n this chapter I will present the design and method of my research. First, I will describe my choice of research design, I will present my method and I will also describe the data collection and analysis and my choice of informants. The purpose of this study is to examine what leaders do to influence a composition of people, working together as a team, to become high performers, what identical or similar characteristics are lying beneath these high performing teams, and how does the leader behavior impact a high performing team to become high performers? I will in my work try to find answers to the following hypothesis: What impacts a team to become high performers? What similarities and differences can be found among leaders? What can you do as a leader to support the team to become high performers?
3.1 Research design
What research design is to be chosen is depending on the problem of the research itself. It also depends partly on the researcher's knowledge about the problem. The research design may therefore be the overall plan for how the problem should be addressed. My research has a qualitative design as to I will explore the views, experiences, beliefs and/or motivations of individuals in my specific topic. Interviews are particularly useful for getting the story behind an informant’s experiences. Interviews may be useful as follow up to certain respondents to questionnaires, e.g., to further investigate their responses (McNamara,1999). I have therefore chosen in depth interviews to address my hypothesis. In qualitative studies, one assumes that reality can be perceived in many different ways and that there is therefore no absolute and objective truth. For example, researchers cannot, for example, formulate relevant questionnaires about the research area that can then be answered and provide quantitative information. The qualitative method is also used advantageously exploratory i.e. when you know very little in advance about the phenomenon or the issue (Malterud, 2009). Qualitative studies often involve a small number of people but try to investigate these more in depth - "the less is more" (McCracken, 1988). Thus, one cannot generalize in the usual way, nor use numbers to highlight the extent of phenomena.
An objective knowledge of reality is either induction or deduction. Which one of these is most appropriate cannot be answered, but the choice will fall on the approach that is most consistent with the current knowledge perspective (Johansson-Lindfors, 1993). If I work inductively, I follow the "path of discovery" while in deduction I will follow the "path of evidence". Working inductively allows me to adapt the study to the material that emerges
I
while I in the deductible research, form my hypotheses from the work material, which must then be empirically proven (Patel and Davidsson, 1994). In this research no focus has been placed on either the inductive or the deductive way of work. I do not intend to produce knowledge in the form of a new theory in the studied area as applying the inductive approach.
I also do not work deductively because I do not only accept theories where testing of possible hypotheses transpires (Johansson-Lindfors, 1993). Since I have used theory as a starting point for knowing what I would like to include in this paper, I may argue that this essay is deductive as a starting point (Patel and Davidsson, 1994). Views about what I intended to study were consequently already there before the questions were defined but I will largely let the material that emerge during the interviews lead me to the formulation of my overall issues, i.e. I will reason from deduction to induction. Processing of the results and the search for knowledge in the form of theories will take place in parallel. I am of the opinion that I will work inductively when I have assumed a number of interviews (10) from which I will then attempt to draw general conclusions. However, with my interview guide questions, I have acted in a deductive manner. The weakness of the induction method, however, is that its conclusions are never logically binding and that one can never really prove that a theory is absolutely true (Molander, 1988; Eisenhardt, 1989). All we can prove is that a false theory is false. Since I lack a deeper knowledge in the field of study I have chosen a qualitative study. Eisenhardt, 1989, argues that this background is particularly suitable for qualitative studies, as it offers an opportunity to change the focus / reference frame during the course of study.
3.2 Data collection
A thorough literature study was conducted before the problem was formulated and the research guide/ questions were made. The chosen theoretical perspectives and models are described in chapter 2. The electronical library in the University of Stavanger, Oria.no, and its subsites, for example EBSCO Host, and ProQuest, and a smaller number of searches on Google Scholar, were used to search for and find literature with elevated academic quality. Qualitative methods, such as interviews, are believed to provide a more in-depth information pertaining to informants’ experiences and viewpoints of a particular topic, than what would be obtained from purely quantitative methods, such as questionnaires. Interviews are, therefore, most appropriate in this study where little is already known about the study phenomenon or where detailed insights are required from individual informants (May, 1991; Britten, 1999;
Silverman, 2000; Patel and Tebelius, 1987).
Research interviews are often divided into three central types. These are: structured, semi-structured and unsemi-structured. Structured interviews are questionnaires in which fixed questions are asked, with little or no variation and where there is no scope for follow -up questions to responses that could permit further elaboration. Thus, these are relatively quick and easy to administer and may be of particular use if clarification of certain questions is required. Nevertheless, they allow only for limited participant responses and are of little use if in depth questions are required. Unstructured interviews do not reflect any preconceived theories or ideas and are performed with little or no organization. Example of such questions, 'Can you tell me about your experience of …?'. The interview will then progress from the initial response. Unstructured interviews are usually very time-consuming (often lasting several hours) and can be difficult to manage, and to participate in. The use of these are, generally considered where significant in-depth knowledge is required. Semi-structured interviews consist of several key questions that help to define the areas to be explored, but also allows the interviewer or informant to diverge in order to pursue an idea or response in more detail (May, 1991; Britten, 1999; Silverman, 2000). I will make use of semi-structured interviews in my work. The purpose of the interviews is to get the person's view of his or her reality and you want the person to tell as much as possible without being led by me as the interviewer.
