PURCHASING PROCEDURES - University of Central Lancashire

2.7 All qualitative surveys and associated reports will be clearly identified as such
and conclusions presented appropriately.
Focus groups, interviews and desk (document) reviews can make a significant
contribution to policy or organizational development and review. They are able to
identify emerging themes, patterns, perceptions and narratives. Appropriately
designed and executed they can provide thought-provoking suggestions and
possibilities which other methods fail to identify. However, such methods by their
very nature are open to the dangers of subjective interpretations, incomplete
summation and „spin‟. There is no reason in principle why these difficulties
cannot be overcome. Research suggests that such methods are least useful when the
consultant is unfamiliar with the vocabulary, cultures and practices of the target
population. This presents a particular challenge to consultants who can in principle
add value through externality and disinterest. In practical terms such methods present
further difficulties since (i) confidentiality and an ethical treatment of the participant‟s
contribution are paramount (ii) participants are not anonymous to the consultant, (iii)
the elicitation of the participant‟s views is conversational, (iv) in the case of focus
groups, the participants‟ contribution can reflect peer pressure and (v) in some
settings more vocal and more confident participants can generate more content and be
more influential. In some settings this can lead to some views from minority or less
powerful respondents being excluded and undervalued. Consultants should
demonstrate awareness of these limitations and put conclusions and recommendations
in an appropriate context. Presentation of results of qualitative research is an area of
particular difficulty due to the role of subjectivity, individuality, and particular
circumstances in which the views of participants are solicited. Normally, the
University will expect such methods at the early stages of a review to identify the
areas meriting further structured assessment through surveys or other methods.
Qualitative methods can support a wide range of activities and can add value on
topics during periods of change or which are subject to multiple stakeholder
perspectives.
This means that
Data from interviews and focus groups should not be presented as though they had
been collected via a quantitative survey.
Summaries, conclusions and recommendations based wholly or principally on
qualitative methods should normally indicate areas or issues for further systematic
structured work or robust analysis rather than be offered as definitive statements of
stakeholders‟ views in general.
Consultant research involving qualitative methods should indicate how they have
sought to ensure that issues around anonymity, „conversationalism‟, peer pressure and
inclusion have been addressed. It is acknowledged that these issues can never be
entirely eliminated but conclusions should reflect that fact.
Conclusions in qualitative research should be derived from the data as systematically
as with quantitative research. Clear contemporaneous notes should be made at the
Purchasing Procedures December 2011