COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION WRITTEN RESPONSES by LEARNER ID #: [insert here – do NOT provide your name or other identifiers] Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of...

COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION
COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION
WRITTEN RESPONSES
y
LEARNER ID #: [insert here – do NOT provide your name or other identifiers]
Presented in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Capella University
School of Business and Technology
Comp Exam Facilitator: [insert here]

1
QUESTION 1
Evaluate the challenges of conducting grounded theory and case study research. Analyze the
issues associated with sampling, validity, reliability, and bias. Synthesize the findings and
determine an appropriate strategy for research on the impact of technology on ethics in the
anking sector.
2
Introduction
Grounded theory and case study both have been utilized by the researchers using a
qualitative approach to investigate about a phenomenon. Despite the illustration of the usefulness
of grounded theory and case study as a means of studying a phenomenon from a qualitative
perspective (Fendt & Sachs, 2007; Seuring, 2008), there are certain drawbacks that limit the
effective incorporation of these tools as a part of the research. This section intends to highlight
the major challenges a researcher is likely to face in the implementation of grounded theory and
case study as a mode of inquiry. The analysis will focus on the issues related to sampling,
validity, reliability, and bias. The synthesis of findings will be used as a platform for determining
a suitable strategic course of action for the researcher for exploring the impact of technology on
ethics in the banking sector.
Challenges Associated with Grounded Theory
Grounded theory is deemed as an effective means of gathering in-depth information from
the sample, which can be used in the development of theoretical constructs to explain a particular
ehavior, event, perspective etc (Glaser, 2002). However the limitations associated with the
sampling, validity, reliability and bias seem to raise concerns among scholars about the reliance
on it as a tool of qualitative investigation.
Sampling
Sampling in case of grounded theory has taken on a different approach from other
esearch instruments associated with the quantitative domain. Suddaby (2006) stated that the
earlier proponents of grounded theory have identified the sampling process consisting of
3
identification of relevancy of data on the basis of the evolving understanding about the
theoretical underpinnings. Such an approach is likely to expose a researcher to the limitations
embedded in the simultaneous use of sampling and theoretical development.
Draucker, Martsolf, Ross and Rusk (2007) pointed out another limitation embedded in
the use of sampling in grounded theory by asserting that the absence of a structured guide for the
implementation of theoretical sampling tends to create difficulty for the researchers. The scholars
even if well versed in the use of sampling for grounded theory may face issues in the
implementation of the process at any stage of data collection. Therefore, indicating an important
area of consideration for the scholars.
Another challenge in the implementation of sampling in grounded theory is that it follows
an entirely different approach in comparison to the positivist philosophical foundations of
esearch. It has also been observed that the grounded theory‟s approach of using the collected
data as a source of judgment for sampling negates the notion of development of hypotheses and
their relative testing (Suddaby, 2006). The emerging sampling framework depicts a loosely
coordinated idea of sampling, deviating from the essence of sampling techniques reflected in
positivist methodology.
The use of theoretical sampling also poses the challenge of determining the sample size
eforehand, as in case of quantitative modes of inquiry, or other qualitative means of data
collection. Starks and Trinidad (2007) indicated that the sampling process for grounded theory
continues with the inclusion of individuals as research participants, until the investigator is able
4
to attain „theoretical saturation‟. The ambiguity of the criterion for theoretical saturation
encourages the use of great deal of subjectivity in determining the achievement of this objective.
Such issues in sampling methodology may limit the scope of applicability of grounded theory.
Validity
The degree of validity associated with the data obtained through the use of grounded
theory has also been challenged by the scholars (Lomborg & Kirkevold, 2003). One group of
thought has emerged, arguing that the core elements used for defining the validity of a
quantitative approach can‟t have parallel application within the domain of qualitative research.
As noted by Co
in and Strauss (1990) in order to comprehend the degree of validity of
grounded theory as a qualitative tool of investigation, alterations need to be made in the
framework illustrating the construct of validity.
