office at the White House and travelling with the President to record events Prior to this online video diary or blog, the official record of each President’s work was produced by the official White House photographer, who recorded important events using still photographs In addition, some key events were filmed by military camera personnel, to provide a motion picture record The advent of this online video diary has resulted in an (almost) all-seeing and all-hearing approach, capable of producing a far more intrusive and revealing record of the President’s activities Arun Chaudhary is quoted by Vaidyanathan (2011: 2), ‘My favourite thing to film is what I call “awkward world leader moments”, which are basically world leaders having chit-chat like you and I would.’ He is also quoted as commenting on the scope of this observational approach, ‘I think people enjoy seeing how their institutions work from the inside, and they’re going to demand more of it’ (Vaidyanathan, 2011: 4) Vaidyanathan (2011) also reports that other world leaders including the Source: Press Association Images (PA Photos)/Jacquelyn Martin President of Russia and the Prime Minister of Canada have employed people to produce video records of their work activities Observation has traditionally been associated with ethnography (see Section 5.5) The use of the Internet to conduct types of observation led to the invention of the term, ‘netnography’ (Kozinets 2006) Now, this use of online video diaries or blogs has lead to another new term to describe this data collection method: ‘videography.’ 341 Chapter Collecting primary data through observation 9.2 Participant observation What is participant observation? If you have studied sociology or anthropology in the past you are certain to be familiar with participant observation This is where ‘the researcher attempts to participate fully in the lives and activities of members and thus becomes a member of their group, organisation or community This enables the researcher to share their experiences by not merely observing what is happening but also feeling it’ (Gill and Johnson 2010: 161) It has been used extensively in these disciplines to attempt to get to the root of ‘what is going on’ in a wide range of social settings Participant observation has its roots in social anthropology, but it was the Chicago School (at the University of Chicago) that changed its focus by using ethnographic methods to study social and urban problems within cultural groups in the USA A seminal example of this work is Whyte’s (1943) Street Corner Society, which examined the lives of street gangs in Boston This approach to ethnography involved researchers living amongst those whom they studied, to observe and talk to them to produce detailed cultural accounts of their shared beliefs, behaviours, interactions, language, rituals and the events that shaped their lives (Cunliffe 2010) Participant observation has not been used that much in management and business research However, this does not mean to say that it has limited value for management and business researchers Indeed, it can be a very valuable tool, usually as the principal research method, but possibly in combination with other methods Delbridge and Kirkpatrick (1994: 37) note that participant observation implies, ‘immersion [by the researcher] in the research setting, with the objective of sharing in peoples’ lives while attempting to learn their symbolic world’ It is worth dwelling on this explanation Whichever role you adopt as the participant observer (the choice open to you will be discussed later), there will be a high level of immersion This is quite different from data collection by means of questionnaire, where you will probably know little of the context in which the respondents’ comments are set or the delicate nuances of meaning with which the respondents garnish their responses In participant observation the purpose is to discover those delicate nuances of meaning As Delbridge and Kirkpatrick (1994: 39) state, ‘in the social sciences we cannot hope to adequately explain the behaviour of social actors unless we at least try to understand their meanings’ This last comment gives a clue to the point that Delbridge and Kirkpatrick make about ‘attempting to learn the [informants’] symbolic world’ Some understanding of this point is vital if you are to convince yourself and others of the value of using participant observation The symbolic frame of reference is located within the school of sociology known as symbolic interactionism In symbolic interactionism the individual derives a sense of identity from interaction and communication with others Through this process of interaction and communication the individual responds to others and adjusts his or her understandings and behaviour as a shared sense of order and reality is ‘negotiated’ with others Central to this process is the notion that people continually change in the light of the social circumstances in which they find themselves The transition from full-time student to career employee is one example of this (How often have you heard people say, ‘she’s so different since she’s worked at that new place’?) The individual’s sense of identity is constantly being constructed and reconstructed as he or she moves through differing social contexts and encounters different situations and different people This is a necessarily brief explanation of symbolic interactionism However, we hope that you can see why Delbridge and Kirkpatrick (1994: 37) think that participant 342 Participant observation Box 9.1 Focus on student research Managers and their use of power: a cross-cultural approach Mong was a young Chinese business graduate who had recently been working in a Chinese/German joint venture in the automobile industry She was located in the supply chain department Mong was completing the latter stages of her MBA As part of the course, she had to submit a research project on a management topic of her choice Mong was fascinated by the international management component of her course that dealt with cross-cultural matters This was particularly significant in her case as she worked at a company site that comprised both Chinese and German managers Mong felt that a body of theory which she could profitably link to the issue of cross-cultural integration was that of power With help from her project tutor she developed a research question that allowed her to explore the way in which Chinese and German managers used power to ‘negotiate’ their relationships in a situation which was unfamiliar to both sets of managers Mong’s question was: ‘What strategies are used by different groups of national managers collaborating in an international joint venture to negotiate their transnational relationships and how effective are these?’ Mong was fortunate that one of her duties was to take minutes at the twice-weekly management meetings in the department She obtained permission to use these meetings to collect her data She developed an observation schedule which related to her research objectives and used this to collect data during each meeting Data collection was not easy for Mong as she had to take minutes in addition to noting the type and frequency of responses of managers However, as time progressed she became very skilled at fulfilling both her minute-taking and data-collection roles She also gained permission to audio-record the meetings At the end of four months, when she had attended over 30 meetings, she had collected a wealth of data and was in a good position to analyse them and draw some fascinating conclusions Mong’s observation role raised ethical questions as she did not reveal her researcher role to the meeting delegates She discussed these questions with her senior manager in the company and project tutor and completed the necessary university ethics committee documentation It was agreed by all concerned that Mong’s research objectives justified the data collection approach chosen and that the university’s ethical code had not been breached observation is about ‘attempting to learn the [informants’] symbolic world’ It is a quest to understand the identity of the individual, but, more importantly, it is about trying to get to the bottom of the processes by which the individual constantly constructs and reconstructs his or her identity (Box 9.1) Different types of participant observation There are four types of participant observation These four types are distinguished by two separate dimensions (see Figure 9.1) One dimension relates to whether the researcher’s identity is revealed (overt observation) or concealed (covert observation) In overt observation, the researcher is open about the fact that she or he is conducting research; in covert observation, the researcher conceals what he or she is doing The other dimension relates to the extent to which the researcher participates in the activities of the organisation, group or community that she or he is observing 343 Chapter Collecting primary data through observation Researcher takes part in activity Participant as observer Complete participant Researcher’s identity is revealed Researcher’s identity is concealed Observer as participant Complete observer Researcher observes activity Figure 9.1 Typology of participant observation researcher roles Based on earlier work, Gill and Johnson (2010) labelled the roles indicated by these four types (Figure 9.1): • • • • complete participant; complete observer; observer-as-participant; participant-as-observer Complete participant The complete participant role sees you as the researcher attempting to become a member of the group in which you are performing research You not reveal your true purpose to the group members You may be able to justify this role on pure research grounds in the light of your research questions and objectives For example, you