Ravalier PhD Theis.pdf - Anglia Ruskin Research Online

148
pain-based or stress-related diaries. These can sensitise individuals to the issue being studied, causing them to
reflect and respond to the issue being recorded.
Despite these potentially research-damaging and critical criticisms of diary research use, there are various
courses of action which can be taken in order to ensure the limiting of these problems. By asking participants to fill
in the research diary toward the end of the working day it can be put ‘to the back’ of the individual’s mind
throughout the work day, meaning it should not alter of adversely affect an individual’s take on a situation. Also,
as is the case with the present study, having adequate levels of buy-in and participation from management at all
levels of the participating organisation will help to at least partially alleviate some of the poor retention and project
up-take problems. Additionally, Ohly et al. (2010) argue that while research diary techniques do require a
significant level of effort from participants, special attention must be paid to the design of the diary, for example
by limiting the number of items to 5 or under to ensure too much of the participants’ resources are not taken up.
Moreover in order to deflect some of the potential ethical issues as mentioned previously, a positive diary reflection
would mean that issues pertaining to the reflection of negatively-based questioning can be averted.
Within the present study, simplified ‘logs’ were chosen for use as opposed to often more detailed diary
methods. The study asks participants to complete four questions, purposely designed to be brief to answer, with
each of the questions asked adding a specific dimension to the AI process:
1. What went well in your day The initial manner in which the positivity necessary in AI is created, and also
helps to set the tone as to what areas are working well within the everyday working lives of employees.