3.3 Interview guide The interview guide (
Appendix A – Interview guide) approach is intended to ensure that the same general areas of information are collected from each informant; this provides more focus, but still allows a degree of freedom and adaptability in getting the information from the informant. I have tried to use open-ended questions to get lengthy and descriptive answers rather than close-ended questions (those that can be answered with “yes” or “no”). I am avoiding leading questions. I
am keeping the questions as short and specific as possible and try avoiding asking two-in-one questions (Bernard, 2000). When I designed the interview guide, it was imperative that I ask questions that are likely to harvest as much information about the study phenomenon as possible and also be able to address the objectives of this research. In my qualitative interview, good questions are labelled open-ended (i.e. require more than a yes/no answer), neutral, sensitive and understandable. All interviews have been recorded and transcribed verbatim afterwards, as this protects against partiality and provides a permanent record of what was and was not said. It has also shown helpful to make field notes during and immediately after each interview about observations, thoughts and ideas about the interview, as this helped in the data analysis process (Pontin, 2000). A recording machine was used to enable me to be more attentive during the interviews to the informant’s answers and body-language, and to be able to transcribe the interviews for complete analysis (Bryman, 2011). As stated, all interviews are transcribed, and clear indicators have been made for who says what (Gillham, 2008). Additionally, this data can be recorded and reviewed several times by the researcher (when necessary) to help producing an accurate interview report (Berg, 2007).
However, Hermanowicz (2002) remarks that “while interviewing is among the most central, revealing and enjoyable methods that one can use in research, it is deceptively difficult”.
Hammersley and Gomm (2008) add that researchers should remember that informants will only give what they are prepared to reveal about their perceptions of events and opinions. Also, both interviewer and informant may have incomplete knowledge or even faulty memory. In addition, interviews have also been criticized (Robson, 2002) as being time-consuming with regard to both data collection and analysis because they need to be transcribed, coded and possibly translated as was the case in this study. Before the interviews took place, I informed informants about the study details and I gave assurance about ethical principles, such as anonymity and confidentiality. This gives informants an idea of what to expect from the interview, increases the likelihood of honesty and is also a fundamental aspect of the informed consent process. Once this thesis is handed in and approved, the interview recordings and field notes are destroyed permanently to assure full anonymity. Wherever possible, interviews should be conducted in areas free from distractions and at times and locations that are most suitable for informants (Kvale, 1996; Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995). One of the most important skills is the ability to listen attentively to what is being said, so that informants are able to recount their experiences as fully as possible, without unnecessary interruptions. As a qualitative research interviewer, I need to focus on as my main task in interviewing, to understand the meaning of what the respondents say. A qualitative
research interview seeks to cover both a factual and a meaning level, though it is usually more difficult to interview on a meaning level (Kvale, 1996).
3.4 Informants and Interviews
To be able to shed light on the problem a considered selection of ten informants from the same region, and a mixture of men and women would give me sufficient amount of research data to answer my hypothesis. My selection of informants is based on the appropriate selection, and the principle that I can get the best possible information by selecting items based on their attributes. A hand-picked selection is done, based on their relevance to my research and based on their knowledge or experience in the field. I then selected the objects that I knew since earlier and, as I thought, could provide the greatest possible value (Denscombe, 2017). The selection is a mix of regional organizations within the same industry and leaders who have a mixed length of experience from the area to be researched. These informants were selected by using my own professional network. The primary criteria were that they had to be leaders or team leaders with staff responsibility and more than one (1) year of leadership experience. One could also say that I have combined the selection with a convenience selection. This selection is based on what is appropriate for the researcher and which items are next to hand to choose. The advantage of this can be seen for small-scale research projects where there is a limited budget for both time and cost (Denscombe, 2017). The informants are listed below in table a.
Area Role Region Age
1 Consulting Director Stavanger 35
2 IT Consulting Manager Stavanger 45
3 IT Consulting Director Rogaland 44
4 Technology/Delivery Client SVP West Norway 55
5 Consulting System development Unit leader Stavanger – Rogaland - Norway 51
6 Management Consulting/Digital Partner Norway - International 42
7 Technology Consulting and Project Management
Program Director Nordics 41
8 Management Consulting Partner Norway and EMEA 54
9 IT Leader Rogaland 40
10 Technology and Consulting Vice President West Norway 43
Table a: Informants – Area, Role, Region and Age overview.
Interviews were held face to face in all cases but two (2) where a telephone conference was held. The interviews were held in two different languages, Norwegian and English. I experienced a good connection with the informants this way and outside disturbances and technical difficulties were minimized. Some interviews were more stressed than others due to
time pressure on the informant from his/her own schedule. Others were taking longer time, allowing us to get into the answers in more depth.