may be interested to know the extent of lunchtime drinking in a particular work setting You would probably be keen to discover which groups of employees drink at lunchtimes, what they drink, how much they drink and how they explain their drinking Were you to explain your research objectives to the group you wished to study, it is rather unlikely that they would cooperate since employers would usually discourage lunchtime drinking In addition, they might see your research activity as prying This example raises questions of ethics You would be in a position where you were ‘spying’ on people who have probably become your friends as well as colleagues They may have learned to trust you with information that they would not share were they to know your true purpose This example suggests the researcher should not adopt this role where the focus of the research may cause harm to individuals (see Section 6.5) However, there may be other foci where you might consider adopting the role of complete participant, where there would not be any risks of breaching trust or creating harm An example might be where you were researching working practices in an organisation, to evaluate the relationship between theory and practice, where it would be possible to maintain the anonymity of both the organisation and informants as you participated as a co-worker Complete observer Here too you would not reveal the purpose of your activity to those you were observing However, unlike the complete participant role, you would not take part in the activities 344 Participant observation of the group For example, the complete observer role may be used in studying consumer behaviour in supermarkets Your research question may concern your wish to observe consumers at the checkout Which checkouts they choose? How much interaction is there with fellow shoppers and the cashier? How they appear to be influenced by the attitude of the cashier? What level of impatience is displayed when delays are experienced? This behaviour may be observed by the researcher being located near the checkout in an unobtrusive way The patterns of behaviour displayed may be the precursor to research by structured observation (Section 9.3), in which case this would be the exploratory stage of such a research project Observer-as-participant Acting in the role of observer-as-participant will primarily involve you in observing, although your purpose will be known to those whom you are studying In some cases this role may verge on that of participant-as-observer, where it becomes necessary to have some interaction with informants For example, adopting the role of observeras-participant in an outward-bound course to assist team building would mean that you were there as a spectator but it may be necessary to interact with participants and take part in some activities to be able to conduct your observation As an observer-as-participant, your identity as a researcher would be clear to all concerned and they would know your purpose This would present the advantage of you being able to focus on your researcher role For example, you would be able to jot down insights as they occurred to you You would be able to concentrate on your discussions with the informants What you would lose, of course, would be the emotional involvement: really knowing what it feels like to be on the receiving end of the experience Participant-as-observer In the role of participant-as-observer you would both take part and reveal your purpose as a researcher This role is potentially a broad one On the one hand, you may become a fully accredited participant by becoming, for example, an employee in order to undertake your observation study in a particular context As a part-time business or management student you may be able to use your existing employment status to adopt the role of participant-as-observer Alternatively, you may participate in a group without taking on all of the attributes of its members For example, Waddington (2004) describes his experiences of being a participant-as-observer, in which he participated in a strike, spending long hours on the picket line and socialising with those on strike, without being an employee of the company involved To achieve this, it was necessary to gain the support and trust of those involved Waddington describes how he immersed himself in this context, how he experienced the emotional involvement of participating in this event and how he experienced the same feelings as the defeated strikers at the end of the strike Factors that will determine the choice of participant observer role The purpose of your research You should always be guided by the appropriateness of the method for your research question(s) and objectives A research question that seeks to develop an understanding of a phenomenon about which the research informants would be naturally defensive is 345 Chapter Collecting primary data through observation one that lends itself to the complete participant role Discovering what it is like to be a participant on a particular training course is more appropriate to the participant-asobserver role Your status If you are a part-time student who otherwise works full-time in an organisation, there may be a range of opportunities for you to use one of the participant observation roles as the means to collect data to answer your research question and address your research objectives Depending on the nature and focus of your research question and objectives you may be able to adopt the role of either complete participant, or participant-as-observer, or observer-as-participant As a part-time student you will be likely to encounter advantages as well some issues where you conduct research as an insider within your employing organisation (Box 9.2) If you are a full-time student you will need to secure access before adopting this approach but may still be able to adopt any of the four roles depending on the nature of your research question and objectives, the time you have to devote to your research and your circumstances Box 9.2 Focus on management research The case for doing research in your own organisation In an Organisational Research Methods article, Brannick and Coghlan (2007) question the established tradition that academic theory-driven research in organisations is conducted best by outsiders, arguing that this can be done acceptably by insider researchers They define insider researchers as those undertaking research in their own organisations while a complete member, which in this context means both having insider pre-understanding and access and wanting to remain a member on a desired career path when the research is completed Insider research may be frowned upon because it is perceived as not conforming to standards of intellectual rigour, because internal researchers have a personal stake and substantive emotional investment in the setting It is argued that insider researchers are native to the setting and, therefore, they are perceived to be prone to charges of being too close and thereby not attaining the distance and objectivity necessary for valid research Brannick and Coghlan challenge this view and show how insider research, in whatever research tradition it is undertaken, is not only valid and useful but also provides important knowledge about what organisations are really like, which traditional approaches may not be able to uncover Brannick and Coghlan assemble a number of points to substantiate their argument They argue that researchers, through a process of reflexive awareness, are able to articulate tacit knowledge that has become deeply segmented because of socialisation in an organisational system and reframe it as theoretical knowledge Reflexivity is the concept used in the social sciences to explore and deal with the relationship between the researcher and the object of research Insider researchers are already members of the organisation and so have primary access Clearly, any researcher’s status in the organisation has an impact on access Access at one level automatically may lead to limits or access at other levels The higher the status of the researcher, the more access they have or the more networks they can access, particularly downward through the hierarchy However, being in a high hierarchical position may exclude access to many informal and grapevine networks Insider researchers derive benefits from their experience and pre-understanding Managers have knowledge of their organisation’s everyday life They know ▲ 346 Participant observation the everyday jargon They know the legitimate and taboo phenomena of what can be talked about and what cannot They know what occupies colleagues’ minds They know how the informal organisation works and to whom they should turn for information and gossip They know the critical events and what they mean within the organisation They are able to see beyond objectives that are merely window dressing When they are inquiring, they can use the internal jargon, draw on their own experience in asking questions and interviewing, be able to follow up on replies, and so obtain richer data They are able to participate in discussions or merely observe what is going on without others necessarily being aware of their presence They can participate freely without drawing attention to themselves and creating suspicion There are also some disadvantages to being close to the data Insider researchers may assume too much and so not probe as much as if they were outsiders or ignorant of the situation They may think they know the answer and not expose their current thinking to alternative reframing They may find it difficult to obtain relevant data because, as a member, they have to cross departmental, functional or hierarchical boundaries, or because, as an insider, they may be denied deeper access that might not be denied an outsider