Where respondents agreed, the completion of the Diary was coupled with a subsequent interview (Zimmerman and Wieder, 1977:485) during which the Diary responses were explored. Not only does review of the completed Diary entries allow the interviewer to focus on the specifics of the particular transaction, but a level of ‘familiarity’ develops between interviewer and interviewee during the Diary phase which facilitates the interview process.
The resulting advantage of adopting a research design that utilises the Diary - Diary Interview approach is an improvement in the quality of data that can be collected within the limited time that can reasonably be expected to be given by interviewees.
The purpose of these interviews was both to probe and develop the Diary responses. As in the exploratory study27, and following the recommendations of Yin (203:89), Rubin and Rubin (2003:341) and Bryman and Bell (2003:341) the Diary-Interviews were conducted on a semi-structured basis using interview protocols, developed specifically with reference to the Diary responses specific to the interviewee. The interview protocols acted both as prompt sheets to the interviewer and also provided a checklist that ensured that the intended topics were covered (Voss, Tsikriktsis and Frohlich, 2002:205). The Diary-Interview process utilised the protocol template as reproduced in Appendix 6.
While the nature of the probes developed for inclusion on the appropriate interview protocol were customised to the transaction, based on the diary responses obtained, certain common themes were nevertheless pursued consistent with the research objectives. Illustrative extracts, taken from selected interview transcripts, demonstrate the manner in which issues of collaboration and interdependence were explored, while other probes used
27 The use of semi-structured Interviews to collect qualitative data is discussed in respect of
the exploratory study in Section 3.3.3
137 were of a more general nature designed to invite the interviewee to broaden the discussion should they be so inclined. The overall objective of the interview was to engage the respondent in a guided conversation (Yin, 2003:89) in which the interviewee was encouraged to speak freely about the wider aspects of the chosen transaction.
Illustrative Collaboration probes:
Researcher: So, was the vendor involved in the definition phase? Did the technical people, who I presume are putting together the scope, consult with the vendor?
Buyer #03: no, we depend on our own people to give us this information.
Researcher: Okay, when you started out to develop the scope was the vendor asked to assist in developing the specification?
Buyer #10: We already had the scope of what we needed. It basically came down to a list of what was needed against which piece of legislation. Having carried out the service in-house we pretty well knew what was needed. With someone in place there is the potential to improve things as we go on.
Researcher: Okay, so in terms of the specification of what you're actually looking for …. does the vendor have an input to the development of the specification?
Buyer #25: historically not. However, we have a contract which is up for renewal a year from now, and we will probably start putting the tender together in Q1 of next year. We have just had a review meeting with the incumbent and obviously they are aware of the contract coming to an end.
We have just heard discussion about them helping others in the preparation of the tender. Whether we choose to do this or not, we haven't decided on internally.
Illustrative interdependence probes:
Researcher: You said there are limited sources of supply, but I assume that these services are something that [you] have bought before?
Buyer #30: the reason I choose that …. was it's very technical. The job they do... They need to have some experience of it. We wouldn't let someone use our equipment as a guinea pig, to be honest! You probably end up dealing with people who have done that stuff before for us. We know them. We know their competence, and they have got experience of it. There wouldn't be many people qualified to do it. It's partly a financial thing as well. The people that go on our site need to have certain qualifications and approval....
138 Researcher: so you mentioned again the two suppliers, and I guess that this raises the question "why are there only two out there?
Buyer #41: that was what I alluded to when I said that there were specific requirements from the client …….. that this facility needed to be within 25 miles from the existing data centre location.…….. There were only the two within the geographic location. That is why we were restricted to two.
Illustrative general probes:
Researcher: okay, final question from me. If you were to do the whole thing again, what would you do differently?
Buyer #35: What would I do differently? I'm trying to think. …... If anything was to change probably be to have a better and closer dialogue with the [Technical] team. To try to get more involved technically….. So that I get away from "when the contract is awarded, I throw it over a wall, and never hear about it again". If I was to do it again I would want to get much greater knowledge about the technical aspects.
Researcher: So how easy do you think it would be to bridge that gap?
Buyer #35: it would be easy insofar as the team would not have a problem if I sat in on meetings. Maybe the issue would be getting the technical knowledge.
Researcher: so taking the example that we talked about earlier, what would happen if it was an original equipment manufacturer who was offering a bespoke service. How would that work?
Buyer #28: it is difficult ground! Very difficult! I would always challenge if someone has engaged with one organisation to the potential detriment of others. Technically what you have is an end-user with a requirement, and that requirement should be articulated in terms of output. There will be many ways of achieving that output. If you narrow it down to a technical solution, too quickly, you are limiting the marketplace and in some ways you might, actually, be laying yourself open to challenge.
A total of twenty-one interviews were conducted with buyers who had completed the Diary Phase of the data collection process. Where possible interviews were conducted on a face to face basis or utilising Skype where distances precluded physical meetings. A few interviews were conducted by telephone, recognising that certain interviewees were uncomfortable with the use of Skype. The interview durations ranged from around two hours to approximately thirty minutes. The interviews were recorded and transcribed for subsequent coding and analysis. Typically an average of around one hour of interview recordings was transcribed per buyer.