The scientific quality needs to be judged by various criteria. Remenyi et al. (1998) consider that the case study may be judged on the basis of three types of validity:
namely, construct validity, internal validity, and external validity. Additionally the reliability of the research must be evaluated.
Validity
Validity is the success in measuring what we really want to measure. Construct validity refers to establishing correct operational measures for the concepts, ideas, and relationships studied (Remenyi et al. 1998). In this study the construct validity has been ensured by a careful identification and conceptual analysis of the ideas and relationships first in the theoretical part. The empirical study provides a richer part to study the correlations of research issues more in depth and in a real-life context (see especially Chapter 5). The construct validity was further increased in conversations with the Case Company advisors: they contributed, among other things, to the conceptualization of the term information sharing and its meaning in the R&D collaboration context.
Yin (2003) suggests that three kinds of principles should be followed when trying to increase the construct validity (and reliability) of the empirical data collection. The first step is to use multiple sources of evidence. Then, the case study database should be prepared (will be explained in the section Reliability), and finally, the chain of
evidence must be maintained (was explained in Section 2.3.2). In this study the primary interviews served as the main source of evidence, but additionally the secondary interviews, company-specific documentation and also the experience and documentation gained during the research project in 2001–2003 were used as sources.
Silverman (2001), on the other hand, suggests two ways in which to validate the study: triangulation and respondent validation. The first method is similar to pursuing multiple sources of evidence, while the latter means taking one’s findings back to the subjects being studied. If these findings are verified by other people, one can be more confident of their validity. In this study respondent validation was used as an example after the introductory interviews, when the key contacts suggested that competence transfer would be an important issue in the management of information sharing. This was verified in the primary interviews in all Sub-Cases. Secondly, some issues arisen in the first interviews were given additional attention in the subsequent interviews.
For example, since the influence of task characteristics on the information sharing became highly emphasized from the very beginning, this question was asked in more detail later on in other interviews.
It proved more difficult to be sure of the internal validity as it is of concern in all causal and explanatory studies of the relationship between different events (Remenyi et al. 1998). In the case study this means that the researcher must be sure of making the conclusion that a particular result was caused by a particular phenomenon.
Discussions with key informants and contact persons in the Case Company have been of help when determining the detailed knowledge of each idea and relationship arisen as a consequence of the interviews. Examples of these types of causalities are given in Appendix 4.
The external validity6 refers to the generalization of the study and its replication logic. It has already been stated that this study does not aim at statistical generalization, but at analytical generalization. This means that the basic objective of this kind of research is to expand and generalize theories. (Yin 2003, 10) At this point it is essential to highlight the purpose of doing qualitative research. Since qualitative research does not aim at any numeric generalization, it is not purposeful to evaluate context-dependent factors according to their appearance or significance. Instead, the study aims to find out such factors that have been found influential in the studied Sub-Cases. In other words, this study and the research methodology is not useful for statistical generalization, but it could be used as a starting point for further, rather quantitative, analysis. Only after data generalization, the different characteristics in the information sharing context could be put in the order of importance. That is, this study is designed to identify possible factors arising from R&D collaboration context, and explain how these may have an influence on information sharing.
Reliability
Reliability refers to the issue of whether the evidence and the measures used are consistent and stable. This means that if someone else would conduct the same research, the results would be the same. Because there is always some subjectivity of the researcher involved in the process (e.g., researcher’s intuition, flexibility, and number of random errors), the research process should be described carefully so that anyone else can repeat the study.
In terms of the reliability of data collection, Yin (1994) first proposes that investigators should confirm the skills of investigators (if there are many). Second, the case study protocol should be followed, and third, pilot studies should be carried
6 Like the external validity, reliability is closely related to the generalization and is very questionable in the study of business and management: all situations and organizations are different, and thus the same results cannot ever be obtained again, which actually makes reliability not a central issue (Remenyi et al. 1998, 181). The second reason is that one cannot manipulate and control conditions.
The case study results can be used as a basis for further research along the line of the process proposed by Eisenhart (1989).
out. Also, the generation of a case study database helps increasing the reliability. In this study all the means mentioned above, except the pilot study, have been used at least to some extent. The case study protocol has been described in Section 2.3.2, and the whole research process is summarized in Appendix 5.
The pilot study as such has not been established. Instead, a lot of experience was gained when doing research with the same Case Company and the same Business Area during the research project. Furthermore, the discussions and introductory sessions held with the Case Company’s advisors helped in preparing for the real interviews. In addition, the first interviews showed that following a strict interview framework was not fruitful and in the subsequent interviews the research method was changed to get more information on the larger context.
The case study database is large, because the classification and analyzing of the interview data was done in two phases: after writing the interview memos and after the transcription of the data. All in all the case study database consists of different kinds of memos drafted i) in the introductory sessions, ii) in the interview session (original, hand-written memos), iii) right after the interview session (the memos completed after listening to the tapes), and iv) commented memos sent for verification to each interviewee. Additionally, the case study database includes transcripted interviews, emails exchanged with the interviewees and the advisors of the Case Company, and different kinds of interview summaries.
3 MANAGING INFORMATION SHARING AS A NETWORKING ACTIVITY
This study deals with supply management issues inherent in information sharing during R&D collaboration. Information sharing is regarded as an essential activity in the supply (here R&D) network. The literature on Supply Management is regarded as a good starting point in understanding and explaining complex interaction between organizations as was explained in the Introduction.
The theoretical part is divided into two main chapters: In Chapter 3 the concept information sharing is explained and analyzed as a networking activity. After that the benefits, challenges and risks related to information sharing will be summarized, and some of the means to govern information sharing will be presented with the theoretical reasoning for managing information sharing activities. Especially the supply management perspective will be brought forward in the sharing of information. The following chapter (4) continues from these standpoints by clarifying the importance of network and relationship analysis and explaining how it is linked with the concept of context-dependency. Then, an a priori framework for analyzing the contexts of networking activities will be presented. In the subsequent section the focus is on the context-dependency of information sharing. The following figure illustrates the structure of the theoretical part as well as its linkage to the empirical research:
Figure 6. The structure of the theoretical approaches to study context-dependency
This study moves from the description of the information sharing activity to considerations about the ways it can be managed. Consequently, in the thesis it will be suggested that it becomes highly important to analyze more profoundly the business environment where the company is operating. Therefore, the theoretical part of the study not only reveals the importance of context-dependency and how it emerges in information sharing, but also provides a framework in which this context-dependency can be studied.