Part One
Chapter 4 Methodology
4.1 Adopting an Appropriate Research Design
Bryman (2001) identifies a number of factors that need to be addressed when designing a research method:
• The relationship between theory and research, in particular whether the approach is deductive (theory guides the research) or inductive (theory is an outcome of the research);
• Epistemological issues, or views of what is acceptable knowledge about the social world;
• Ontological issues, addressing the issue as to whether the world is regarded as something external to the social actors or not;
• The research strategy to be adopted, whether qualitative or quantitative data is sought;
• The impact of values and ethical issues on the social research process (Bryman, 2001).
Each of these aspects of the research design will now be considered.
4.1.1 Relationship between Theory and Research
Research can either aim to test an existing theory (a deductive approach) or develop new theories (an inductive approach). A deductive approach would involve developing hypotheses from the findings of the literature review. The research would test the hypotheses and draw conclusions as to their validity.
Given the relatively limited available knowledge about voluntary sector perspectives of accountability, a deductive approach was not used. Also, a number of the key areas (for example, the definition of accountability) are contested. Developing useful hypotheses would be difficult. As this research aims to explore the staff of voluntary organisations’ perceptions of accountability, a more inductive approach is appropriate.
However, the distinction between inductive and deductive approaches must be categorised as one of degree and iteration (Bryman, 2001; Locke, 2001). While the research does not focus on testing hypotheses, it was conducted with knowledge of what previous research has found; the insights of such were presented in the previous chapter. The research questions to be explored in the research are based on knowledge of what has been previously discovered.
4.1.2 Epistemological Considerations
An epistemological issue concerns the question of what is regarded as acceptable knowledge. The central issue in social science is whether the social world can be studied according to the same principles and procedures used in studying the natural world. A positivist epistemology8 affirms the importance of studying the social
8 Bryman (2001) defines positivism as:
….an epistemological position that advocates the applications of the methods of the natural sciences to the study of social reality and beyond. But the term stretches beyond this principle, though the constituent elements may vary between authors. However positivism is also taken to entail the following: 1) Only phenomena and hence knowledge confirmed by the senses can genuinely be warranted as knowledge (the principle of phenomenalism); 2) The purpose of the theory is to generate hypotheses that can be tested and that will thereby allow explanations of (continued)
world as if it were the natural world. An interpretive paradigm9 suggests that social actors are different to natural phenomena and research needs to interpret or understand their behaviour from their perspective (Burrell and Morgan, 1979;
Bryman, 2001; Silverman, 2001).
This research will take an interpretive perspective. As the perceptions of staff, board members and managers of voluntary organisations are the focus of this research, access to their thinking is needed to interpret their subjective perceptions. This stance is backed by a number of other voluntary sector researchers. Herman and Renz’s (1999) research on voluntary organisations concluded that accountability relationships involved two parties who, on the basis of limited objective performance data, based their judgements of each other on subjective perceptions. For this reason, they argue that an interpretive approach is the most appropriate for the study of voluntary sector accountability relationships and performance.
4.1.3 Ontological Considerations
Ontology is concerned with the issue of whether social entities should be considered objective entities that exist external to social actors (an objectivist ontology) or
laws to be assessed (the principle of deductivism); 3) Knowledge is arrived at through the gathering of facts that provide the basis for the laws (the principles of inductivism); 4) Science must (and presumably can) be conducted in a way that is value free (that is, objective) 5) There is a clear distinction between scientific statements and normative statements and a belief that the former are the true domain of the scientist. This last principle is implied by the first because the truth or otherwise of normative statements cannot be confirmed by the senses (Bryman, 2001: 12).
9 In contrast, Bryman (2001: 13) defines interpretivism as:
... an alternative to the positivist orthodoxy that has held sway for decades. It is predicated upon the view that a strategy is required that respects the differences between people and the objects of the natural sciences and therefore requires the social scientist to grasp the subjective meaning of social action.
whether they are socially constructed from the perceptions and actions of social actors (a constructivist position) (Bryman 2001).
The entities considered by this research are voluntary organisations. While they are assumed to have structural realities (such as physical locations), they are also the product of social interaction and in a constant state of revision. Their reputation and images are, for example, created and recreated by stakeholders’ perceptions of their performance and the worthiness of their mission. Such perceptions are constantly changing.
Research on voluntary organisations has identified their dynamic nature. For example, Golden-Biddle and Rao’s (1997) research concluded that individual board members constructed different realities of their organisation’s identity. A constructivist ontology is, therefore, most appropriate.
4.1.4 Qualitative or Quantitative Research
Quantitative research emphasises quantification in the collection and analysis of data and generally entails a deductive approach, incorporates the norms and practices of the natural scientific model and is linked to an objectivist ontology. Qualitative research usually emphasises words, takes an inductive approach and constructivist ontology (Bryman 2001). Denzin and Lincoln (1994: 2) also consider an interpretive epistemology central to the qualitative approach as:
… qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them … hoping always to get a better fix on the subject matter at hand.
Qualitative data was sought in this research for a number of reasons. As well as being compatible with the epistemological and ontological positions taken by this research (interpretive and constructivist) as demonstrated by Denzin and Lincoln and Bryman above, it is suitable for research questions, such as the ones posed by this research, that stress how social experience is created and given meaning. Denzin and Lincoln (1994) conclude that qualitative data is, at its essence, descriptions of routine and problematic moments and meaning in people’s lives. Studying what those
working for voluntary organisations say provides insights into how they interpret the world and the meaning they give to things. This will allow for an in-depth picture of how respondents view their stakeholders and accountability relationships.
Qualitative data is also considered ‘rich.’ As Miles and Huberman (1994: 1) argue, qualitative data is
… a source of well-grounded, rich descriptions and explanations of processes in identifiable local contexts. With qualitative data one can preserve chronological flow, see precisely what events led to which consequences and derive fruitful explanations.
Given the exploratory orientation of this research, rich data is needed to identify such consequences and explanations. Indeed Woodward and Marshall (2004) conclude that their large scale quantitative survey of the perceptions of the importance of the stakeholders of one type of voluntary organisations (not-for-profit companies) was hampered by its lack of qualitative data. Their quantitative data could not reveal any of the contextual and process dynamics that occurred. Adopting a qualitative approach, they stated, would provide a much needed understanding of the complexities of accountability relationships and stakeholders.
4.1.5 Values and Ethical Issues
Thinking about the process of research and the researcher’s role in it is termed reflexivity (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995). My gender, ethnicity, previous career as a government official, and experience of volunteering, may affect the research process. To acknowledge and minimise the effects of my values, reflexive steps have been built into the research design. They are discussed later in this section.
Ethical considerations were also taken into consideration. Those interviewed may speak negatively about organisations on which their organisation relies for funding.
Ensuring those interviewed have given informed consent and are aware of the uses of their information is important (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995). Confidentially will be guaranteed by ensuring the case study organisations and those interviewed are not identified by using code names and not divulging information that could identify
them. The research design has been given ethical approval by the appropriate research body10.