Various researchers have offered an alternative perspective to the concept of validity,
considering the application of internal and external validity incompatible with the philosophical
asis of qualitative research (Sandelowski, 1993; Stenbacka, 2001; Davies & Dodd, 2002). These
scholars suggest that the application of validity in quantitative research doesn‟t bear the same
valence in qualitative approach. The concept of qualitative validity as proposed by Sandelowski,
(1986) is based on the perception of the reader about the degree of trustworthiness and credibility
that can be associated with the research, thus adding a great deal of subjectivity in the decision.
Such an approach ca
ies the issue of the use of subjective opinion in evaluation of the quality of
a scholarly work, leaving the possibility of e
oneous perception.
5
A more refined approach has been presented by Rolfe (2006) who has considered the use
of the criterion of credibility and transferability as an alternative approach to internal and
external validity respectively. However, the use of these components also poses challenge to the
qualitative research as the proponents of quantitative approach argue for the effectiveness of the
factors of credibility and transferability. Credibility may provide sound arguments pertaining to
the validity of the findings of grounded theory from the perspective of the people who were
involved in the sample of the study, however similar perspective may not be found among others
(Sandelowski, 1993).
Reliability
The issue of reliability is also a key challenge the researcher has to face while deploying
grounded theory as a means of inquiry, because the subjective nature of analysis makes it an
intricate process. Golafshani (2003) indicated that within the sphere of qualitative investigation,
esearchers are more likely to focus on the criterion of dependability, illustrating the ability of
the future researchers to replicate the findings. However, Pa
y (1998) argued that the inability of
the future researchers to replicate the grounded theory in an exact manner also poses a challenge
to the reliability of the findings generated during the research process. For the quantitative
approaches, the degree of reliability is easier to determine as compared to the qualitative
methods.
Sandelowski (1993) indicated that critics have viewed the use of means such as
dependability as a potential source of threat for the level of validity of a grounded theory
esearch. At one hand the incorporation of feedback from other researchers in the form of
member or peer checking has been deemed to add to the degree of dependability or reliability of
6
the findings, as the peers or other scholars can provide an unbiased perspective towards the
accuracy of sample and its related findings. On the other hand, Sandelowski (1993) argued that
such an approach should be incorporated in the methodology with caution as it can have a
negative impact on the reliability of the findings and inferences.
Bias in Grounded Theory
The bias involved in the research process can also decrease the degree of trustworthiness
and dependability of the inferences drawn from grounded theory. Although within the context of
the application of grounded theory as a means of investigation, the researcher is required to
identify the sources which can induce biased perspective in the perception of the researcher
during the theory development process (Jones & Alony, 2011). However, such process of
acknowledgement doesn‟t guarantee that all possible biases involved in the exploration and
construct development have been identified. There remains a possibility of overlooking sources
of bias as trivial, which may in fact have a significant influence on the research process.
Another source of bias which can decrease the degree of reliability and validity of
findings is the bias originating from the respondents, which has been identified as double
hermeneutic and the Hawthorne effect (Jones & Alony, 2011). The researcher may find it
difficult to identify how participants alter their responses on the basis of the knowledge they
have attained during the investigation. Secondly, Hawthorne effect can also manifest itself in the
form of behaviors that emerge as a means of forming a positive impression on the researcher,
thus polluting the accurate version of reality.
7
A researcher using grounded theory needs to identify the sources of bias originating from
his own ideas about an event, situation, behavior etc, which may be a daunting task, as the biased
perception may prevent the researcher from acknowledging the presence of such issues. The
inclination to follow preconceived ideas about the area of investigation can also result in filtering
out of limited scope of information, and overlooking some important area of concern as it
doesn‟t seem to fit in the frame of reference adopted in the study (Parker & Roffey, 1997).
