Data Collection

DQ #1: Analyze the data collection methods/procedures from the sample qualitative dissertation written by Valon in your course materials. Critically assess its application using your readings (texts & research articles) as the foundation. Data collection is a process of gathering and measuring information on a topic of interest in order to answer stated research questions (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012). As stated in the methodology section, Murtezaj (2011) uses the phenomenological descriptive approach to investigate the role of emotional intelligence in the work of diplomats negotiating agreements and mediating conflicts. Under data collection methods and procedures, the sampling techniques used – purposeful sampling, criterion sampling, and snowballing (Murtezaj, 2011)– are well-documented and explained using theoretical references. This section could still benefit from more contextualization: instead of answering ‘What is purposeful sampling?’, the author could detail ‘Why and how was purposeful sampling done in this study?’. The sample inclusion criteria listed – leader diplomat, extensive negotiating experience, different culture (Murtezaj, 2011) – are well thought-out and relevant to answering the stated research question. However, in the actual data collection process it appears that the last criterion was not always followed (3 out of the 7 interviewees come from the same country, without specifying whether they belong to different sub-cultures); additionally, women are underrepresented (only 1 out of 7 respondents, acknowledged as a limitation). In the same vein, the study would have benefitted from a more diverse sample by age group and geographic/religious background. Each participant has 20-30 years of diplomatic experience (characteristic of the 45+ age group) to match the ‘leader diplomats’ in the research question. It is felt, however, that widening the research question to include Generation Y diplomats could have 1) yielded a more complete picture of the role of emotional intelligence across ages, 2) revealed potentially differing opinions due to the generation gap and 3) helped to identify emerging trends that will shape future diplomacy. Another unstated limitation is geographical and religious underrepresentation, as 4 out of the 5 countries in the sample are European and all 5 are predominantly Christian. Granted, rigid sampling is the domain of quantitative approaches (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012) rather than qualitative purposeful sampling. Still, qualitative research should strive to widen the spectrum of experiences (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012) for a more complete investigation of the phenomenon at hand. In light of the above, it is felt that the inclusion of Asian, Middle Eastern, and African nationals could have illuminated more heterogeneous perspectives on emotion, negotiation, and conflict. Finally, although the limitations caution against generalizability from the small sample, there is no mention of how saturation (Cresswell, 2009) was achieved. The study is specific about the steps in contacting respondents: the process starts with an initial email invitation, then a phone call to follow up, and finally a personal visit for the actual interview (Murtezaj, 2011). At each stage, more detail could have been provided, for instance: Did the author take any steps to encourage or reward participation? Were the first respondents (before snowballing) previous acquaintances of the researcher? (Would there be any potential for biased answers?). According to the explanation, the researcher certainly went to great lengths to conduct the study in the interviewees' natural setting by traveling to 4 European capitals (Murtezaj, 2011). Arguably, face-to-face contact has a great impact on building rapport (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012), though a less resource-intensive contact method such as Skype calling could have potentially reached a more geographically diverse sample. Additionally, the author appears to have invested a lot of effort into monitoring the subjects’ public activity and experiences ‘relevant to the study’ (Murtezaj, 2011, p. 73), though it is not clearly stated if and how this information was incorporated into the study. In terms of research methods used, the study builds a strong case in favor of in-depth interviews as a tool to focus on particular experiences and facilitate understanding (Murtezaj, 2011). The justification could be enhanced by more specifically linking the benefits of in-depth interviewing with the context of busy diplomats discussing a highly subjective topic of emotions and conflict. Further arguments to strengthen the rationale could be : 1) unlike past survey instruments quoted in the literature review (Murtezaj, 2011), Murtezaj’ open questions are unhindered by pre-coded answer choices, 2) interviewees can discuss at length the areas that concern them most (e.g. choosing to focus more on negotiating contracts or on conflict), 3) the investigator has the flexibility to probe further or change direction by adding new questions, and 4) interviews are conducted in a private setting to discuss sensitive issues pertaining to state secrets or personal failures (Kotler, Keller, Swee, Siew, & Chin, 2009). Finally, the study is quite methodical in laying out various practical aspects of the interviewing process, such as respondent briefing or signing the ethical consent form (Murtezaj, 2011).  