Data collection

Case study research allows the use of multiple sources of data (Patton, 1990; Yin, 2003), including but not limited to interviews, documents, archival records, participant observation, field observation, physical artefacts and meeting minutes (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Merriam, 1998; Yin, 1994). Researchers can collect data from multiple sources and converge them during analysis. Baxter and Jack (2008) liken each data source to a piece of a ‘puzzle’, with each piece enhancing the understanding of the phenomenon being studied. Convergence of data from different sources strengthens the findings as the data is triangulated. Farquhar (2012. p. 7) notes that triangulation is an important aspect of the case study method because ‘an investigation of the phenomenon from different perspectives provides robust foundations for the findings and supports arguments for its contribution to knowledge’.

Triangulation involves multiple data-collecting procedures, multiple theoretical perspectives and multiple techniques of analysis (Berg, 2001; Denzin, 1978). This study

adopted a data triangulation strategy, utilising multiple sources of data to generate an in-depth understanding of the HCD implications of CEE in Africa and how African governments leverage the engagement for HCD (objectives of Sub-studies 3 and 4). The primary and secondary data sources utilised in this study include interviews (face-face, online), documents (company reports, press releases and reports, training reports, policy documents and guidelines) and incidental (casual) observations. See table 2 for a depiction of data triangulation in relation to research questions 2 and 3, which are addressed in sub-study 3 and 4.

The interview is one of the most important and widely used qualitative data collection methods (Qu & Dumay, 2011). Interviews are useful because they provide in-depth information about the informants’ experiences and their perceptions of a particular topic. Broadly, interview methods are of three types: structured, semi-structured and unstructured. Semi-structured interviews are the most commonly used and the most diverse of the three categories (Arksey & Knight, 1999).

Semi-structured interviews, though more similar to unstructured interviews, combine the characteristics of the other two types. They usually follow an interview guide, which contains key questions on the topics to be covered in the interview, with room for flexibility and adaptability depending on the context (Arksey & Knight, 1999; Farquhar, 2012). The researcher has some scope to modify the order and wording of the questions, according to the informants. The researcher can also probe for responses, follow up on an idea or return to an answer that needs further clarification or elaboration (Merriam, 1998). Informants also can answer questions in the order that they consider important; that is, they can choose what to say about a topic or question and how much (Arksey & Knight, 1999).

Table 2. Data Sources: Research Question 2 and 3 Research questions (2 and 3) Semi-structured

Interviews

contributes to HCD in Africa? i i i

Do African governments leverage CEE for

HCD? If so how? i i i

This study utilised semi-structured interviews to generate primary data. The interviews addressed two main objectives: to investigate how Huawei’s operations contribute to HCD in Nigeria, and how the Nigerian government leverages CEE for HCD. The interviews targeted a range of informants including relevant government officials from Nigeria, officials from the case organisation Huawei, Nigeria, including current and ex-employees, participants of training programmes, and beneficiaries of Huawei scholarships. In total, 29 semi-structured interviews were conducted between March and October 2016 across various sites in Nigeria as well as online via Skype (See Appendix 2).

Interview participants were selected through purposive sampling and the snowball technique. These techniques helped select informants who had an important perspective and extensive knowledge on the topic being studied (Elo et al., 2014). Purposive sampling is based on the notion that ‘research participants are not created equal’ (Palys, 2008, p.

697); thus, researchers need to select a sample that ties well with the research objectives and context. While purposive sampling is associated with different sampling strategies such as paradigmatic case sampling, maximum variation sampling, typical case sampling, theory-guided sampling, critical case sampling, etc. (Palys, 2008), the strategy used in this study was criterion sampling. Criterion sampling, as the name suggests, involves identifying cases or individuals who meet certain criteria (Palys, 2008). In this case, several criteria based on the individual’s experience and knowledge of the topic were defined to identify useful and crucial informants for this study.

The criteria used for selecting the informants were as follows:

• Individuals from the case organisation (Huawei) who were knowledgeable about the organisation’s history and operations in Africa and Nigeria, in particular.

Further, individuals knowledgeable or directly involved in the policies and practices of recruitment, training, local supplier relations, CSR. This included managers, human resource managers, trainers, public relation officers, etc.

• Individuals employed by the organisation currently or in the past (ex-employees of Huawei)

• Participants of Huawei’s training programmes

• Individuals who were tasked with implementing or were knowledgeable about national policies on FDIs, HCD, telecommunications and other issues relevant to this study. This included Nigerian government officials in relevant ministries, agencies or institutes such as the Ministry of Trade and Investment, Ministry of Information and Communication Technology, Ministry of Labour, Office of National Content, Nigerian Information Technology Development Agency, Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission, etc.