Insider researchers may have a strong desire to influence and change the organisation They may feel empathy for their colleagues and so be motivated to keep up the endeavour These are beneficial in that they may sustain researchers’ energy and a drawback in that they may lead to erroneous conclusions Insider researchers have to deal with the dilemma of writing a report on what they have found When they are observing colleagues at work and recording their observations, they may be perceived as spying or breaking peer norms Probably the most important issue for insider researchers, particularly when they want to remain and progress in the organisation, is managing organisational politics The time you have to devote to your research Some of the roles outlined earlier may be very time-consuming If you are to develop a rich and deep understanding of an organisational phenomenon, it will need much careful study A period of attachment to the organisation will often be necessary However, many full-time courses have placement opportunities that may be used for this purpose In addition, most full-time students have part-time jobs, which provide wonderful opportunities to understand the ‘meanings’ that their fellow employees, for whom the work is their main occupation, attach to a variety of organisational processes What is needed is a creative perspective on what constitutes research and research opportunities The possibilities are potentially numerous The degree to which you feel suited to participant observation Delbridge and Kirkpatrick (1994) note that not everybody is suited to observational research Much of it relies on the building of relationships with others A certain amount of personal flexibility is also needed As the participant observer you have to be ‘all things to all people’ Your own personality must be suppressed to a greater extent This is not something with which you may feel comfortable Organisational access This may present a problem for some researchers as it is obviously a key issue More is said about gaining access to organisations for research in Sections 6.2 to 6.4 347 Chapter Collecting primary data through observation Ethical considerations The degree to which you reveal your identity as the researcher or adopt a covert stance will be dictated by ethical considerations The topic of ethics in research is dealt with in detail in Sections 6.5 and 6.6 Data collection and analysis Note making and recording data Note making is very important in observation-based studies Your notes are likely to be composed of different types of data Delbridge and Kirkpatrick (1994) categorise the types of data generated by participant observation as ‘primary’, ‘secondary’ and ‘experiential’ (Table 9.1) In addition, you will find it helpful to record contextual data Data collection It is likely that the nature of the primary data you collect will go through various phases, as you first seek to become familiar with the setting in which you are conducting observation before focusing on those aspects that will allow you to answer your research question and meet your objectives Robson (2011) outlines a process that involves descriptive observation, then creating a narrative account before possibly undertaking a phase of focused observation In descriptive observation you will concentrate on observing and describing the physical setting, the key informants and their activities, particular events and their sequence and the attendant processes and emotions involved This description may be the basis for you to write a narrative account, in much the same way as an investigative journalist would write one However, Robson (2011) makes the point forcefully that the researcher must go much further than the journalist Your job as researcher is to go on and develop a framework of theory that will help you to understand, and to explain to others, what is going on in the research setting you are studying To achieve this it may become evident to you that your observation needs to focus Table 9.1 Types of data generated by participant observation Data type Explanation Primary observations Those data where you would note what happened or what was said at the time Keeping a diary is a good way of doing this Secondary observations Statements by observers of what happened or was said This necessarily involves observers’ interpretations Experiential data Those data on your perceptions and feelings as you experience the process you are researching Keeping a diary of these perceptions proves a valuable source of data when the time comes to write up your research This may also include notes on how you feel that your values have intervened, or changed, over the research process Contextual data Those data related to the research setting; for example, roles played by key informants and how these may have changed; organisational structures and communication patterns that will help you to interpret other data Source: Developed from Delbridge and Kirkpatrick (1994) 348 Participant observation on particular events or on the interactions between key informants, which will lead you to undertake a phase of focused observation What will be clear from the types of data you will collect as participant observer is that formal set-piece interviewing is unlikely to take place Such ‘interviewing’ as does take place is likely to be informal discussion It will be part of the overall approach of asking questions that should be adopted in this research method These questions are of two types (Robson 2011): first, to informants to clarify the situations you have observed and, second, to yourself to clarify the situation and the accounts given of the situation How you record your data will depend to a great extent on the role you play as observer The more ‘open’ you are the more possible it will be for you to make notes at the time the event is being observed or reported In any event, there is one golden rule: recording must take place on the same day as the fieldwork in order that you not forget valuable data The importance placed on this by one complete participant observer, working in a bakery, is evident from the following quotation: Right from the start I found it impossible to keep everything I wanted in my head until the end of the day . . and had to take rough notes as I was going along But I was ‘stuck on the line’, and had nowhere to retire to privately to note things down Eventually, the wheeze of using innocently provided lavatory cubicles occurred to me Looking back, all my notes for that third summer were on Bronco toilet paper! Apart from the awkward tendency for pencilled notes to be self-erasing from hard toilet paper . . my frequent requests for ‘time out’ after interesting happenings or conversations in the bakehouse and the amount of time that I was spending in the lavatory began to get noticed . . Ditton (1977), cited in Bryman (1989: 145) Other ways of conducting observation and collecting data Participant observation means that the researcher needs to be present in some way The traditional way to conduct observation involves the researcher being present in the physical setting of those being observed Internet and video technologies mean that an event may be streamed to a different location, or recorded in its entirety, so that the researcher may still be able to operate as a participant observer in the role of either complete observer or observer-as-participant (Figure 9.1) Clearly, what they would not be able to is operate as either complete participant or participant-as-observer if observing a previously recorded event in which they had not taken part The advent of these technologies also means that other forms of observation are now possible These may be linked to participant observation but they cannot be categorised as such The opening vignette indicates that edited video recording can also facilitate observational analysis There are a number of ways in which this approach may be used, with different advantages and disadvantages Recorded material that is suitable may be available to be downloaded from the Internet, perhaps through social networking sites The key here is suitability Such material may provide you with a source of data but this is very likely to have been collected and edited for a different purpose to that of your research question and objectives and so may be of limited use In some cases it may be possible to ask your informant or informants to create a video diary that you subsequently analyse This would have the advantage of being designed to address your research question and objectives but would be a logistically demanding task to plan for and undertake, making this an unlikely event in practice However, this approach may be useful where considerable distances exist between informants, making face-to-face observation difficult or impossible to undertake In such a case, this type of 349 Glossary typical case sampling A purposive sampling method which focuses on selecting those cases on the basis that they are typical or illustrative See also purposive sampling U uninformed response Tendency for a respondent to deliberately guess where they have sufficient knowledge or experience to answer a question unitising data The process of attaching relevant ‘bits’ or ‘chunks’ of your data to the appropriate category or categories that you have devised unit of data A number of words, a line of a transcript, a sentence, a number of sentences, a complete paragraph, or some other chunk of textual data that fits the category unreachable respondent Respondent selected for a sample who cannot be located or who cannot be contacted unstructured interview Loosely structured and informally conducted interview that may commence with one or more themes to explore with participants but without a predetermined list of questions to work through See also