The study used mixed research methodology, using a combination of both the qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. The researcher approached the study from an exploratory perspective and the rationale for this choice was based on the fact that using one method would not suffice and would not have addressed all the research objectives sufficiently.
Creswell (2012) cited in Xaba (2015) defines the mixed methods research approach as a procedure for collecting, analysing and “mixing” both quantitative and qualitative research as methods in a single study in order to understand a research problem. It was envisaged that using the mixed methods research design in this study would help to overcome the limitations of a single design (Tashakkori &Teddlie, 2008). In this particular study, the quantitative data were used to explain and interpret the qualitative data. Klassen, Creswell, Plano, Clark, Smith and Meissner (2012) hold that the use of mixed methods is most suitable when a quantitative or qualitative approach, by itself, is inadequate to develop multiple perspectives and a complete understanding of the research problem and or research question.
The mixed method design strategy was sequentially exploratory (Creswell, 2013) and was characterized by two phases. The researcher initially used the qualitative data collection and analysis followed by the second phase, which was the quantitative data collection and analysis.
Du Plooy-Cilliers, Davis & Bezuidenhout (2014) write about the need to explore the richness, complexity and depth of the qualitative data to understand the phenomenon under investigation. Yin (2003; 2013) outlines six possible sources of information when conducting qualitative research on identified cases. The sources could be official documents, literature on the subject, interviews, direct observation and physical artefacts.
An extensive document review was undertaken to gain a deeper understanding of the challenges facing the management of the youth academies.
Qualitative data collection was firstly through a literature and document review to gain deeper understanding of the theoretical foundations underpinning governance, management, leadership, systems thinking and complexity theory.
Another form of qualitative data collection was the focus groups. According to Du Plooy- Cilliers, Davis & Bezuidenhout (2014), focus groups allow for the gathering of a group to focus on a topic and explore it from different angles in a relaxed, non-directive yet focused manner. In Creswell (2013), the focus group approach is more suitable for a group of people who, although they might be working on different projects, are bound by their common interest in the subject.
The review of literature was followed by three focus groups, which were made up of:
12 middle managers from the Department of Social Development;
22 members of the social cooperatives that operate in the two academies and
14 board members from the two NPOs that run the academies on behalf of the government.
There are six cooperatives in total operating from the two youth development academies.
These are made up of twenty-two (22) members, all of whom were included in the first focus group. The stratified random sampling approach was used in breaking this focus group down into two (02) manageable chunks of eleven (11) members each, while ensuring proportional representation. As suggested by Creswell (2013), the age, location and gender variables of each of the sub-groups were considered when disaggregating this focus group into two sub-groups. The focus group sessions were held separately at each academy. The second focus group comprised the 14 NPO board members. These were divided into two groups of seven individuals each and were conducted separately.
Semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions were utilised. Semi-structured interviews allow the interviewer to ask follow-up questions for clarity and also provide participants with an opportunity to clarify points (Du Plooy-Cilliers, Davis & Bezuidenhout, 2014). Both of the two (02) centre managers who have the direct responsibility for the management of the academies were part of the group where semi-structured interviews
were administered. Further semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with the two (02) traditional leaders from each community where the academies are located, with two (02) of the local ward councillors from each municipal ward where each of the two academies is located. Because of the geographic spread of the participants, a number of the interviews were conducted telephonically and others were administered face-to-face. In total, the sampling for qualitative data collection numbered fifty-four (54) individuals of the population of ninety-eight (98).
Quantitative data collection was achieved through a closed-ended set of questionnaires administered to fifty-five (55) individuals from a total population of ninety-eight (98). These elements of the sample were made up of three (03) senior managers and twelve (12) middle managers from the Department of Social Development, chosen because of their direct role in the management of the youth academies. They were included in this sample for the triangulation of data. There were also thirty-two (32) staff members employed by the NPOs that run the youth academies and a further eight (08) participants from other government departments and NGOs that have either direct or indirect roles in the delivery of programmes at the youth academies. Using multiple sources for qualitative and quantitative evidence collection allowed for better triangulation of the data from these sources (Alt, 2012).
Participant observation, particularly of the staff and managers of the two academies as they went about their daily activities, was also undertaken, as well as document analysis to gain further insights into the managerial processes at the academies. As indicated before, the mixed method approach was sequential and exploratory. It was categorized into qualitative data collection and analysis followed by quantitative data analysis (Creswell, 2013). Creswell (2013) posits that the sequential approach to mixed methods application allows for triangulation, complementarity and the development of new models based on the initial qualitative data collection, which seeks to establish points of convergence, corroboration and cross-checking of results based on the quantitative data analysis. This assists with explanation, improvement, illustration and further clarification of results. The researcher agrees with Creswell’s argument and asserts that triangulation contributes to the deepening and widening of one’s understanding and accords the two
traditions, the qualitative and the quantitative, a complementary status, although not necessarily a separate-but-equal status.