Furthermore, the researcher also needs to mitigate the ill effects of participant‟s bias on
the research findings, through a similar process of identification and control (Co
in & Strauss,
1990). However, the effectiveness of the process can be challenged with the ability of the
esearcher to handle the identification of bias and sorting out relevant and accurate information
from the participants. Considering the dual bias eminent in grounded theory, the researcher
would need to be extra cautious in data collection, analysis and interpretation, as bias can seep
into the investigation process during any of these stages, challenging the process of effectiveness
of bias identification and handling (Allan, 2003).
Challenges Associated with Case Study
Similar to grounded theory, case study has also been used extensively in exploring the
various aspects of human behavior with the focus on ca
ying out the investigation in terms of
particular communities, organizations or societies (Gi
ert, Ruigrok & Wick, 2008). The critics
of case study as a means of investigation have argued about its effectiveness in terms of the
validity and reliability of the results generated in the research process. Along with that the bias
involved in the investigation can also have an impact on the value the inferences are able to add
8
in the already available literature (Stoecker, 1991). This section aims to elaborate these
challenges associated with the qualitative method of case study.
Sampling
Sampling in case study is based on the relevance of experience or information an
individual possesses in terms of an area of investigation. The individuals who hold the necessary
information about the phenomena under study are selected through probability and non
probability sampling techniques (Vogt et al., 2012). The sampling process in case study doesn‟t
face the same issues as evident in case of grounded theory, however, sampling in this domain is
also not void of issues. The identification of cases that can constitute the sample of the study may
e an easier approach, but the extraction of relevant information from the sample can become an
issue if the researcher basis the selection of sample on biased frame of reference (Curtis, Gesler,
Smith & Washburn, 2000). Determining a concrete criterion before the sample selection is
initiated seems to mitigate the influence of researcher‟s bias in sample selection.
Another challenge the researchers are most likely to face in case of sampling for the case
study approach is to determine the sample size that is adequately suitable to fulfill the needs of
the researcher (Sandelowski, 1995). The investigator may be required to use subjective judgment
about the adequacy of the cases for effectively facilitating the process of hypothesis testing.
However, the subjective jurisdiction still ca
ies the risk of e
or (Voss, Tsikriktsis & Frohlich,
2002).
9
Validity
The first and foremost challenge to the validity of the inferences drawn from the case
study is the lack of a structured evaluative format for the analysis of validity of the findings.
Riege (2003) noted that in order to increase the validity of the findings, the researcher using case
study as a mode of data collection is faced with the issue of using coherent validity tests, the
absence of which tends to create issues in each stage of the research process. In addition to this,
the validity measured in terms of trustworthiness and credibility of the findings is a challenging
process as the subjective nature of data makes it difficult to answer the criticism in the same
manner as quantitative approach.
Researchers have indicated that triangulation has been used as a means of enhancing the
validity of the research findings (Dooley, 2002; Riege, 2003), but in instances where the data is
obtained through case study, such combination of qualitative and subjective paradigms may not
e possible. It has also been stated that the subjective nature of na
ative accounts generated in
the case study, has also been criticized as a factor decreasing the degree of trustworthiness and
dependability of the results (Voss et al., 2002).
Driessen, Vleuten, Schuwirth, Tartwijk and Vermunt (2005) offered a different
perspective, indicating that the use of qualitative research and subjective data is not the sole basis
of low degree of validity of the findings, as objective data can also be negatively affected due to
esearcher‟s bias. The researcher is faced with the challenge to handle these issues effectively to
maintain a significant level of validity. The validity of the findings can also be enhanced by
incorporating feedback from the other researchers or peers (Healy & Pe
y, 2000); however the
10
iased perception of these people continues to pose a threat to the internal and external validity
of the case study findings, if not handled properly.