informant interview upper quartile The value above which a quarter of the data values lie when the data values for a variable have been ranked URL Uniform resource locator specifying where a known resource can be found V validity (1) The extent to which data collection method or methods accurately measure what they were intended to measure (2) The extent to which 684 research findings are really about what they profess to be about See also construct validity, criterion related validity, ecological validity, face validity, internal validity, measurement validity, predictive validity variable Individual element or attribute upon which data have been collected variance Statistic that measures the spread of data values; a measure of dispersion The smaller the variance, the closer individual data values are to the mean The value of the variance is the square of the standard deviation See also dispersion measures, standard deviation variance inflation factor (VIF) Statistic used to measure collinearity see collinearity VIF see variance inflation factor virtual access The initial level of gaining access to online communities to conduct research See also cognitive access, continuing access, gatekeeper visual aid Item such as an overhead projector slide, whiteboard, video recording or handout that is designed to enhance professional presentation and the learning of the audience W web based questionnaire questionnaire web log see Internet-mediated see blog weighting The process by which data values are adjusted to reflect differences in the proportion of the population that each case represents within-subjects design Experimental design using only a single group where every participant is exposed to the planned intervention or series of interventions See also experiment, between-subjects design Index Page numbers in bold refer to glossary entries 50th percentiles see medians A abduction 144, 145, 147–8, 149, 186, 665 abstracts 601–3, 665 literature sources 98, 100, 102 project report 601–3 utility of articles, assessing using 106 academic journals 84, 86 acceptable knowledge 132–3 access 14, 17, 208–10, 665 difficult or costly for secondary data 320 email 214–15 ethics 237–41 Internet-mediated, issues associated with gaining 214–16, 217 levels of 210, 674 participant observers 347 strategies to gain access 216–26 sufficiency 212–13, 682 traditional, issues associated with gaining 210–14, 215–16 types of 210, 683 action research 173, 183–5, 665 active response rates 268, 665 active voice 617, 665 actual sample size 269–70 ad hoc surveys 307, 313, 665 adjusted minimum sample size 660 advertising 357–8, 573 aggregations 310, 320 alpha coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) 430, 665 alternative form test for reliability 430–1 alternative hypotheses 174, 561, 579, 665 ambiguity about causal direction 193 American Psychological Association (APA) style 111, 608, 656, 657 analysis 619, 665 analysis of data see data analysis of variance (ANOVA) 509, 519, 520, 665 analysis stage, ethics 245–7 Analytic Induction 351, 574–5, 665 annotating 74–5 anonymity 223, 231, 234, 241–2, 245, 248–9, 396, 406, 618, 665 ANOVA (analysis of variance) 509, 519, 520, 665 answerability 44 APA see American Psychological Association appendices 609, 665 application 619, 665 applied research 12, 665 appropriateness 30, 386–7, 388 archival research 173, 178–9, 665 area-based data sets 314 assessment criteria 619–20 assessors’ requirements, meeting 51–2 associated variables 514–17 asynchronous electronic interviews 405–6, 665 attribute variables 425, 426, 665 audio CDs and downloads, referencing Harvard style 654 audio-recordings interviews 396–8, 400 group 402 transcriptions 400, 550–2 authenticity criteria 194 author-date systems 644–56 authority, critique of 77 autocorrelation 529, 666 availability sampling see convenience sampling axial coding 186, 568, 571, 666 axiology 137–9, 140, 666 B back-translation 442 background to research 53–4 bank lending 89 bar charts 488, 489, 490–1, 494, 496, 666 see also multiple bar charts; percentage component bar charts; stacked bar charts base periods 527, 666 basic research 12, 666 behaviour researchers 393 variables 425, 426, 684 beneficence 230, 666 benefits 232 between-subjects design 176, 666 bias 127, 155 interviews 381, 382–3, 389 measurement bias 329 non-response 267 observer bias 352 participant bias 192 researcher bias 192 bibliographic details 110–11, 666 bibliographies 110, 666 abbreviations 658 referencing in 656, 657 Big Mac index 473 blogs 215, 233, 341, 350, 666 referencing Harvard style 651 bookmarking 105 books 85, 88 referencing Harvard style 645–6 bookshops 101 Boolean logic 100, 666 boundaryless careers 608 box plots 489, 495–7, 502, 666 brands 253–5 brainstorming 36–7, 96, 666 break-off 267, 666 brochures, referencing Harvard style 651 685 Index brokers 215 see also gatekeepers browsing 101–2 bulletin boards 215, 233 referencing Harvard style business schools 6–7 652 C capability 28, 30 CAPI (computer-aided personal interviewing) 422–3, 477, 687 CAQDAS (computer aided qualitative data analysis software) 18, 546, 551–3, 555, 558, 563, 566, 573, 581–3, 666 carbon footprints 535–40 careers 202–3 boundaryless 608 case studies 173, 179–81, 260, 666 cases 259–60, 666 choice, Grounded Theory 568–9 data collection 478–82 relationships between cases 502 weighting cases 486–7 negative 562, 676 catalogues 316 categorical data 475, 476, 483–5, 489, 504, 509, 666 categorising data 557–8, 560, 666 category questions 434, 666 CATI see computer-aided telephone interviewing causal relationships 193, 523, 666 causality 45, 666 CD-ROMS, referencing Harvard style 651 censuses 258, 307, 310–12, 433, 666 central limit theorem 265–6, 666 central tendency measures 503–6, 666 CEO (chief executive officers) 479 chapters in books, referencing Harvard style 646–7 chat rooms 233, 405, 406, 666 check questions 431 checking data for errors 486 chi square tests 509, 514–17, 666 chief executive officers (CEO) 479 children’s brand choices 253–5 clarity 614–15 classic experiments 175–6, 667 closed questions 392, 432, 667 cluster sampling 261, 270–2, 278–80, 667 clustering method 598 co-creation 63–6 codebooks 483–5, 667 686 codes of ethics 228–9, 230, 667 coding 185–6, 558, 667 axial 186, 568, 571, 666 data 443–4, 480–5 focused 186, 568, 569–71, 671 initial 186, 568, 569, 571 open 186, 568, 569, 570, 676 pre-coding 443, 678 question responses 443–4 schedules 358–61 selective 186, 568, 572, 681 Template Analysis 572–3 coefficient of determination see regression coefficient coefficient of multiple determination see multiple regression coefficient coefficient of variation 504, 507, 667 cognitive access 211, 215, 216, 353, 667 coherence 51, 159–61 cohort studies 314, 667 collaborative innovation networks 412 collection of data see data collinearity 524–5, 667 comparative data 318 comparative proportional pie charts 489, 494, 501, 667 comparing and contrasting 74 comparisons, constant see constant comparisons compiled data 307, 667 complementarity reason for using mixed methods design 169 complete observer roles 344–5, 667 complete participant roles 344, 346, 667 complete refusal 267, 667 complete response 267, 667 complex methodological choices 165 computer-aided personal interviewing (CAPI) 422–3, 477, 667 computer aided qualitative data analysis software see CAQDAS computer-aided telephone interviewing (CATI) 273, 422–3, 477, 667 concept-driven data categories 558 conclusions 607–8, 667 concurrent embedded design 168, 667 concurrent mixed methods research 167, 667 concurrent mixing methodological choices 165 conference papers, referencing Harvard style 653 concurrent triangulation design 167, 667 conference proceedings 85, 90 confidence reason for using mixed methods design 169 confidentiality 223, 231, 234, 241–2, 245, 249, 667 confounding variables 174–5, 667 conjunctions 499–501 consent 237–8 forms 239–40, 667 inferred 238, 672 informed see informed consent questionnaires 455 constant comparisons 186, 569, 571, 667 construct validity 193, 430, 668 construction industry statistics 431 consultancy reports 609, 613–14, 668 contacts, personal 218–21, 378–9 content project reports 610–14 validity 429, 684 contextual data 318, 348, 395–6, 553, 668 contingency tables 489, 498, 668 continuing access 211, 668 continuous and regular surveys 307, 310–13 continuous data 476, 479, 489, 504, 509, 668 control groups 175, 668 control variables 174–5, 668 controlled index languages 100, 668 controls to allow the testing of hypotheses 668 convenience sampling 261, 282, 284, 291, 668 convergence 93 co-production 63–6 correlation 521, 668 correlation coefficients 509, 521–2, 668 costs and benefits analysis 321, 329–31 costs, interviewing issues 398 course materials, referencing Harvard style 654–5 coverage 323, 668 covering letters 446, 449, 668 covert observation 343 covert research 243, 668 Cramer’s V 509, 515–16, 517, 668 creative thinking technique 30–1, 34–7, 668 credibility 194 interviews and 385 researchers 222, 225–6 criterion-related validity 429–30, 668 critical case sampling 261, 282, 284, 288–9, 290, 668 Index critical discourse analysis 577–8 critical ethnography 182, 668 critical friends 600 critical incidence technique 390–1, 668 critical incidents 391, 668 critical realism 136–7, 668 critical reviews of literature see literature: reviews Cronbach’s alpha 430, 668 crop science 138–9 cross-cultural research 343 cross-posting 454, 669 cross-sectional research 190, 669 cross-tabulation 489, 498, 669 culture differences, interviews 384–5 organisational 132 D data 46, 669 analysis 14, 18, 232, 234 ethics 236, 245–7 observation 351, 361 qualitative see qualitative data quantitative see quantitative data questionnaires 422–3 software 422–3, 473–4 archive catalogues 316 categorising data 557–8, 560, 666 checking for errors 486 cleaning 550 