process enhances the attainment of rich information that broadens the study findings (Case, Burwick, Volpp and Patel, 2015; Bryman and Bell, 2007). Literature indicates that convenience sampling costs much less and consumes less time than other sampling methods because of its easy- accessibility and measurability of elements (Malhotra, 2010). Nonetheless, convenience sampling has its own limitations such as being prone to bias (Welman et al., 2005; Saunders et al., 2009).
collection instruments. Figure 4.2 presents the two data collection instruments used in this study which were interviews in the form of interview guides and questionnaires. Questionnaires were administered to women who either own or manage SMESs in Gweru, Zimbabwe; in-depth interviews were conducted with finance experts and bank SMES loan managers.
Questionnaires
A questionnaire for research purposes is reformulated with a set of questions relevant to the study (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013). The perception survey questionnaire poses questions about subjects’
feelings and emotions on a given topic (Voorpostel et al., 2016). Knowledge surveys provide questions to define what the respondents contemplate the “know” as accurate information (Alshenqeeti, 2014). The critical difference in the two categories of surveys is that subjects are requested to identify rather than appraise. The questionnaire was designed to cover the research objectives and find solutions to the research questions. It was essential to pursue an efficient and effective progression to achieve reliable data from which the study could be successfully completed. The purpose of the questionnaire was to enhance the researcher’s ability to identify, design and implement a strategy to collect the data required to meet the research objectives (Cavana et al., 2001). In this project, it was the objective of the study to collect conclusive data from the survey, to find answers to research questions, as well as to organize and analyse the results.
Women-entrepreneurs’ Questionnaire
The questions factored into the questionnaire were designed according to the research objectives.
The questionnaire, largely comprising of Likert Scale questions, meant to gather the perceptions and knowledge of the respondent on women-owned or managed SMESs. Besides the Likert Scale questions, there were open-ended questions and closed-ended questions. It took an average of twenty (20) to thirty (30) minutes for the women to complete the questionnaire. These were hand delivered by the researcher. Three hundred (319) questionnaires were distributed to the participants, in accordance with the Table for Determining Sample Size from a Given Population (Morgan and Krejcie, 1970). Of the 319 questionnaires distributed, 300 were completed on all the sections. The self-developed and self-administrated questionnaire was used in the pilot test. The statistical analysis of the questionnaire was done through SPSS 25.0.0. The Cronbach Alpha values achieved were 0.7 in this study.
In-depth Interviews
This study took a mixed methods approach; therefore, there were two different data collection methods. The first one to be discussed was the quantitative approach taken; the second approach used was a qualitative approach. The following sub-sections discuss the qualitative approaches taken in the collection of data in this study.
In-depth interviews with Bank Loan Managers
In-depth interviews were carried out with all the identified ten (10) bank loan managers in the purposive population in Gweru. The questions asked were designed to collect corresponding data to answer the research questions. The duration of the in-depth interviews was averaged at forty- five (45) minutes at the most. The interviews were conducted by the researcher.
In-depth interviews with SMES finance experts
An interview guide was formulated for the semi-structured in-depth interviews with the SMES finance experts. The interview guide assisted the researcher to gain deeper insight into the funding issues facing women-owned SMESs. The questions were formulated with the purpose to freely collect qualitative data from experts without encountering their resistance by committing them to give details to each question.
In-depth personal interviews were conducted with SMES finance experts with more detailed understanding of the industry. Interview schedules were used to solicit participant views. The interviewer efficiently collected the data from the informants by cross examining the experts with specific knowledge of the business financing environment in Zimbabwe. The process of in-depth interviews was important for the researcher to gain a deeper understanding of the study. There are, however, some pros and cons to carrying out interviews for collecting research data. According to Alshenqeeti (2014), there are advantages and disadvantages, as briefly explained below:
Advantages:
Advantages of in-depth interviews are as follows:
i. There were no likelihoods of non-response as the researcher personally collected data.
ii. The gathered data was reliable as the researcher discreetly collected the data by cross- examining the informants (Abdullah, 2017).
Disadvantages:
The main disadvantages of in-depth interviews carried out were that:
i. There was a chance of bias.
ii. The informants did not respond to some personal questions.
iii. The exercise proved to be a time-consuming process (Holloway and Galvin, 2016).
At some stages of the process, the researcher felt that some interviewees were rather uncomfortable and reacted as if they were pressurized to share their personal information. In such instances, the researcher became tactful and respected the respondent’s privacy by avoiding, skipping or re- phrasing the semi-structured interview questions. Data was recorded and was later transposed onto paper. The next section discusses the secondary data concept.
4.6.2 Secondary data collection
Secondary data is data that have been collected and authenticated by other researchers, other than the user (Moore, 2006). Common sources of secondary data are books, journal articles, and various other sources could be useful to the researcher (Cavana et al., 2001). Additional sources could be useful material gathered by government departments, legislative archives and data that were collected by other scholars (Herrett et al., 2015). Secondary data comprises both raw documents and published reviews (Saunders et al., 2001). This study utilized secondary data that was collected from relevant reviewed journal articles, manuals, e-books, policy documents, government blueprints, databases and other pertinent frameworks.
Figure 4.3 adopts Creswell’s (2013) research framework, which links the main elements to include Research Paradigms, Research Designs and Research Methods.
Figure 4.3: Linking the paradigms, designs and methods Source: Creswell, (2013)