Reliability
Reliability in the domain of case study is also an area of consideration by the researcher
as the option to explore the area of study on the basis of similar test items does
ing in some
level of standardization, thus promoting increased degree of reliability. At the same time
however, it exposes the researcher to the risk of overlooking some additional information that
may be important to understand the phenomena (Voss et al., 2002). Therefore a researcher needs
to adopt a course of action that reduces the threats to reliability in case study and promote rigor
and dependability in the process of data collection and analysis.
Researchers have made efforts to gauge the degree of reliability of the findings, by
indulging in further replication of the findings at a later time. Mays and Pope (1995) further
elaborated the notion, by indicating that the researchers engage in careful documentation of the
esponses obtained from the sample to ensure that the data available for analysis can be later on
used for critical evaluation as well. At times, the researcher may be propelled to repeat the
evaluation, seeking feedback from other analysts, which can make this a time consuming process
(Vogt, Gardner & Haeffele, 2012).
Bias in Case Study
The qualitative research approach has a high degree of possibility to be initiated on the
asis of the already held perception and beliefs of the researchers which can have an undue effect
on the quality of the research. Voss et al (2002) reflected similar notion by indicating that the
11
observer bias is a major area of challenge in the case study research. It has been noted that the
prior information the researcher has can guide the process of identification of content shared by
participants as relevant or i
elevant, thus making the research findings susceptible to the
influence of the perspective of the investigator (Eisenhardt, 1989).
Along with that a researcher may not include aspects of information that may be
important, but doesn‟t match the criteria he has developed on the basis of his subjective frame of
eference. Such a stance will give rise to inferences that cover limited aspect of a phenomenon.
The incorporation of more than one investigator may facilitate the process of promoting a more
accurate perspective of the phenomena by overcoming observer bias.
Another challenge the researcher may face in terms of bias in case study is the way in
which the information obtained from the participants is evaluated (Eisenhardt, 1989). In cases
where the researcher opts to focus on in-depth analysis of a single case the inferences have a
higher probability of being effected by information processing bias. Considering this threat, the
esearcher may rely on the analytical mode including the comparative analysis of different cases
to decrease the impact of bias.
Strategy for Research
This section of the paper will provide with an appropriate strategy that outlines the
esearch process that can be used for ca
ying out investigation about the impact of technology
on ethics in banking sector. Grounded theory and case study, both can be used for the purpose of
exploring this phenomena, however, the discussion presented before can be used to identify one
12
approach that is most suitable for drawing inferences that have significant degree of validity and
eliability with minimum involvement of sampling issues and researcher‟s bias.
The phenomenon of ethics in the sphere of banking industry has been studied by various
scholars (Harvey, 1995; San-Jose, Retolaza & Gutie
ez-Goiria, 2011). In an effort to indentify
the other core elements apart from affinity which constitute the ethical framework for the
financial institutions such as Banks, it has been stated that integrity and responsibility also seems
to play an integral role in this regard (Cowton, 2002). These elements seem to illustrate the basic
ethical framework associated with the baking entities in the industry.
Integrity would encompass the ability to generate a significant degree of trust and
dependability among the customers that can help the financial institution in ca
ying out its
various activities in an effective manner. As far as responsibility is concerned, the ethical
component can be seen in the form of performing the duties, and at the same time, keeping in
view the possible consequences of these activities. For instance, as Cowton (2002) stated, banks
that are involved in providing loan to the business entities may be required to take an overview
of their regulatory framework pertaining to the lending policies, which will in turn reflect the
factor of responsibility. Another component highlighted in this section is related to the impact
that technology can have the changes it can
ing and the alterations it can create in the outlook
of the notion of ethical banking.
Grounded Theory as a Strategy for Research
13
Grounded theory within this context will allow the researcher to gain an in-depth
understanding of the role technology tends to play in this area. The researcher can focus on the
population, consisting of the managers working in the banking industry, and select a sample to
develop the basic theoretical framework for comprehension of the phenomena. The number of
participants at the initiation of the study can be 15 to 20 managers; however there is a possibility
to increase the size of the sample as the research progresses (Starks and Trinidad, 2007).
