Research: Investigation of a problem

4.1 Introduction

The process of finding a solution to a problem after a thorough study and analysis of the situational
factor is known as research (Sekaran-2000). This implies that research is an organized and
systematic investigation of a problem. In a research, there are various methods, techniques and
instruments been use to gather the information. After gathering the information’s, those information’s
need to be analyzed and evaluated align with the research aim to recommend a solution for the
problem.

This chapter outline the various research designs and methods been used in this research.
4.2 Research Philosophy:

During choosing the research methodology, the researcher needs to adopt one which aligns with the
research objective. Research philosophy mainly depends on how the researcher wants to carry out
the research. The researcher can use multiple approaches to find out the best possible answer from
the various dimensions. Saunder et al. (2003) approach appear reasonably logical as they compare
research process with an onion layer and arguing about different layers. The onion shows there are
three research philosophies.

Research process onion

Source: Saunders et al (2003, p 83)

According to Saunders et al. (2003) research process onion, there are three types of research
philosophies. They are Positivism, Interpretivism and Realism. Comprehensive analysis of all the
philosophies been carried out by the researcher to selecting the most suitable methodology for this
research.

4.2.1 Positivism: According to Saunders et al. (2003), “The researcher in this tradition assumes the
role of an objective analyst, coolly making detached interpretations about those data that have been
collected in apparently value free manner”. This methodology is mostly carried through observation
and focus on lightly structured methodology. The result of this philosophy is totally based on the real
fact and gathered data rather than just interpretation of different opinions.

4.2.2 Interpretivism: This method of research philosophy is based on the ways; people think about
various aspects of a particular topic. As different people analyze the same thing in different ways, the
researcher can gain the different view of the particular topic.

4.2.3 Realism: Saunders et al. (2003) “Realism is based on the belief that a reality exists that is
independent of human thoughts and beliefs.” It implies that, there could be forces on factors that
could affect people and it does not matter whether the person aware about the presence of the factor
or not.

Saunders et al. (2003) claimed that, often business and management research is a mixture of
positivism and interpretivism and reflect the attitude of realism. It shows researcher(s) show not
bound oneself to just one type of research philosophy. For this research, the researcher use realism
and interpretivism research philosophy and these were considered most appropriate by the
researcher, though positivism approach was also used to get an unbiased result.
4.3 Research Approach:

Saunders et al. (2003) showed, there are two types of research approaches. They are Inductivism
approach and Deductive approach.
4.3.1 Inductivism approach:

In this approach the researcher needs to develop own theory after data collection and analyze those
data. It is important for the researcher (s) to know the previous work in the same field.
4.3.2 Deductive approach:

is such an approach where the researcher(s) need to create a theoretical model and framework and
try relating with the relevant discipline and finally collecting the data to test the created model or
framework whether it match the researcher (s) expectation or not.

For this research, the researcher used inductive approach of research due to the limited time scale.
The researcher tried to develop an own theory, collected data through different data collection
method (questionnaire, interview and observation) and also tried to find out any previous research on
the same field, though there were several on the same topic but none were done in the same
organization.
4.4 Access to the data:

As a previous employer, the researcher explains the benefits, nature and the process of the research
to several managers and enrollment officers. The researcher formally invites them to participate in the
interview and fill up the questionnaires with the employers.

The researcher used existing contacts strategy to gaining access to the organization.
4.5 Sampling:

According to the Jankowicz (2000), “Sampling is the deliberate choice of the number of people who
are to provide you with the data from which you will draw conclusions about some larger group whom
those people represent.” It means that, sampling is a segment from a large group of people who will
provide the data on behalf of the whole group.

As the population using to identify the practices and the major elements of recruitment and selection
process at Grameen Phone and examine the effectiveness of the recruitment and selection methods
used by Grameen Phone. The researcher chooses several Grameen Phone managers and
enrollment officers as sample group for this research. Due to get the different view of the topic the
researcher include HR Executives into this research as the managers may only think about the
organizations point of view.
Figure: 4 Total numbers of the samples for this research (%)

Total population size for this research was 125. However, a Total number of 97 respondents including
72 HR Executives, 18 training and development officers, 5 Selection and Recruitment Officer, 1
Deputy Manager and 1 HR manager are in sample size for the questionnaire from the Grameen
Phone. Sample size was cut down to 97 from 125 populations due to their different time shifts of work
and incomplete questionnaires. 3 Selection and Recruitment Officers and 2 Training and
Development Officers were the sample size for the semi – structured interview. The researcher
followed the simple random sampling process to run the questionnaire.
4.5 Source of information:

There are two sources of information, these are primary and secondary sources and the data
gathered through those resources are called primary data and secondary data.
4.5.1 Secondary Data:

Anderson (2004) describes secondary data as “Data which has been generated else where for other
purpose”. It implies that, secondary data is the data which is already exist and gathered by some
other people for different reasons. This type data include both raw data published summaries.
Secondary data were mostly used by the researcher in the literature review to gain an in depth
knowledge and to get a clear understanding of the subject area. Gathering the secondary data is time
consuming and time effective for the researcher as most of the findings from previous researches
already existed in form of books and journals etc. Moreover, as existing high quality data collected
and analyzed by following well established procedures, the reliability and validity of the secondary
data remains high. Stewart and Kamins (1993) said, secondary data are likely to be higher quality
data than gather by the researcher himself.
4.5.2 Primary Data:

according to Anderson (2004), “Primary data is information that is collected by the researcher, usually
for the purpose of particular research project.” It means that, for any specific project when the
researcher collects data are known as primary data.