clouds 565 coding 443–4, 480–5 collection 14, 17–18 email use during 242 ethics and 236, 241–4 interactive nature of data analysis and 562 measurement bias 329 observation 348–50, 358–61 philosophies 140 questionnaires 423–8 confidentiality 231, 234 display and analysis 564–6, 572, 665 harvesting 233 management compliance 232, 235 matrices 478–82, 564, 665 non-standardised 546 primary see primary data processing 236, 247–9 protection 247–9 qualitative see qualitative data quality interviews and 380–4 lack of control over 320 quantitative see quantitative data reduction 564, 680 requirements table 425–8 research proposals and 54–5 sampling 551, 681 saturation 283, 681 secondary see secondary data storage 236, 247–9 types 475–7, 478 use 144 data-driven data categories 558 Data Protection Act 1998: 247–8 databases 98–100, 102 debriefing 243, 669 deception 233, 238, 241, 669 deciles 504, 506, 669 deductive approach 48, 669 abductive approach and 144–5 characteristics 145–6 critical reviews 73–4 inductive approach and 144–5, 146–7, 148–9, 153, 155 premises 143–4 qualitative analysis 548–9, 578–81 sequential steps 145 definitions, secondary data and 320, 321 degrees of freedom 510 deliberate distortion 329, 669 delivery and collection questionnaires 419–20, 421, 457, 669 Delphi technique 37, 38, 669 deontological view 227, 669 dependability 194 dependent variables (DV) 174–6, 424, 502, 579, 669 descriptive data 475, 476, 479, 489, 504, 509, 669 descriptive observation 348, 669 descriptive research 171, 172, 377, 419, 669 descriptive statistics 502–8, 669 descripto-explanatory studies 171, 669 design questionnaires 428–52 research see research design determination, coefficient of see regression coefficient deviant sampling see extreme case sampling diagrams 46, 487, 488, 612 online, referencing Harvard style 652–3 see also bar charts; box plots; histograms; line graphs; pictograms; pie charts; scatter graphs/plots diaries electronic 217 reflective 13–15, 555–6, 669 video 349–50 dichotomous data 475, 476, 669 dictionaries 92–3 referencing Harvard style 647 differences cultural, interviews 384–5 qualitative and quantitative data, between 546–7 testing for 509, 512–20 difficult interviewees 394, 395 digital object identifiers (DOI) 644, 669 direct realism 136–7, 669 direct translation 442 disability guidelines 663–4 discourse analysis 577–8, 669 discoveries, unforeseen 318 discrete data 476–7, 479, 489, 504, 509, 669 discriminatory language 618 discursive practice 578 discussion groups, Internet 214 discussion lists, referencing Harvard style 652 discussions 32, 92, 605–6, 669 dispersion measures 504, 506–8, 670 dissertations 32, 670 distortion, deliberate 329, 670 distribution of values 495–8, 501–2 distribution systems 535–40 divergence 93 diversity reason for using mixed methods design 169 document summaries 554, 670 documentary secondary data 307, 308–9, 670 DOI (digital object identifiers) 644, 670 dominant chief executive officers 479 double phase methodological choices 165 double-phase research design 167 Dow Jones Industrial Average 528 drafts of reports 618–19 Durbin–Watson statistic 529, 670 DV see dependent variables DVDs, referencing Harvard style 654 dynamic capabilities 404 E ecological validity 352, 670 EDA (exploratory data analysis) 487, 670 effect size index 513, 670 electronic data gathering 305 electronic diaries 217 687 Index electronic interviews see interviews electronic questionnaires 419–20, 446, 454–5, 670 electronic textual data 553 elements 258, 259, 670 emails access 214–15 data collection, use during 242 delivery of questionnaires 454–5 interviews 214, 405, 407–8, 670 lists 215, 233 referencing Harvard style 652 requesting access 221–2 embedded mixed methods research 168, 670 emotional labour 204–5, 337–8, 589–91 encyclopaedias 92–3 environmental impacts of business activities 535–40 environmentally friendly office spaces 587–9 epistemology 132–4, 140, 670 errors checking for 486 grammatical 616, 617, 671 informants 361–2 observers 352 participants 192 researchers 192 time 362, 683 Type I 513–14 Type II 513–14 ethical clearance 52 ethics 14, 17, 208–10, 670 access gaining stage 237–41 analysis stage 236, 245–7 checklist 246–7 codes of 228–90, 230, 667 complete participant roles and 344 data collection stage 236, 241–4 defining research ethics 226–30 general categories of 230–5 Internet issues 232–5 participant observation 344, 348 principles for recognition and overcoming or minimising 230–5 reporting stage 245–7 research design 191, 237–41 at specific stages of research process 236–47 ethnicity guidelines 662–3 ethnography 130, 155, 173, 181–2, 341, 670 European Union (EU) data protection 247 evaluation 619, 670 688 literature 107–8 secondary data sources 321–31 evidence 22–3 see also literature: reviews existing contacts 219–20, 670 experiential data 348, 670 experiential meanings 442, 670 experimental group 175, 670 experiments 173, 174–6, 214, 670 expert systems 670 explanation building 580–1, 670 explanatory research 172, 377, 419, 580, 670 exploratory data analysis (EDA) 487, 670 exploratory studies 171, 172, 377, 419, 580, 670 extended text 565 extension questions 393 external researchers 195–6, 213–14, 671 external validity 176, 194, 671 see also generalisability extreme case sampling 261, 282, 284, 287, 671 F F-tests 525, 527 face-to-face interviews 375 face validity 429–30, 451, 671 facilitation reason for using mixed methods design 169 facilitators 403 false assumptions 194–5 familiarity 217 farm shops 535–6, 538–9 fast food retailers 356–7 feasibility 52, 212–13, 671 feelings, researchers 134 films, referencing Harvard style 653–4 filter questions 444, 671 findings, reporting see project reports flash-mobs 412–13 focus groups 375, 400–2, 403, 671 focus reason for using mixed methods design 169 focused coding 186, 568, 569–71, 671 focused interviews 374, 375, 671 focused observations 349, 671 follow-ups 392, 454, 457, 671 food crop science 138–9 farm shops 535–6, 538–9 fast food retailers 356–7 food miles 535–40 footnotes (Vancouver) system 111, 608, 656–7 forced-choice questions see closed questions forecasting 527–9 forums see Internet: forums freedom, degrees of 510 Freedom of Information Act 2005 318 frequency distributions 488, 489, 671 frequency polygons 489, 493 FTSE 100 index 527, 528 full text online databases 98 full-text searches 100 fully integrated methodological choices 165 fully integrated mixed methods research 166–7, 671 functionalist paradigm 141–2, 155, 671 fundamental research see basic research G Gantt charts 56–9, 671 gatekeepers 210–11, 317, 671 see also brokers gender 617–18, 662 general focus research questions 43, 671 general search engines 103, 104, 317 generalisability 144, 169, 194, 195, 262–5, 382, 383–4, 671 see also external validity generalisations 144, 146, 671 generic approaches to qualitative data analysis 556–66 goal setting 597 Goldilocks test 42, 671 Google 93 government publications 90, 310, 312 referencing Harvard style 648–9 government statistics 317, 319–20 government websites 316 graduate recruitment 263 grammar 442, 616–18 grammatical errors 616, 617, 671 grand theories 49–50 graphics in project reports 612 graphs see line graphs; multiple line graphs; scatter graphs green jobs 606 grey literature see primary literature Grounded Theory 173, 185–7, 386, 556, 565, 567–72, 574, 671 group interviews 14, 18, 375, 400–3, 672 H habituation 243, 353–4, 672 handbooks 92–3 Index haphazard sampling 261, 284, 290–1, 672 happiness 177–8 harm avoidance of 230, 231 causing 233 Harvard system 111, 608, 644–56, 657 harvesting 233 heterogeneous sampling 261, 282, 284, 287–8, 672 heteroscedasticity 524, 672 highest and lowest values 488–93, 499 Hippocratic Oath 209 histograms 489, 490–2, 672 home pages 103 homogeneous sampling 261, 282, 284, 288, 672 homoscedasticity 524, 672 hybrid access 210, 215, 672 hyperlinks 215 hypotheses 46, 135, 145, 174, 672 alternative 174 generation 580 null 174 testing 508, 513, 560–1, 571 see also significance testing I Ibid 658 ideas notebooks of 34, 676 see also research ideas idiomatic meanings 442, 672 immersive market research 547 implied consent 238 in-depth interviews see interviews ‘in vivo’ codes 557–8, 565, 569, 673 incremental access 211, 225 independent groups t-tests 509, 517, 520, 672 independent measures 176, 672 independent variables (IV) 174–5, 424, 502, 579, 672 index numbers 504, 507–8, 509, 525–7, 672 indexes 98, 316 individual workplace performance 119–23 inductive approach 48, 672 abductive approach and 144–5 critical reviews 74 deductive approach and 144–5, 146–7, 148–9, 153, 155 premises 143–4 qualitative analysis 548, 549, 566–78 ineligible respondents 268, 672 inference, statistical 266, 672 informants 340, 672 error 361–2, 672 interviews 375, 672 verification 352–3, 672 information gateways 104, 311–12, 317 provision to interviewees 385–6 public 379 sources, students’ use 438 informed consent 231, 234, 238, 241, 672 initial coding 186, 568, 569, 571 initial samples 568, 672 initiation reason for using mixed methods design 169 insider researchers 346–7 instant messaging 214, 215, 233, 406 instrumentation 193 integers 477, 672 integration of ideas 38–40 integrity of researchers 231 interconnectivity 44 interests of researchers 31 interim summaries 553–4, 672 inter-library loans 105, 672 internal consistency 430 internal researchers 196, 214, 243, 673 internal validity 176, 193, 428, 429, 673 Internet 83 access, issues associated with gaining 214–16, 217 bibliographic details 110 data collection, use during 242 ethics 228, 229, 232–5 forums 405, 406–7, 673 information gateways 104, 311–12, 317 interviews 214, 375, 404, 405–8 netiquette 235, 454, 676 questionnaires 214, 217, 419–20, 421, 446, 447, 454–5, 673 referencing Harvard style 651 research ethics and 232–5, 242 searching 103–5, 109–10 secondary data 311–12, 