The sampling process is likely to continue until the researcher deems that the number of
participants included in the study can facilitate the process of generating significant amount of
knowledge to construct a theoretical framework; which has been labeled as theoretical saturation
(Glaser, 2002). The information gathered from the managers in banking industry can be
compared and analyzed until a theoretical map starts to emerge, indicating a meaningful pattern
and connection between the ideas. These ideas can be used to develop theoretical framework for
understanding a phenomenon.
The use of grounded theory as a part of the research strategy can allow the researcher to
identify the distinctive ideas held by the managers about the use of technology and its related
influence on the ethical component in the industry. Some of the managers may consider ethical
anking to be related to the trust that consumer is able to develop on the financial institutions. On
the other hand, other managers may consider it to reflect the ability of the banks to maintain
adequate privacy of the data related to the customers (Mukherjee & Nath, 2003).
14
The researcher will need to be cautious of the issues arising in terms of the reliability and
validity of the findings generated through grounded theory. The trustworthiness and
dependability of the research findings can be refined by taking support from the peers. The
esearcher can discuss the findings with other researchers to identify the loopholes and flaws in
the process of data collection and analysis to point out areas in need of improvement. Since the
perception of ethical conduct in banking will be studied from the perspective of the managers,
the researcher needs to ensure that the meaning na
ated by the research participants is depicted
accurately in the findings. This accuracy can also be achieved by utilizing other researchers for
analyzing the data to draw inferences.
The researcher‟s own perception about ethics and the role of technology in influencing
the ethical conduct in banks needs to be handled in an appropriate manner, to ensure that the
inferences are a representation of the responses of the participants rather than the researcher‟s
own ideas and perception. To ensure that the quality of data collection and analysis is not
compromised, the researcher needs to keep check of the bias. Secondly, as Parker and Roffey,
(1997) observed, grounded theory exposes the research process to loss of information due to
iased frame of reference used by the researcher, thus posing a significant challenge to the
credibility, trustworthiness and dependability of the findings.
Case Study as a Research Strategy
Another approach to investigate about the phenomenon is through the use of case study.
Considering the issues related to sampling, validity, reliability and researcher bias, case study
seems to offer a better strategic course of action for investigating about the impact of technology
on the ethics in banking sector. The population will be the same as in case of grounded theory,
15
while the researcher can select 8 to 10 organizations as cases, with the possibility of altering the
sample size due to the resource constraint. To ensure that minimum bias has been involved in the
sample selected from the population, the researcher will need to develop a clear criterion for the
characteristics of the sample (Curtis, Gesler, Smith & Washburn, 2000).
The information obtained from the case study is subjective in nature; however the lack of
objectivity itself doesn‟t make an approach invalid or unreliable. It is the inability to validate the
findings through the use of various tools that can have a negative impact on the degree of
trustworthiness and dependability of the inferences (Riege, 2003). The analysis of information
provided by the managers can be validated by using feedback from the peers, thus incorporating
multiple perspectives in the data analysis process to minimize the threat to validity and reliability
(Healy & Pe
y, 2000).
The pre conceived notions of the researcher also need to be handled during the research
process, as the concept of ethical behavior possessed by the research participants may be
different from the researcher‟s perception. The aim of the researcher is to investigate how the
ethics have been seen to be influenced by the managers in terms of the introduction of
technology in the banking sector. The role of the researcher in this case will be therefore based
on the position of an observer, who would be involved in recording the findings and analyzing
them.
Another challenge that the researcher faces is the issue of bias which can be effectively
handled by taking alternative perspectives into consideration. Eisenhardt (1989) elaborated this
16
idea by indicating that the utilization of careful documentation of the information provided by
the sample, and the incorporation of feedback from the peers highlights two central themes that
can help the researcher in handling the issue of bias.