DQ #2: Discuss the data collection methods/procedures that are best suited for the personal topic of interest you described in unit 2. Develop 5 open-ended questions to start the interview process. Research topic and interview questions The proposed research topic is to investigate customer acquisition and retention strategies used by street food vendors in Vinh Long, Vietnam. Using semi-structured face-to-face interviews (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012) with street food vendors may shed light on their beliefs, attitudes, and underlying assumptions regarding their customers. Sample interview questions: What kind of customers usually eat at your food shop? Overall, would you say that there are more new or regular customers in your shop? Why do you think first-time customers choose your shop and not a competitor’s? What (if anything) do you do to encourage potential customers to try your shop? Why do you think some customers come back to eat at your shop? Are these reasons similar or different from their reasons to try your place for the first time? What (if anything) do you do to encourage customers to return? How do you think your customers see you? To what extent does their opinion of you influence their desire to try or return to your shop? Rationale for data collection methods and procedures A semi-structured qualitative interview can be a powerful tool for exploratory research into the lives of Vietnamese street food vendors. First, the semi-structured aspect allows the inclusion of certain standard questions to compare views across respondent groups (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012), e.g. customer retention strategies are likely to differ between permanent street eateries versus semi-permanent vendors. Simultaneously, as qualitative interviews are flexible, some questions can be adapted to the situation or new questions added (Cresswell, 2009), e.g. to probe deeper when a street food vendor shares particularly successful or challenging experiences. Respondents will be recruited and interviewed face-to-face at their shops in Vinh Long for cultural and practical reasons. Culturally, the Vietnamese are strongly relationship-based (Hofstede, 1994) and direct human contact would increase the vendors’ willingness to participate in the study. In a high-context language like the Vietnamese one (Hofstede, 1994), using other methods such as the phone would prevent researchers from visually grasping non-verbal clues to ‘what is left unspoken’ and know when to probe. In practical terms, face-to-face contact means that approaching and briefing respondents can be done simultaneously, followed by signing the consent form and conducting the interview. Additionally, the interviewer can pace the flow of questions around the sellers’ downtime when the respondent does not feel rushed, and take breaks to minimize disruptions to seller-customer interactions. By directly seeing the vendors and shops, interviewers can increase the diversity of the sample to include: younger v. older vendors, established v. temporary businesses, varied menus (freshly cooked soups or seafood, seasonal dishes, snacks), or different price ranges. The research team will be briefed on implementation details such as research objectives, introductory statements, interview questions, and the storage of ethical consent forms and notes (under lock and key in a cabinet). Lead by a senior researcher, the team will travel to Vinh Long and approach respondents at 3 key locations: central wet market, main bus station, and riverside area. Notes will be taken and all conversations will be audio recorded for further analysis. Interviewing will continue until saturation of data is reached – possibly around 30 or higher (Mason, 2010).  References Cresswell, J. (2009). Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). California: Sage Publications. Hofstede, G. (1994). The business of international business is culture. International Business Review, 3(1), 1-14. Kotler, P., Keller, K. L., Swee, H. A., Siew, M. L., & Chin, T. T. (2009). Marketing Management: An Asian Perspective. Singapore: Prentice Hall. Mason, M. (2010). Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews. Retrieved March 2, 2015, from Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research: http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1428/3027 Murtezaj, V. (2011). Understanding the Role of Emotional Intelligence in Negotiating Agreements and Diplomatic Conflict Management Behaviour. Zug, Switzerland: [Unpublished]. Saunders, M. N., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students. Harlow: Pearson. Lena Bucatariu – ID95389 Qualitative Research Methods – Unit 3 7