317, 325 see also entries beginning with online and web interpretation questions 393 interpretation reason for using mixed methods design 169 interpretive ethnography 182, 673 interpretive paradigm 141, 142–3, 673 interpretivism 137, 140, 155, 673 inter-quartile range 504, 506, 673 interval data 475, 476, 673 intervening variables 561 interviewee bias 381, 382–3, 673 interviewer-administered questionnaires 420, 673 interviewer bias 381, 382–3, 673 interviews 372–4, 673 data quality issues 380–4 electronic 375, 404, 405–8, 670 email see emails ethics 242 focus groups see focus groups focused 374, 375, 671 group see group interviews guides 386 in-depth 14, 18, 374, 375, 377 checklists 387, 397 conducting 388–98 data quality issues 380–4 management of 399 occasions for use 378–80 opening comments 389, 390 preparation for 384–7 questions 389–93 researchers’ appearance 388 scheduling 399 Internet see Internet journalism 373 links to the purpose of research and research strategy 376–7 logistical issues 398–400 non-directive 374, 375 non-standardised 375 preparation for 384–7 resource issues 398–400 schedules see structured below semi-structured 14, 18, 374–5, 377, 413, 681 checklists 387, 397 conducting 388–98 data quality issues 380–4 management of 399 occasions for use 378–80 opening comments 389, 390 preparation for 384–7 questions 389–93 researchers’ appearance 388 scheduling 399 structured 374, 375, 377, 420, 421, 458, 682 telephone 375, 404–5 themes 385–6 transcribing 550–2 types of 374–5 unstructured 374, 684 see also in-depth above word processing notes of 598 intranet-mediated access 210, 673 689 Index intranet-mediated interviews 375, 404, 405–8 intranet-mediated questionnaires 419–20, 421, 446, 454–5, 673 introductions 603, 673 introductory chapters 603 introductory letters 222, 673 intrusive research methods 212, 673 investigative questions 425, 427–8, 673 IV see independent variables J jargon 615 journals 84, 86, 673 articles, referencing Harvard style 649–50 journalism 373 judgemental sampling see purposive sampling K Kendall’s rank correlation coefficient (Kendall’s tau) 509, 521, 673 key words 566, 673 knowledge acceptable 132–3 creation 8–9 level of 384–5 Kolmogorov–Smirnov test 509, 510–11, 517, 518, 673 kurtosis 495, 674 L labelling categories 558 language discourse analysis 577–8 non-discriminatory 618, 662–4 report writing 615 suitability 224 translating questions 442–3 law of large numbers 266, 674 layout quantitative data 477–82 questionnaires 444–6, 447–8 leading questions 393 lean supply chains 535–40 learning cycle 13 learning, organisational 153–5 letters covering 446, 449, 668 introductory 222, 673 referencing Harvard style 652 690 lexical meanings 442, 674 libraries 105–7, 316–17 Likert-style rating scales 436, 674 limited character blogs 215 line graphs 489, 493, 494, 674 see also multiple line graphs linearity 524, 674 link terms 100 linked web pages 215 list questions 433–4, 674 listening skills 393 lists email 215, 233 of names, addresses and email addresses 262–5 literal replication 180–1, 674 literature abstracts as sources 98, 100, 102 deductive approach impact on 580 critical reviews see reviews below exploring relevance using 34–6 grey see primary below primary 82–5, 89–90, 678 quotations from 616 relevance exploring using 34–6 relevance of 107–8 reports as sources 85, 90 reviews 14, 17, 70–3, 668 content 76–7 evaluating literature 107–8 literature search see searches below literature sources 82–90 obtaining literature 105–7 plagiarism 113–15 project reports, positioning in 603–4 purpose of 73–4 reading, adopting critical perspective in 74–5 recording literature 108–11 research questions, chapters informing 604 structure 77–82 systematic reviews 112–13, 119–23 writing 596 scanning 101–2 searches 32–3 conducting 97–105 planning 90–7 secondary 82–9, 681 sources 82–90 tertiary see tertiary literature sources sufficiency 108 tertiary sources see tertiary literature sources value of 107–8 Loc cit 658 locations interviews 386–7, 401 for writing 597 logic 144 logic leaps 194–5 logical reasoning 45, 674 logical sequences 575 logistical issues of interviewing 398–400 London Olympics long-term trends 529, 674 longitudinal secondary data 307, 314, 327–8 longitudinal studies 190–1, 318, 404, 674 lower quartile 506, 674 lowest and highest values 488–93, 499 lurking 233 M magazine articles, referencing Harvard style 650 mail questionnaires see postal questionnaires management reports 609, 613–14, 674 Mann–Whitney U tests 509, 520, 674 market research 547 marketing 189 matched pair analysis 175, 674 matrices data display 478–2, 564 project report conclusions 607 matrix questions 440, 674 maturation 193 mature markets 366–8 maximum variation sampling see heterogeneous sampling means 504–6, 674 measurability 44 measurement bias 329 measurement validity 322–3, 429, 674 media releases, referencing Harvard style 651 scanning 33–4 trust of 376 medians 504, 505, 674 mediating variables (MV) 174, 424, 674 memos to self 554–5, 674 metasearch engines 103–4 method 3–4, 54–5, 57, 674 methodological choices 165 methodology 3–4, 604, 605, 674 middle-range theories 49–50 mind maps 36, 394, 607 mindcam technique 350 Index minimal interaction 353, 674 minimum sample size 265–7 missing data, coding 485 mistrust 233 mixed methods 165, 674 mixed methods research 165–70, 217, 675 mixed model research 165, 675 mixed translation techniques 442 modal groups 504, 675 Mode knowledge creation 8, 675 Mode knowledge creation 8–9, 675 Mode knowledge creation 9, 675 moderating variables 174, 424, 675 moderators 403, 406, 675 modes 503–4, 505, 675 mono method 164–5, 675 mortality (withdrawing from studies) 193 moving averages 509, 527–9, 675 multicollinearity 524, 675 multi-method qualitative studies 165, 675 multi-method quantitative studies 165, 675 multi-method research 165 multi-phase research design 167, 675 multiple bar charts 489, 498, 499, 675 multiple determination, coefficient of see multiple regression coefficient multiple-dichotomy coding method 481, 482, 675 multiple line graphs 489, 499–500, 675 multiple methods 148–9, 164–70, 377, 675 multiple phase methodological choices 165 multiple regression analysis 523, 526–7, 675 multiple regression coefficient 509, 523, 675 multiple reports for multiple audiences 612–13 multiple-response coding method 480–2, 675 multiple-source secondary data 307, 313–14, 327–8, 675 multi-stage sampling 261, 270–2, 279–80, 675 MV (mediating variables) 174, 424, 674 N narrative accounts 348, 675 Narrative Analysis 575–7, 676 Narrative Inquiries 173, 187–90, 575, 676 narratives 188, 675 narrowing down, working up and 38–40 National Health Service (NHS) 229, 230 national income accounts 177–8 naturalism 181, 676 negative cases 562, 676 negative correlation 521, 676 negative skew 495, 676 netiquette 235, 454, 676 netnography 341 networks 564–5 new contacts 220–2, 676 newspapers 85, 88–9 referencing Harvard style 650 NHS 229, 230 nominal data see descriptive data non-directive interviews 374, 375 non-discriminatory language 618, 662–4 non-maleficence 230, 231, 676 non-parametric statistics 508, 676 non-probability sampling 261, 262, 271, 281–91, 298–9, 580, 676 non-random sampling see non-probability sampling non-refereed academic journals 84, 86 non-response 267–8, 485, 676 non-response bias 267 non-standardised data 546 non-standardised interviews see interviews: semi-structured non-text materials 307, 308–9 normal distribution 495, 676 normality testing 509, 510–12 note making 108–10, 348, 394–8, 402 notebooks of ideas 34, 676 research 13–15, 555, 680 null hypotheses 174, 513, 676 numeric rating scales 438, 676 numeric referencing systems 656–7 numerical data 475, 476, 482, 489, 504, 509, 517–20, 676 O objectivism 131, 141, 676 objectivity 676 critique of 77 researchers 231, 241 observation 14, 18, 676 ethics and 242–3 participant 340–1, 342–55, 676 structured 340–1, 355–62, 682 observer-as-participant roles 344, 345, 346, 353, 676 observer bias 352, 676 observer effect 353–4, 676 observer error 352, 676 office spaces 587–9 Olympic Games, London one-stage cluster sampling see cluster sampling one-to-many interviews 375 one-to-one interviews 375 one-way analysis of variance 520, 676 online advertising 357–8 online catalogues 316 online communities 215, 406–7 online databases 98–100, 102 online diagrams, referencing Harvard style 652–3 online images, referencing Harvard style 652 online indexes 316 online news 376 online public access catalogues (OPAC) 98–9 online questionnaires 419–20, 421, 443–4, 446, 447, 454–5, 464–6, 676 online shopping 297–9 online teaching materials, referencing Harvard style 654–5 online video diaries 341 ontology 130–1, 140, 676 Op cit 658 OPAC (online public access catalogues) 98–9 open coding 186, 568, 569, 570, 676 open questions 391, 432–3, 677 opening comments, interviews 389, 390 operationalisation 44, 146, 677 opinion variables 425, 426, 677 optical mark readers 423, 677 oral presentations see presentations ordinal data see ranked data organisation-provided topics 40 organisational access 347 organisational behaviour 33 organisational benefits 223–4, 232 organisational concerns 223 organisational culture 132 organisational documentation 304–6, 308, 385 organisational learning 153–5 outcomes, potential, symmetry of 29 outliers 495–7 outline structures 598 overall suitability 322–3 overt observation 343 691 Index P paired t-tests 509, 518–19, 677 paradigms, research 140–3, 677 parallel translation 442 parameters of literature search 91 parametric statistics 508, 677 partial response 267, 677 partially integrated methodological choices 165 partially integrated mixed methods research 166–7, 677 participant-as-observer roles 344, 345, 346, 677 participant bias 192, 677 participant error 192 participant information sheets 238, 239, 677 participant observation 340–1, 342–55, 