Conclusion
Grounded theory and case study as a means of scientific inquiry have strengths and
limitations. In view of the limitations associated with the approaches of grounded theory and
case study, the investigation about the impact of technology on ethics in banking can be ca
ied
out on the basis of utilizing case study. The selection of an organization as a unit of analysis will
support the researcher in generating focused information about the phenomenon. Instead of
using grounded theory for development of new constructs to explain the views held by the
participants, the researcher can engage in the exploration of the impact of the event on behavior
and conduct of the personnel. Therefore, case study seems to be a more effective strategy in this
egard.
17
REFERENCES
Allan, G. (2003). A critique of using grounded theory as a research method. Electronic Journal
of Business Research Method, 2(1), 1-10.
Co
in, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative
criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.
Cowton, C. J. (2002). Integrity, Responsibility and Affinity: Three Aspects of Ethics in Banking.
Business Ethics: A European Review, 11(4), 393–400.
Curtis, S., Gesler, W., Smith, G., & Washburn, S. (2000). Approaches to sampling and case
selection in qualitative research: Examples in the geography of health. Social Science and
Medicine, 50(2), 1001-1014.
Cutcliffe, J. (2005) Adapt or adopt: developing and transgressing the methodological boundaries
of grounded theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing 51(4), 421–428.
Darke, P., .Shanks, G., & Broadbent, M. (1998). Successfully completing case study research:
combining rigor relevance and pragmatism. Information Systems Journal, 8(4), 273-289
Davies, D., & Dodd, J. (2002). Qualitative research and the question of rigor. Qualitative Health
esearch, 12(2), 279-289.
Dooley, L. M. (2002). Case study research and theory building. Advances in Developing Human
Resources, 4(3), 335-354.
Draucker, C. B., Martsolf, D. S., Ross, R., & Rusk, T. B. (2007). Theoretical sampling and
category development in grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17(8), 1137-
1148
18
Driessen, E., Vleuten, C.van der, Schuwirth, L., Tartwijk, J.van & Vermunt, J. (2005). The use
of qualitative research criteria for portfolio assessment as an alternative to reliability
evaluation: a case study. Medical Education, 39(2), 214–220.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of
Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Fendt J. & Sachs W. (2007). Grounded theory method in management research. Organizational
Research Methods, 11(3), 430-455
Gi
ert, M., Ruigrok, W., & Wick, B. (2008). What passes as a rigorous case study? Strategic
Management Journal, 29(13), 1465-1474.
Glaser, B. (2002). Conceptualization: On theory and theorizing using grounded theory.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 23-38.
Golafshani N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The
Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-607.
Harvey, B. (1995). Ethical bank: the case of the Co-operative Bank. Journal of Business Ethics,
14(12), 1005-1013.
Healy, M & Pe
y, C. (2000). Comprehensive criteria to judge validity and reliability of
qualitative research within the realism paradigm. Qualitative Market Research: An
International Journal, 3(3), 118 – 126
Jones, M., & Alony, I. (2011). Guiding the use of grounded theory in doctoral studies – An
example from the Australian film industry. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 6,
95-114.
19
Lomborg, K. & Kirkevold, M. (2003). Truth and validity in grounded theory -- a reconsidered
ealist interpretation of the criteria: fit, work, relevance and modifiability. Nursing
Philosophy 4(3), 189-200.
Mays, N & Pope, C. (1995). Rigor and Qualitative Research. British Medical Journal,
311(6997), 109-112.
Mukherjee, A & Nath, P. (2003). A model of trust in online relationship banking. International
Journal of Bank Marketing, 21(1), 5 - 15
Parker, L.D. & Roffey, B.H. (1997). Methodological Themes: Back to the Drawing Board:
Revisiting Grounded Theory and the Everyday Accountant‟s and Manager‟s Reality.
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 10(2), 212-247.
Pa
y, K. W. (1998). Grounded theory and social process: A new direction for leadership
esearch. Leadership Quarterly, 9(1), 85–106....