RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN
4.5 Research Design Implementation
4.5.5 Data Analysis - Phase One
The fundamental objectives of any research study are that the researcher should have accurate data analysis that ensures that research questions are effectively answered. In Phase One Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), descriptive and inferential statistical techniques using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.0 software were used. Descriptive statistics were mainly used to screen, clean and describe the characteristics of the sample (Moses and Knutsen, 2007). With inferential statistics also being used in this research to draw main conclusions about the characteristics of the population from which the main sample is derived (Brase and Brase, 2016).
Data from the structured questionnaires were transferred to an SPSS spreadsheet and double- checked by comparing with another spreadsheet keyed by the researcher. Data cleaning was done and using a statistical package from SPSS all descriptive statistics such as frequency, mean and standard deviation were generated for all the variables and analysed further. Table 4-5 shows the method that was appropriate for the analysis of the quantitative data.
Table 4-5: Method of Data Analysis for Quantitative Research Method
Research Method Nature of Data Method of Analysis
Questionnaire (closed question responses)
Nominal, ordinal and continuous quantitative data
Statistical tests including descriptive statistics, T-test, Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Spearman’s correlation, Source: Own, 2017
4.5.6 Sample Size and Geographic Location of Phase Two Implementation
Informal manufacturing SMEs were selected from each of the country’s major five (5) cities, that is, Harare, Bulawayo, Gweru, Masvingo and Mutare based on the notion that these are the major economic hubs of Zimbabwe where meaningful informal manufacturing activities are likely to take place. In that regard, these cities provided a national outlook that allowed the findings of the study to be generalised across the rest of the country. Table 4-6 shows the organisation of the five (5) focus group interviews contacted in the five cities in Zimbabwe.
Table 4-6: Five (5) Focus Group Interviews in Zimbabwe FIVE (5) FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEWS IN ZIMBABWE
Cities Harare Bulawayo Gweru Masvingo Mutare Total Expected Total Hrs
1 1 1 1 1 5 10
Source: Own, 2017
Key Assumptions:
i. Five (5) focus group interviews of between 45 to 120 minutes were done in each city. The
questions (Appendix 10: Focus Group - Questionnaires and Appendix 11: Interview Guides - Semi-structured questionnaires). Questions were designed to help get a deep understanding of the informal SMEs in the manufacturing sector.
The study used open-ended questions in conducting focus group interviews and Yin (2009), argues that this should allow constructing validity owing to the use of multiple sources of evidence that allows for multiple measurements of the same phenomenon in this study. Focus group interviews go beyond the simple collection and gathering of data and an attempt to construct meaning and interpretation in the context of the given conversations. Focus group interviews provide access to critical analysis of the research participant’s behaviour and afford the researchers the opportunity to understand the meaning of that behaviour (Klenke, 2008).
Kitzinger (1994; 1995) argues that the advantages and disadvantages of the focus group are:
Advantages
The interaction of participants in focus groups enables them to ask questions of each other, as well as to re-evaluate and reconsider their understandings of their specific experiences.
Focus groups elicit the information in such a way that allows researchers to find out why an issue is salient and what is salient about it and therefore the gap between what people say and what they do can be better understood by researchers. In addition, the moderator can gain information from non-verbal responses to supplement/contradict verbal responses in a focus group interview.
The opportunity to work collaboratively with researchers can be empowering for participants in a focus group interview.
Focus group to users, participants or consumers can become a forum for change both during the focus group meeting itself and afterwards (Race, Hodge and Parker, 1994).
Provides data more quickly and at a lower cost than by interviewing participants in groups.
There is room for further explanations, which makes it easier for the researcher to seek clarification where there is need.
Disadvantages
Focus groups can be intimidating at times in cases where they are shy and inarticulate members’ thereby reducing reliability.
In focus groups, the researcher or moderator has less control over the data produced that in
Sometimes in focus group interviews, it may be difficult for the researcher to identify an individual message clearly. In addition, focus group produces relatively chaotic data making analysis even more difficult.
Focus groups are also difficult to assembly since in some cases it might be difficult to get a representative sample and focus group may discourage certain people from participating in cases where the participant is not very articulate or confident or have communication problems.
Focus groups by their very nature may also discourage some people from trusting others with sensitive or personal information, and in this case, the use of personal interviews or use of workbooks alongside focus groups may be a more suitable strategy.
Focus group interviews are not fully confidential or anonymous since the material is shared with other participants in the group.
Focus group interviews are time-consuming and expensive to conduct especially in this day when transport cost is high, and petrol is expensive.
In some cases, it may affect the relationship between the interviewee and interviewer.
The study achieved its objectives extensively by the research participants being able to share their experiences regarding the challenges they face and the important role of their informal operations in Zimbabwe and to their families thereby addressing the research questions for this study.
4.5.7.1 Sampling for Focus Group Interviews
Participants for the focus group interviews were characterised by homogeneity though the researcher ensured representativeness among the participants to allow different and contrasting opinions. Homogeneity ensured that all those involved in informal manufacturing SMEs had the same interests in common. Participants were recruited from the wider sample used for the structured questionnaire study in the survey discussed in phase one above but ensuring that all
The three (3) parts of the focus group interviews were:
research participants are completing the consent form (Appendix 6: Informed Consent - Participant) for agreeing to attend the focus group for discussion. Explanation was given by the researcher for participants’ right to decline to be involved.
Completion of the short focus group-questionnaire by all the participants (Annexure 10:
Semi-Structured Questionnaire: Focus Group).
Discussions questions among the researcher and other group attendants with audio recordings being made during the focus group discussion with written permission being obtained from research participants (Appendix 6: Informed Consent-Participant). The rationale for audio- recording was that the potential wealth of ideas that flowed meant that it was likely to be difficult to manage the data collection process and note key points at the same time. This was overcome by audio recording focus group interviews and making use of two interviewers.
The use of the two (2) interviewers implied that one (1) person facilitated the discussion (moderator) and the other person made notes. The moderator provided clear explanations of the purpose of the group and helped the participants to feel at ease and also facilitated the open interaction between group members. The moderator promoted debate by asking open questions, challenging participants in an attempt to draw out differences and tease out a diverse range of meanings on the topic under discussion. Moderators had to probe for details and move the discussion forward when the conversation was drifting or had reached a minor conclusion.
Moderators had to keep the session focused and ensured that everyone gets a chance to speak.
The degree of control and direction imposed by moderators depended upon the goals of the research and the researcher’s preferred style. The two (2) moderators involved in the facilitation of the focus group interview had to agree as to how much input or direction each will give ensuring that one of the moderators facilitated and the other took notes and checked the audio-recording equipment during the interviews. Through careful planning about role and responsibilities, they ensured that consistency was maintained across all the focus groups.