The purpose of this study is to compare CQ with the IMICC, which will be achieved through a qualitative comparative analysis. A qualitative approach was chosen because this study aims at achieving a profound and detailed understanding of a complex topic (Trochim, 2006). The comparative method also is qualitative and pervades many aspects of qualitative research (Boeije, 2002; Given, 2008). One of the main ideas of comparative research is searching and discovering similarities and differences amongst phenomena or entities (Given, 2008; Mills, van de Bunt, & de Bruijn, 2006; Warwick &
Oshersleben, 1973). Often comparative research focuses on cross-national or cross-societal comparisons, not on models (e.g. Hantrais, 1995; Mills, van de Bunt, & de Bruijn, 2006; Warwick & Osherson, 1973). Therefore, the existent information on comparative studies will be adapted to the needs of the present study for it aims at discovering similarities and differences among two models which, on the surface, address the same phenomenon. The scope of this study is not only limited to searching for similarities and differences. Comparative analysis can also contribute to theory-building of both models (Collier, 1993).
Before conducting the comparison, it is important to gather comparable data. These data have to be produced by the researcher in the course of the study through data analysis (Boeije, 2002). In order to gather the relevant data and to familiarise the reader with the topic, it is essential to first
introduce both models. The introduction will take the form of an atheoretical case study. These are descriptive single case studies, which can serve as a means to data gathering and contribution to theory-building (Lijphart, 1971).
After the introduction of the models, the comparative analysis will follow. The design of the comparison is guided by several sources that apply the comparative method. These sources serve as a reference point and as a guideline to organizing this study. One of these sources is a guide to writing compare-and-contrast academic papers written for the Harvard Writing School.
In this overview, Walk (1998) presents several possibilities to conduct a comparative analysis. With regards to organising the study, there are two possibilities: a text-by-text and a point-by-point analysis. A text-by-text analysis first discusses A and then B. The point-by-point analysis on the other hand discusses comparable points of A and B. The point-by-point analysis will be used in this comparative study.
This method of comparison has been found in other comparative studies. These comparative studies are from various disciplines such as intercultural communication (Callahan, 2004), communication (de Vreese, Peter, & Semetko, 2001), information technology (Lee, Su, & Shen, 2007), sociology (Pfau-Effinger, 1998), psychology (Russel, 1994), and health science (Wang, 2001). The authors in these articles apply a similar method as suggested by Walk (1998). The authors first introduce the different systems they are about to compare. In the comparison, they then discuss selected aspects of the systems at the same time. Pfau-Effinger (1998) for example discusses the changes of female labour participation in several countries before she starts comparing another aspect. Lee, Su, and Chen (2007) first introduce
four wireless protocols and then start to compare different aspects (e.g. security or network size) for each of these protocols. The other articles mentioned above apply the same method of simultaneously explaining the influence of one aspect on all the systems compared in the study. Therefore, the comparison in this study will be conducted through the same method of simultaneously contrasting the two models with one aspect. This point-by-point comparison offers the advantage that it immediately highlights the differences or similarities between the models.
To summarize, the present study will combine several methods for conducting the comparison between CQ and the IMICC. In the beginning, the models will be described separately in the form of an atheoretical case study.
This introduction primarily serves the need to introduce the models to the reader and to distinguish comparable data. The actual comparison will analyse the found data point by point. This ensures that the information gathered from the comparison is not lost in the text and that the reader is able to easily follow the comparison.
The research questions which guide the comparative analysis will be introduced at a later stage. This is due to the specific nature of the research questions and the method chosen for this study. As previously explained it is necessary to first collect comparable data. Therefore, the research questions will be presented after introducing CQ and the IMICC. This procedure also ensures that the choice of the research questions is clear and comprehensible.
The three objectives of this study will guide the collection of comparable data.
2.1 Data collection
The data collection of the present qualitative study differs from other qualitative studies as the data are not gathered through interviews, surveys, questionnaires, experiments or observations, but through an extended literature review. Secondary data, data which have been previously collected by other scholars (Frey et al., 2000) are the key data and the main information source for the present research.
Data were collected for three purposes: The finding of a model which could be compared to CQ, background information on the concept of intelligence, and finding material on how to conduct theoretical comparative research. The key data for both models comprise books, handbooks, articles, and conference papers. Databases and search engines such as EBSCOhost (Communication & Mass Media Complete, and Academic Search Elite), Google, Google Scholar, and Nelliportaali were used to search information for all three purposes.
The search terms for finding the ICC model included: model of intercultural communication competence, model of intercultural competence, general model of intercultural competence, culture-general model of intercultural competence, measuring intercultural competence, and others.
Relevant information on CQ and the intelligence concept was found in databases offered through Nelliportaali such as ProQuest Psychology Journals, and ScienceDirect (Elsevier). Key words for the search of comparative research methods included the following: comparative research, comparative analysis, comparative research in communication, comparative research in
intercultural communication, how to do comparative research, comparisons in communication research, comparative and theoretical study, and others.
2.2 Outline of the thesis
After explaining the purpose, the motivation, and the method of this study, the next two chapters will introduce both models. Chapter three will illustrate ICC and describe the IMICC in more detail. The fourth chapter will cover the intelligence concept as well as CQ. Comparable data are collected throughout the introduction and will be presented in chapter five along with a small recap of the method and the research questions. Chapter six will analyse and compare certain aspects of both models. The results of the comparison will be discussed in chapter seven. A conclusion on the conducted research, limitations, and directions for future research will be covered in chapter eight.