This chapter presents the research design and methodology used in the study. First, the selected methodology is introduced and justified, followed by the presenting of the research method. The data collection and analysis methods are justified, and finally the validity and reliability of the study are discussed.
3.1 Research methodology
Qualitative research was the chosen methodology for this study. Qualitative business research gives a researcher an opportunity to focus on the complexity of business-related phenomena in their contexts. It produces new knowledge about how things work in real-life business contexts, why they work in a specific way, and how we can make sense of them in a way that they might be changed. (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008.) Since the purpose of the study is to research complex processes and their functionality in a network environment, selection of the qualitative methodology is justified.
3.2 Research method
The chosen research method, or research strategy, for this study was a single case study.
Intensive, or classic, case study research draws on the qualitative and ethnographic research traditions, emphasizing interpretation and understanding of the case as well as elaboration of cultural meanings and sense-making processes in specific contexts. The main aim is to understand and explore the case from ‘the inside’ and develop understanding from the perspectives of the people involved in the case. (Eriksson &
Kovalainen, 2008.) The research method chosen for this study can therefore be classified as intensive case study.
3.3 Data collection and analysis
This thesis concentrates on the company Metso Outotec Oyj, where the writer of the thesis is also currently working at the Tampere, Finland offices. Metso Outotec was created through the combination of Metso Minerals and Outotec on June 30, 2020. The company is a frontrunner in sustainable technologies, end-to-end solutions and services for the minerals processing, aggregates and metals refining industries globally.
(Metso:Outotec, 2021.)
Data was collected through a series of semi-structured interviews during February 2021.
Interviewees were different stakeholders at Metso Outotec and also at their external warehouse partner. The list of interview questions is presented in Appendix 1. The interviews included many how-questions in order to gain in-depth answers from multiple perspectives, in general the interviews were conducted in a fairly conversational tone to discuss the topics. The criteria for selecting the interviewees was based on collecting a broad range of perspectives from representatives of different parts in the supply chain, namely in the inbound process. Each interviewee has several years of experience working for their current company, so each interviewee was able to provide perspective from a prolonged period of time. Purchasing, logistics and warehouse teams were represented from Metso Outotec’s side, and different stakeholders from an external 3PL warehouse were also interviewed to gauge their views on the same topics. Nine persons were interviewed overall, the interviews lasted between 60 and 90 minutes each.
Interviews were conducted via Microsoft Teams, due to ongoing Covid-19 restrictions which prevented face-to-face interviews, especially given that the 3PL Warehouse representatives are located in the Netherlands. The interviews were recorded and then transcribed word for word. The researcher studied that data in detail. Data was analyzed, recurring themes, differing opinions and interesting quotes were highlighted.
Role of the interviewee Company Experience at current
Logistics Manager Metso Outotec Ten years
Manager, Control Tower EMEA
Metso Outotec Six years
Manager, Warehouse and Quality
Metso Outotec Three and a half years
Operations Manager Ceva Logistics Two and a half years
Inbound Supervisor Ceva Logistics Three years
Office Supervisor Ceva Logistics Five years
Table 5. List of interviewees.
3.4 Reliability and validity
Reliability tells you the extent to which a measure, procedure or instrument yields the same result on repeated trials. Therefore, the question of reliability is related to the provided to interviewees in advance. In addition, if interviewee had further questions
or something was unclear about the interview questions, those were discussed and explained by the researcher.
In all research, quantitative as well as qualitative, we have to deal with our presuppositions in order to remain open throughout the whole process of inquiry.
Prejudices stand in the way of complete openness. It is important to be aware of this in order to recognize and bracket prejudices, and the researcher must recognize prejudices and their influence upon the interpretations made. If we are not aware of these presuppositions or neglect the problems associated with them, then we risk obtaining results that are primarily a reflected image of something already existing in our understanding. (Nyström & Dalhberg, 2001.) In this study, the researcher has ample pre-understanding regarding the topics discussed in the interviews as he is working for Metso Outotec and has been part of the developing the inbound process for several years. During the interviews, the attempt was to remain objective and avoid interpretations of answers to fit existing understanding on the matter. During the whole process of inquiry, the researcher has to be reflective about the method that is used, and the meaning found in data. By a course of action including critical reflections and courage to challenge one's knowledge about oneself, the relationship between pre-understanding and openness can be more successful. (Nyström & Dahlberg, 2001.)
Pre-understanding has also its benefits, in this study it has enabled the researcher to select suitable interviewees and ask probing questions on the subjects being studied.
Also, as the interviewer had experience on the matters that were being discussed in the interviews, the discussion could be quite informal and conversational, and interviewees did not have a high barrier to ask clarifying questions if some points were unclear for them. In order to prove the reliability of this study, the procedures of the study are documented, and multiple quotes are presented to justify the conclusions that have been made based on the data.
Validity is another classic evaluation criterion. It refers to the extent to which conclusions drawn in research give an accurate description or explanation of what happened.
(Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008.) Triangulation of data means that evidence from multiple empirical sources is used to cross-check information (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008). In terms of the validity of the empirical study, the interviewees were selected from multiple teams, from different points of the supply chain. This was done to provide a holistic picture of the current processes and possible development needs. All interviewees had plenty of experience of working at Metso Outotec, or working with Metso Outotec, and all interviewees have been a part of developing the inbound process in different parts of the supply chain, so each interviewee was able to provide different perspectives and draw examples from personal experience. For the theory part, multiple scientific sources that were often cited were used, and multiple theories were presented. Many of the sources that are mentioned were published some years ago, but in those instances the selected sources and theories can still be applied to contemporary cases, and the particular sources were cited by other authors multiple times. Therefore, it can be concluded that triangulation of data and theory have increased the validity of this research.