677 participant researchers 214, 243, 677 participants 677 difficult interviewees 394, 395 participation 184, 231 participation bias 381, 677 passive analysis 233 passive voice 616–17, 677 past events 193 past project titles 32 past tense 616–17 patterns matching 579-81, 677 recognising 565 Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient (PMCC) 509, 521–2, 677 peer reviewed academic journals see refereed academic journals percentage component bar charts 489, 499, 677 percentiles 504, 506, 677 permanence of data 318–19 personal contacts 218–21, 378–9 personal data 247–9, 677 personal entry 212, 677 personal pronouns 617, 677 phenomenology 137, 677 Phi 509, 516, 517, 677 physical access 210–11, 216, 677 pictograms 489, 492–3, 677 pie charts 489, 494, 495, 496–7, 677 see also comparative proportional pie charts pilot testing 451–2, 677 plagiarism 113–15, 678 planning literature searches 90–7 project reports 620–3 writing 598 692 PMCC (Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient) 509, 521–2, 677 populations 259, 260, 678 positive correlation 521, 678 positive skew 495, 678 positivism 134–5, 140, 154–5, 678 Post-it notes post-tests 175–6, 678 postal questionnaires 419–20, 421, 447, 453, 456–7, 678 poster presentations 18 potential outcomes, symmetry of 29, 678 power, cross-cultural integration 343 PowerPoint 612–3, 678 PR (public relations) 379 practitioner-researchers 196, 243, 678 pragmatism 130, 140, 678 precise suitability of secondary data 322, 323–9 pre-coding 443, 678 preconceived ideas avoidance 52 prediction of values 509, 524–5 predictive validity 429–30, 678 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) 113 preliminary inquiries 37–8, 39, 678 preliminary searches 33, 678 present tense 617 presentations 14 oral 18, 620–4 poster 18 project reports 620–4, 627–30 pre-set codes 483, 678 press agencies 379 press releases, referencing Harvard style 651 pre-survey contact 219–21, 454, 678 pre-tests 175–6, 678 previewing 74 project report chapters 612 primary data 304, 306, 678 see also interviews; observation; questionnaires primary literature 82–5, 89–90, 678 primary observations 348, 678 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses) 113 privacy 231, 233, 247, 249, 678 probabilities 512 probability sampling 261, 262, 282, 678 sample size 265–70 sampling frame 262–5 techniques 270–81 probing questions 392, 678 problem solving reason for using mixed methods design 169 professional journals 84, 86, 678 progress summaries 553–4 project reports 14, 18, 594–6, 678 abstracts 601–3 appendices 609 assessment criteria 619–20 conclusions chapters 607–8 content organisation 610–14 discussions 605–6 dividing the work 611–12 ethics 236, 245–7 of findings 232, 234 findings chapters 604–5 introductory chapters 603 length 610 literature reviews positioning 603–4 methodology chapters 604, 605 multiple reports for multiple audiences 612–13 presentations 620–4, 627–30 previewing chapters 612 recommendations 609 references 608–9 structuring 600–10 summarising chapters 612 titles 610 writing styles 614–19 prompt cards 435 proportions comparison of 489, 499, 501 showing 489 proposing type questions 393 propositions development and verification 562 testable 560–2, 579 testing 580 public information 379 public relations (PR) 379 publishers’ web pages 98, 101 pure research see basic research purpose data presentation and 320 literature reviews 73–4 questionnaires, explaining 446–51 research clear account of, providing 222 disadvantages of secondary data 319–20 interviews and 376–7, 378 participant observer roles and 345–6 purposive sampling 261, 282, 284, 287–9, 678 Index Q qualitative data 544–6, 678 analysis 14, 18 aids 553–6 CAQDAS use 581–3 deductively-based 548–9, 578–81 generic approaches 556–66 inductively-based 548, 549, 566–78 preparation of data for analysis 550–3 meaning 546–8 quantitative data and, differences between 546–7 quantitisation of 166, 563–4, 679 reporting results 563 qualitative interviews 377, 400, 404, 679 qualitative research design 161, 163–4 Internet 214 quality data see data research design 191–5 quantifiable data see numerical data quantitative data 472, 679 analysis 14, 18, 472–5 checking for errors 486 coding 480–5 data layout 477–82 descriptive statistics 502–8 entering data 485–6 examining relationships, differences and trends using statistics 508–29 exploring and presenting data 487–502 inputting data 485–6 qualitisation of 166, 679 preparing data 477–85 significance testing 508–29 weighting 486–7 qualitative data and, differences between 546–7 types of 162, 475–7, 478 quantitative research design 161–3 Internet 214 quantity questions 440, 679 quartiles 506, 679 quasi-experiments 175, 679 questionnaires 14, 18, 416–19, 679 choice of 420–3 closing 451 consent 455 constructing 444–6 deciding on data to be collected 423–8 delivery and collection 452–8 design 428–52 ethics 245 Internet see Internet introducing 446–50 layout 444–6, 447–8 occasions of use 419 overview 419–23 pilot testing 451–2 purpose, explaining 446–51 reliability 430–1 types of 419–20 validity 428–31, 451–2 questions coding 443–4 designing for questionnaires 431–43 in-depth interviews 379, 389–93 order and flow in questionnaires 444, 445 semi-structured interviews 379, 389–93 sensitive 391 translating questions into other languages 442–3 wording 440–1 quota sampling 261, 282, 284–7, 679 quotations from literature 616 R radical change 141, 679 radical humanist paradigm 141, 143, 679 radical structuralist paradigm 141, 143, 679 radio programmes, referencing Harvard style 653 random digit dialling 273, 274 random number tables 273 random sampling 261, 679 numbers 661 see also simple random sampling; stratified random sampling; systematic random sampling ranges 504, 506, 679 rank correlation coefficients 509, 521–2 ranked data 475, 476, 489, 504, 509, 517, 679 ranking questions 434–6, 679 rating questions 436–9, 445 ratio data 475–6, 679 rational thinking technique 30–4, 679 raw data 307, 679 reactivity 243, 679 reading, critical 74–5 realism 136–7, 140, 679 realist ethnography 182, 679 reasoning backwards 611 logical 45, 674 recent events 193 re-coding 482, 679 recommendations 609 recorded materials 349 recording interviews 394–8, 394–8, 402 literature 108–11 participant observation data 348 reductionism 146, 679 refereed academic journals 84, 86, 679 reference books, referencing Harvard style 647 references 46, 58, 59, 110, 608–9, 656, 679 referencing styles 110–11, 608–9, 644–58 reflective diaries 13–15, 555–6, 679 see also research notebooks reflective questions 393 reflexivity 346, 679 regression analysis 509, 523, 526–7, 679 regression coefficient 509, 523, 525, 680 regression equation 509, 524, 680 regular surveys 307, 310–13 regulatory perspective 141, 680 relationships 565 causal 193, 523 recognising 560, 565 significant, testing for 512–20 strength of 509, 521–3 relevance 44 gap 8–10 exploring using literature 34–6 of literature 107–8 trees 36, 96–7, 680 reliability 192–3, 680 interviews 381, 382 participant observation issues 352–5 questionnaires 430–1 secondary data 323–9 structured observation issues 361–2 repeated measures 680; see also within-subjects design reports ethics and 245–7 of findings see project reports literature sources 85, 90 project reports see project reports purpose and data presentation 320 qualitative data results 563 referencing Harvard style 647–8 see also consultancy reports; management reports representation 181 693 Index representative samples 267, 680 representative sampling see probability sampling representativeness of samples 280–1, 518 research 680 business and management research 6–12 nature of 4–6 process 12–13, 14 research approaches 14, 17, 143–9, 680 multiple methods research design 164 qualitative research design 163 quantitative research design 162 research design 14, 17, 158–9, 680 choice and coherence 159–61 concurrent embedded 168 concurrent triangulation 167 double-phase 167 ethics 191, 237–41 mixed methods 166–70 multi-phase 167 multiple methods 164–70 nature of 170–2 qualitative methods 161, 163–4 quality 191–5 quantitative methods 161–3 requirements and questionnaires 423–5 researchers’ roles 195–6 sequential explanatory 167 sequential exploratory 167 single-phase 167 strategies see research strategies time frames 190–1 research ethics see ethics research ethics committees 229–30, 680 research gaps 93 research ideas 30, 680 generating 30–7 refining 37–40 turning into research projects 40–50 research interviews see interviews research notebooks 13–15, 555, 680 see also reflective diaries research objectives 56–7, 680 deductive approach impact on 580 in research proposals 54 writing 42, 43 importance of theory in 44–50 research ‘onion’ 128–9, 160 research paradigms 140–3 research philosophies 14, 17, 153–5, 680 diagnosing 151 694 multiple methods research design 164 qualitative research design 163 quantitative research design 162 understanding 126–43 research population 195, 681 research proposals 50, 680 need for 50–2 structure 52–9 worked example 55–8 research questions 129, 681 deductive approach impact on 580 literature review chapters informing 604 in research proposals 54 writing 40–3 importance of theory in 44–50 research strategies 680 action research 173, 183–5 archival research 173, 178–9 case studies 173, 179–81 choice 173–90 ethnography 173, 181–2 experiments 173, 174–6 grounded theory 173, 185–7 interview links to 376–7 multiple methods research design 168–70 narrative inquiries 173, 187–90 qualitative research design 163–4 quantitative research design 163 surveys 173, 176–8 research topics 14, 17, 26–8 good, attributes of 28–30 research ideas, generating and refining 30–50 research proposals, writing 50–9 turning ideas into research projects 40–50 researcher bias 192 researcher error 192 researchers appearance at interviews 388 behaviour 