Understandability and Transparency of the Financial Statements of ...

(Sekaran, 2003). One type of non-probability sampling is purposive sampling where
information is obtained from specific target groups as opposed to convenience sampling
where participants are more readily, or conveniently, available.
In qualitative research the purpose is seldom to arrive at statistically valid conclusions
from probability sampling of the population (Ghauri & Gronhaug, 2005). Rather it is to
understand, gain insights and create explanations. Patton (2002) considered that
qualitative research usually focuses in depth on small samples selected purposefully i.e.
purposive sampling. Purposive sampling has certain particular characteristics (Lincoln
& Guba, 1985). First, there is no prior specification of what the sample size is. Second,
there is a serial selection of participants as maximum variation is best achieved by
selecting each participant only after the previous participant has been interviewed.
Third, as insights and information accumulate the researcher begins to develop working
hypotheses and the sample may be adjusted to focus more on those participants that
seem most relevant. However, in some cases the research will focus less on particular
areas. This happened in this research where there were an overwhelming number of
offers received from potential interviewees connected to a variety of „faith-based‟
organisations. Consideration was given to adding more interviewees from „faith-based‟
organisations, but the decision was made that this would bias the results, so regretfully
the offers were declined.
Patton (2002) identifies many different types of purposeful sampling including: (1)
extreme or deviant case sampling, (2) intensity sampling, (3) heterogeneity sampling,
(4) homogeneous sampling, (5) snowball or chain sampling, (6) criterion sampling. For
the purposes of this research, sampling was via a „snowballing‟ approach, i.e. getting to
know some participants and having them introduce you to others (Taylor & Bogdan,
1998). In this research, to ensure quality, the key to snowballing was to locate
information-rich key informants and ask them to recommend people for you to
interview. However, one of the potential drawbacks of the snowball technique was that
it can limit the diversity of informants. To lessen this potential drawback, participants
were also recruited via direct approaches (Taylor & Bogdan, 1998) through the
attendance at relevant meetings and courses of organisations such as the New Zealand
Institute of Chartered Accountants, the New Zealand Charities Commission and
Community and Voluntary Sector Research forums.
80