Although the bulk of the work undertaken in this
research is qualitative, a quantitative component was included in order to
provide triangulation confirmation of findings from the in-depth case
studies. A detailed analysis of
the relative advantages and constraints for qualitative and quantitative can be
found in the chapter on methodology.
At this point, it is sufficient to reiterate that the primary purpose of
the quantitative study presented here is to support or contradict case study
findings. A secondary objective
was that it might also point to novel theoretical considerations.
In terms of the comprehensiveness of a research
endeavour, triangulation is a key concept in attempting to assess the integrity
and value of the work. By
combining meticulous, highly-focused discourse analysis to the case studies
with broader input from other organisations, the depth and impact of the
theoretical concepts and practical applicability are increased. The overlapping qualitative and
quantitative research provide a system of checks and balances that form a firm
foundation upon which to draw conclusions (Leonard 1994). As such, the quantitative study is not
intended to provide broad generalisability that might be possible from
extensive representative sampling.
Rather, it is a measure of triangulation against previous case study
results.
The most significant reason for including a
quantitative piece in the overall research study was to create this holistic
approach to the topic. However,
within the quantitative work itself a pilot project was also initiated. The purpose of the pilot study was
two-fold. Firstly, it provided the
canvass on which to develop, implement and test a questionnaire. Both in terms of formatting and
theoretical importance of items included in the questionnaire, this pilot
offered a small-scale trial of the study instrument, analysis and presentation. Secondly, the pilot provided the
transition for the researcher from a clearly social constructionist,
interpretivist agenda to a methodology and mindset that requires very different
skills and attitudes. In
other words, the pilot was a re-introduction to positivist methodology as well
as an instrument for discerning the most theoretically appropriate items to
include in the more extensive questionnaire.
In developing the sample for this quantitative
portion of the study, consideration was given to theoretical applicability and
resource issues.
Several issues arose in the process of compiling a
purposive sample of data for the quantitative study. All of the case studies were conducted on community service
sector organisations in metropolitan Sydney. Therefore, in order to triangulate findings from the
qualitative work that would be consistent with appropriate limits on the range
of organisations, the selection of organisations for questionnaire focused on
this narrow group. That is, the
sample would be drawn from community service organisations in urban
Sydney.
As with the case studies, organisations represented
the full spectrum of relationships with for-profit business, from internal
enterprises to long-term project-based partnerships. One individual from each organisation was asked to complete
the questionnaire. Purposive
sampling was used to identify appropriate sources of data for the
questionnaire. From a database of
enquiries about the Masters of Management (Community Management) program at the
UTS and a list of first-year enrolled students, 123 possible informants were
nominated for the final questionnaire.
The sample for the pilot was a research methods class in which the
researcher was co-lecturer.
This process of purposive sampling conformed to
resource constraints on the project because it enabled the researcher to
readily obtain data in a timely, accurate manner. However, this did not mitigate the stringent criteria by
which organisations were included or excluded from the original pool of
possible informants. As described
above, all of the organisations had to conform to geographical and core
activity requirements in order to be part of the questionnaire. Because the most important function of
this questionnaire was triangulation, not generalisability, strict adherence to
statistical measures were not essential for this part of the project. Therefore, traditional measures of
confidence levels and confidence intervals were not applied here.
All questions in the questionnaire are directly
linked to the significant findings from case study work. As with the case studies, the main
building blocks of the questionnaire were the linguistic threads. These threads were intended to be
tested (either confirmed or not confirmed) in the confines of a more controlled
quantitative environment using the questionnaire tool. In addition to the linguistic threads
that were the basis of much of the discourse analysis in the case studies,
other demographic information including organisation size, types of service
offered and position of respondent.
Where case studies were exploratory and iterative, building successively
on each one and recursively analysed, the questionnaire was strictly an
exercise in verification.
A combination of closed- and open-ended questions
were included in the questionnaire.
For statistical manipulation, a Likert scale was used to represent
theoretically relevant items about linguistic threads that emerged from the
case studies such as personal contact, intra-organisational communication,
language matching, social identification and leadership. The purpose of these dual question
types was to monitor the extent to which respondents used similar or different
language to describe their overall experience with for-profit interaction,
depending on whether that language was provided for them from a selection or
whether they had to generate it for themselves. The use of this technique is explored further in both the
full-scale and pilot study results sections. Other open-ended items (that were later categorised and
coded) included position of the person completing the questionnaire, length of
association with the for-profit and types of services offered.