393 credibility 222, 225–6 insiders 346–7 integrity 231 interests 31 objectivity 231, 241 participant observation roles 343–8 personal preferences 34 personal safety 244, 244 preferred style 148–9 roles 195–6 safety 232, 235 status 346–7 strengths 31 values 137–40 resource stocks 528 resources 57–8, 59, 223 interviewing issues 398–400 ‘resources’ researchers 134 respect lacking 233 for others 231 respondents 268, 374, 680 response bias 381, 382, 680 response rates 267–70, 680 restarting writing sessions 600 re-storying narratives 575–7 review articles 32, 680 review questions 765, 680 reviews of literature see literature rhetoric, critique of 77 risk evaluation 230–1 rock ’n’ roll 133 Russian doll principle 43 S S&P 500: 528 safety of researchers 232, 235 samples 258–60, 681 initial 568 representativeness 280–1, 518 size minimum, calculation 659–70 non-probability sampling 283 probability sampling 265–70 statistical significance determined by 513 sampling 14, 17, 258–60 deductive approach impact on 580 fractions 275–6, 681 frames 262–5, 681 need for 260–1 non-probability see non-probability sampling overview of techniques 261–2 probability see probability sampling theoretical see theoretical sampling saturation data 283, 669 theoretical 186, 569, 683 scale items 439, 681 scale questions see rating questions scales 436, 439, 681 scanned documents 553 scanning literature 101–2 scatter graphs/plots 489, 500, 502, 681 scheduling in-depth and semi-structured interviews 399 scientific evidence 22–3 see also literature: reviews scientific research 145, 681 Index scoping studies 112, 681 search engines 103–4, 215, 317, 681 search strings 100, 681 search terms 91–2, 96, 99, 681 search tools 104, 103–5 secondary data 14, 18, 304–7, 681 advantages 317–19 disadvantages 319–21 ethics 246 evaluating sources of 321–31 likely availability 315–16 locating 314–17 pitfalls 319 types of and uses in research 307–14 secondary literature 82–9, 681 secondary observations 348, 681 selective coding 186, 568, 572, 681 self-administered questionnaires 419–20, 450, 681 self-coded questions 440, 681 self-employment 464–6 self-memos 554–5, 681 self-selection sampling 261, 282, 284, 289–90, 681 self-service technology 63–6 semantic differential rating questions 438, 681 semi-structured interviews see interviews sensitive personal data 248–9, 681 sensitive questions 391 sensitivity 223, 681 sentences 615 sequential explanatory research design 167, 681 sequential exploratory research design 167, 681 sequential mixed methods research 167, 681 sequential mixing methodological choices 165 sequential multi-phase design 167, 681 serial correlation 529, 681 service quality 356–7 shadowing 38, 681 Shapiro–Wilk tests 509, 510–11, 682 significance testing 508–29, 682 silence during questioning 393 simple methodological choices 165 simple random sampling 261, 270–2, 273–4, 682 simplicity 614–15 single phase methodological choices 165 single-phase research design 167, 682 skew 495, 528 snap shot secondary data 307 snowball sampling 261, 282, 284, 289, 290, 413, 682 social constructionism 132, 546, 682 social networking 324, 376, 406 social norms 227, 682 social practice 578 social theory 141–3 socially desirable responses 420–2, 682 source questionnaires 443, 682 Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (Spearman’s rho) 509, 521, 682 specialised search engines 104 specific questions 392 specific values 488, 498 specifications 50–1 specificity 44 spelling 616 split infinitives 616, 682 stacked bar charts 489, 501, 502, 682 staff research interests 31–2 standard deviation 504, 506–7, 682 standardised interviews 375 statistical inference 266, 682 statistical significance 508, 513, 682 see also significance testing statistics descriptive 502–8 government 317, 319–20 significance testing 508–29 status, researchers 346–7 storylines 601, 610–11, 682 stratified random sampling 261, 270–2, 276–8, 682 strengths of researchers 31 structured interviews see interviews structured methodology 145, 682 structured observation 340–1, 355–62, 682 subject bias 682 subject directories 104, 105, 682 subjectivism 131–2, 141, 142, 155, 682 substantive theories 50 sufficiency of access 212–13, 682 of literature 108 suitability recorded materials 349 researchers for participant observation 347 secondary data 321–9 summarising effective reading 74 project report chapters 612 supermarkets 297–9, 537–9 supplementary information 111 supply chains 535–40 survey-based secondary data 307, 310–13, 682 surveys 173, 176–8, 682 swarms 412 symbolic interactionism 137, 342–3, 682 symmetric distribution 495, 682 symmetry of potential outcomes 29, 682 synchronicity 405–6, 682 syntax 442 synthesis 619, 683 systematic random sampling 261, 270–2, 275–6, 683 systematic reviews 112–13, 119–23, 683 systematic sampling see systematic random sampling T t-tests 509, 517–20, 525, 527, 683 tables 487, 488, 497, 683 contingency tables 489, 498 data requirements tables 425–8 frequency distribution 488, 489 in project reports 612 random sampling numbers 661 tactics 161 tailored design method 417, 683 target questionnaires 443, 683 teleological view 227–8, 683 telephone interviews 375, 404–5 telephone questionnaires 420, 421, 445, 458, 683 television programmes, referencing Harvard style 653 Template Analysis 572–4, 683 temporal sequences 575 tenses 616–17, 683 terminology in interviews 390 tertiary literature sources 82–3, 87–8, 98–100, 316, 683 test re-test estimates of reliability 430 testable propositions 560–2, 579 testing 193 text critical discourse analysis 578 data 307, 308–9 referencing in 644–55, 656–7 theoretical replication 180–1, 683 theoretical sampling 186, 261, 282, 284, 289, 569, 683 theoretical saturation 186, 569, 683 theory 44, 683 definition 45 development 47–9 importance 46–7 research approaches 144 in terms of relationships between variables 424 types of theoretical contribution 49–50 695 Index theory dependent decisions 683 thesauruses 92–3 theses 32, 85, 90, 683 time errors 362, 683 frames, research design 190–1 gaining access 218–19, 223 interviews and 379–80, 398–9 participant observer role and 347 series 509, 527–9, 683 timescale and research proposal 55–9, 57 for writing 596–7 timing of writing 597 titles 53, 57, 610 topics for research see research topics total response rates 268 totals, comparisons of 501 trade journals 84, 86, 683 tradition, critique of 77 traditional access 210–14, 215–16, 683 transcript summaries 554, 683 transcription 550–2, 683 transferability 194 translation of questionnaires 442–3 transparency 44 trends comparing 489, 499–501 examining 509, 525–9 showing 489, 494 triangulation 179, 683 reason for using mixed methods design 169 trust in interviews 391 repair 335–7 tweets 215 Type I errors 513–14, 683 Type II errors 513–14, 683 typical case sampling 261, 282, 284, 289, 684 U understanding, testing 394 unforeseen discoveries 318 uniform resource locators (URL) 110, 684 uninformed responses 420, 684 unitising data 558, 684 units of data 558, 559, 684 university fees 315 696 unmeasured variables 323 unobtrusiveness 318 unreachable respondents 268, 684 unstructured interviews see interviews unsuitability 322 upper quartile 506, 684 URL (uniform resource locators) 110, 684 V validity 193, 684 external see external validity internal see internal validity interviews 384 observation issues 352–5, 361–2 participant observation issues 352–4 questionnaires 428–31, 451–2 secondary data 323–9 structured observation issues 361–2 value of literature 107–8 values 137–40, 501–2 Vancouver system 111, 608, 656–7 variables 46, 684 comparing 498–502 confounding 174–5 control 174–5 dependent see dependent variables independent see independent variables individual, exploring and presenting 488–98 interdependence between 489, 498 intervening 561 mediating (MV) 174, 424, 674 moderating 174, 424, 675 predicting value from one or more other variables 524–5 questionnaires and data collection 424–5 relationships between 424, 509 types of 174, 425 variance 504, 519–20, 684 variance inflation factor (VIF) 525–9, 684 variation, coefficient of 504, 507, 684 video cameras 350 video-conferencing 406 video diaries 349–50 video downloads, referencing Harvard style 654 videography 341 VIF (variance inflation factor) 525–9, 684 virtual access 215 visual aids 623–4, 684 Voiceover Internet Protocol (VoIP) 405, 406 voluntary participation 231, 233 volunteer sampling 261, 284, 289–90 W web based questionnaires see Internet: questionnaires web conferencing 406 web forums, referencing Harvard style 652 web logs see blogs web pages 98, 101, 233 webcams 214, 215 websites, referencing Harvard style 651 weighting 486–7, 684 Wikipedia 93–5 Wikis 407 referencing Harvard style 651 wines 288 withdrawal from participation 231, 233 withdrawal from studies (mortality) 193 within-subjects design 176, 684 word processing 597–9 words key 566 meanings 546 working up and narrowing down 38–40 writing 594–6 completing sessions 599–600 getting started 596–600 goals 597 literature reviews 596 location 597 outline structures 599 planning 599 project reports see project reports reading by friends 600 research proposals 50–9 restarting sessions 600 styles 614–19 time for 596–7 timing of 597 word processing 597–9 ... (Cunliffe 20 10) Participant observation has not been used that much in management and business research However, this does not mean to say that it has limited value for management and business researchers... observer-as-participant; participant-as-observer Complete participant The complete participant role sees you as the researcher attempting to become a member of the group in which you are performing research. .. Some participant observation affords the opportunity for the researcher to the experience for real’ the emotions of those who are being researched Virtually all data collected are useful researcher