3.5 Data analysis
The analysis process started with a data collection, it further continued with organizing and preparing the same data. I set a coding to the data and a description of the data. It is then classified, categorized, and patterns are identified. I then connect and correlate data to lastly interpret so that the data provides meaning. Much of the work is about systematizing but much is also about getting distance to the interviews, allowing them to "mature". I have first written the entire interview on computer. The general process details are categorized as setting the initial codes, adding reflections. I looked for patterns, themes or common denominators, relationships, classifications, differences as to further exploring those patterns. I elaborated, and if necessarily made small generalizations. Furthermore, I linked generalizations to body of knowledge to construct my results. The aim of the interviews is qualitative data that answers,
“what do I want out of this analysis”?
I transcribed the interviews and this process was very time-consuming. For every hour of talk on an audio recording it will take several more to transcribe it. The transcripts do not include sounds, like sighing and small words that were put in between the answers, I did not transcribe small pauses the informants did, this due to time limitations. Denscombe (2017) states that if using audio recordings, they should be transcribed and annotated. The amount of the raw data that needs to be transcribed will depend on the use to which the data is being put. Denscombe (2017) says that if the contents of an interview are being used for the factual information they provide, for example, as part of a ‘descriptive account’, then the researcher can be quite selective; transcription might only be needed for the purposes of small extracts that can be used as ‘quotes’ to illustrate particular points when writing up the findings. The transcribing started with listening to the whole interview, then I got into each question and repeated these over and over again from the recording machine to get the underlying structure of the talk or the implied meanings of a discussion. The transcribing has been a very valuable part of the research, because it has brought me ‘closer to the data’.
3.6 Reliability and Validity
Issues of validity and reliability are of great of great significance to the findings of the study.
Validity and reliability serve as guarantees of the results of the informants’ performances (Berg, 2007). However, when it comes to qualitative interviews like mine, it is nearly impossible
repeating the interview exactly, so many researchers today choose the word credible instead of validity. To say that collected data is credible means that on good grounds you say that the data you have is reasonable. A good reason, for example, is to ensure that collected data is interpreted correctly, you can ask your interview object afterwards if you have interpreted the answers that he or she correctly stated. Time restrictions on requesting verification from the informants on the interpretations done might affect the validity of the study. Validity refers to the degree to which a study reflects the specific concepts it aims to investigate. Two types of validity are discussed in social science literature: internal and external (Berg, 2007). Internal validity refers to the extent to which an investigation is actually measuring what it is supposed to measure. This type of validity answers the question: Are the differences found related to the measurement? External validity answers the question: Can the findings be generalized?
In addition to the credibility of research, it must have reliability, which can also be difficult in qualitative research. In order to rely on the results presented in qualitative research, often the researcher himself is the one who collects data, one must be careful to report how data has been collected. It cannot be said with certainty that another researcher would have asked exactly the same questions in a semi or unstructured interview, as an example. Reliability refers to the extent to which a research instrument produces the same results on repeated trials. Creswell (2009) argue that interviews have poor reliability: “...due to their openness to so many types of bias, interviews can be notoriously unreliable, particularly when the researcher wishes to draw comparisons between data sets”. Researchers should follow techniques that would help maintaining the validity and reliability of interviewing. These can be: avoiding asking leading questions taking notes not just depending on tape recorders conducting a pilot interview; and giving the informant a chance to sum up and clarify the points they have made. A qualitative study as mine may tell us something about the relationships between a small set of leaders and their ability to increase the likelihood of high performing teams but it does not say anything about a specific area or the whole industry as such. The assumption is still that the research will give an indication of what it takes to influence teams to become high performers. It is extremely important that, when conducting qualitative studies, one also report how results were achieved so that other researchers reviewing the results should be able to rely on the results by assessing the approach (Denscombe, 2017). A risk factor in the analysis was that my preunderstanding, the fact that I had studied earlier research, and the combination of that material influenced my view of the empirical research results. In the analysis part I have strived not to let this risk factor influence the interpretation of the results. During the analysis, a saturation is achieved when the
same common denominators and patterns occur repeatedly. This saturation was also strengthened by the fact that in the discussion chapter, comparing the results with the theories and literature I have studied, there was a high degree of consistency with the previously established theories.
3.7 Ethical considerations
In all types of research, we are bound to be aware of which choices we make in the process itself. We need to be aware of how these choices affect either the informants, the results or any other consequences for the informants themselves after the study has been conducted. Ethical questions are not limited to the direct interview situation but also integrated in all aspects of the preparation and aftermath work (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2009). When it comes to dealing with human informants, research projects should rigorously follow ethical considerations. As interviews are considered an intrusion into respondents' private life’s with regard to time allotted and level of sensitivity of questions asked; a high standard of ethical considerations should be maintained (Cohen et al, 2007). Considerations to ethical issues should be considered
In all types of research, we are bound to be aware of which choices we make in the process itself. We need to be aware of how these choices affect either the informants, the results or any other consequences for the informants themselves after the study has been conducted. Ethical questions are not limited to the direct interview situation but also integrated in all aspects of the preparation and aftermath work (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2009). When it comes to dealing with human informants, research projects should rigorously follow ethical considerations. As interviews are considered an intrusion into respondents' private life’s with regard to time allotted and level of sensitivity of questions asked; a high standard of ethical considerations should be maintained (Cohen et al, 2007). Considerations to ethical issues should be considered