• Individuals or institutions who were beneficiaries of Huawei’s CSR activities such as scholarships and training.

Largely, this study adhered to the general principle of purposive sampling, which according to (Palys, 2008, p. 698) is to ‘think of the person or place or situation that has the largest potential for advancing your understanding and look there’. In addition to purposive sampling, this study also identified crucial informants using the snowball technique, which is also known as referral sampling. Snowball sampling is seen as an ‘informal’ means to reach a target population, especially when the aim of a study is explorative, qualitative or descriptive in nature (Berg, 2001). This technique is particularly useful in cases where a researcher needs to identify members of a concealed or difficult-to-reach population. It involves identifying a member of a population and asking them to name other members of the population (Atkinson & Flint, 2001; Berg, 2001; Vogt, 1999). In this study, the

snowball technique was used to identify ex-employees of Huawei (n = 3), beneficiaries of the Huawei–Unilag scholarship (n = 3) and some participants of the Huawei ‘1000 girls in ICT’ training programme (n = 2). Most of these informants would have been hard to reach without a referral as their names and, in some cases, contact details could not be obtained officially through a publicly available list. A combination of purposive sampling and snowball sampling was instrumental in identifying relevant informants for this study.

The interview guides were developed keeping in mind the research questions and important themes from the conceptual framework. While the interview questions varied slightly depending on the category of the informant, they generally centred on exploring Huawei’s operations and practices in Nigeria from the perspective of local employment, training and skills building, and knowledge and technology transfer. Additionally, the questions explored the theme of CEE, policy measures, strategies and actions of the Nigerian government in relation to FDI and HCD, and particularly the issue of leveraging Chinese FDI for HCD in the telecom sector.

The field work related to this research was carried out in March–April 2016. Key informants were contacted via email and in some cases via telephone to request and schedule interview appointments. The emails included introduction letters from the university, signed by the researcher’s thesis supervisor, to show that the research was supported by the university. While some interview appointments were secured ahead before the field work began, others were scheduled on ground in Nigeria during the field work, by visiting the various ministries and agencies to request for appointments. The majority of the interviews (17) were conducted face-to-face, and others (11) were conducted remotely via skype. One (1) informant choose to answer questions via email. All the interviews were conducted in English and lasted between 40 minutes to 2 hours, depending on the availability of the informant, the informants’ knowledge and experience of the topics and the issues covered in the interview.

The interviews were audiotaped and supported by field notes when some informants declined for the interviews to be recorded. After the interviews, the recordings were heard, transcribed and the notes were read through. This process enabled the researcher to glean some insights from what the informants said or did not say. In some cases, this step led to the inclusion of another informant considered important to the study who was not previously considered. For example, an interview an official from One Stop Investment Centre (OSIC) was deemed necessary on interviewing officers from the Nigerian Investment Promotion Corporation (NIPC) who emphasised the crucial role of OSIC in attracting FDI.

Apart from the interviews, another source of primary data was incidental observation.

During the fieldwork, the researcher visited the Huawei West Africa headquarters in Lagos, Nigeria, and the Huawei training centre in Abuja, Nigeria, on separate occasions. During these visits, the research took notes of what was casually observed in both facilities, mainly with regard to employee composition, profile and working arrangements. This study also utilised secondary data sources, mainly in the form of company reports such as Huawei

Nigeria CSR Report – Growing with Nigeria (n.d.), Huawei’s company magazine Huawei People (Issue 255 January 8, 2015; Issue 263 January 31, 2016; Issue 265 March 31, 2016), Huawei 2013, 2014 Sustainability Report, and Huawei Africa Factsheet 2012. Reports released by the Huawei’s press/events centre were also used such as Telecom Seeds for the Future Training Program released in September 2015 and a training report (Huawei Training for Nigerian Government Officials) published in September 2016. Other documents consisted of Nigerian government policies such as the Guidelines for Nigerian Content Development in Information and Communications Technology, issued on December 3, 2013.

The document review focused on uncovering data on Huawei’s training programmes, CSR initiatives and government policy initiatives and actions related to the local content in ICT policy. The documentary review served two main purposes apart from generating useful data. Firstly, the information gathered helped the researcher in the first step of generating the interview guides. Secondly, it helped the researcher triangulate the data generated from the interview, serving as a way to verify the data, corroborate data and ensure the research findings were credible.

Additionally, this study relied on secondary data in the form of existing literature on CEE in Africa in general and specifically those that addressed HCD issues in relation to CEE in Africa. This study also referenced existing literature that addressed the connection between FDIs and human capital formation in host countries. These existing studies were particularly useful as they shaped the research instruments used in this study.