To achieve a great acceptability and to find the best possible result of this research, researcher used
both primary and secondary data.
4.6 Research Design:

According to Smith et al (2003), a research design is ‘organizing research activity, including the
collection of data, in ways that are most likely to achieve the research aims.’ Data can be collected by
using quantitative techniques or qualitative techniques. Both the qualitative and quantitative methods
been employed to carry out this research.
4.6.1 Quantitative Technique:

According to Hair et al. (2003) said, “Quantitative data are measurements in which numbers are used
directly to represent the properties of something.” Babbie (1992) describes the quantitative research
as “the numerical representation and manipulation of observations for the purpose of describing and
explaining the phenomena that those observations reflect”. It implies that in quantitative technique
researcher’s observation and finding are present through numerical form.

Generally quantitative technique focusses to measure the phenomena. By using this technique,
researcher will get the result in numerical or statistical form. Responses in quantitative method are
not as explanatory as qualitative method. Quantitative method is often most appropriate for
conducting needs assessments or for evaluations comparing outcomes with baseline data.

Finally, Denzin and Lincoln (1994) said that, quantitative studies emphasize the measurement and
analysis of causal relationships between variables, not process.
4.6.2 Qualitative Technique:

According to Mason (1996), qualitative research usually does use some form of quantification, but
statistical forms of analysis are not seen as central and should be conducted as an ethical practice. It
implies that the research involves more people’s understandings and interactions. Though qualitative
research is not always appropriate for every research problem and there is more chance of sacrifice
scope for detail.
.

Mariampoliski (2001) said, “Qualitative technique provide competitive tool for advancing the state of
knowledge and pushing insights”. This type of data can obtain through interview or observation. This
method can be expensive and could long time to finish the process. This technique is used when the
researcher wants to understand any phenomena in a descriptive way rather than any numerical
figure. Due to its exploratory nature, this technique tries to describe, decode and translate any
phenomena.

Mixed methods were used in this research. Cresswell (1994) also said, ‘researchers should make the
most efficient use of both paradigms in understanding social phenomena’.
A positive approach for data collection in the Questionnaires was carried out with both for lower level
employees and members of management officer.

Semi – structured (face to face) interviews were carried out with 3 HR Managers and, Recruitment
and Selection Officer of different GP Center.

Four interview observations were done by the researcher as well.

This study is designed in such ways that helps in collecting necessary data for confirming or
contradict the above-mentioned hypothesis.
4.7 Questionnaire:

According to De Vaus (1991), “A questionnaire is a data collection tool, which requires each research
participant to respond to the same set of questions in a pre-determined order.” It implies that all the
respondents answer the same questions by themselves and the researcher make sequences of the
question previously as per requirement to gather data.

The questionnaire was structured with questions based on both employer and employee’s perception
about the existing recruitment and selection process are used by Grameen Phone and their
effectiveness. The questionnaires were distributed to both employer and employees at several GP
customer care branches. The questionnaire was standardized without any kind of bias from the
researcher and was logical. The researcher try not to design the questionnaire too long and
complicated as the respondents might feel bore or misunderstand the questions. To prevent the
respondents from any misunderstanding, clear instructions were given in the questionnaire.

According to Saunders et al (2003), ‘the use of questionnaires to survey a sizeable population is a

highly economical way of collecting data in a relatively short time, and therefore a popular and
common data collection method in business and management research.’ Data collection through this
method is time consuming and there is a scope that respondents can express their thoughts. On the
other hand, low response rate is the big disadvantage of this method, as this rate may affect the
validity of the result. Oppenheim (1986) said, there is no opportunity for additional explanations and
Bell (1999) said poor questionnaires result in poor answers.
4.8 Semi – Structured Interview:

Semi – structured interview helps interviewees to express their thoughts and concern freely.
According to Saunders et al. (2003), interview is a good instrument for collecting valid and reliable
information relevant to research objective. This type of interview helps the managers to display their
concern about the existing recruitment and selection process of Grameen Phone.

In this study, interviews carried out were semi – structured in nature, contained few numbers of open
– ended questions were asked. Interviewees been given enough space and time to elaborate the
answers and the interviewer can identify the meaning behind the replies. Time and the length of the
interview were taken into account to prevent the interviewee from being carried away from the
interview.
4.9 Observation:

According to Cooper and Schindler (2003), “Observation alone can capture the whole event as it
occurs in its natural environment.” It means that observation is a systematic, proper controlled and
scientific method of data collection. This method has high validity in research conducting.

There is less possibility in this method that participant’s ideas would be influence the data since there
is no interaction between the observer and the participants. Data can be gathered in real time through
this method. However, Collins and Hussey (2003) said, there are some drawbacks of this method like
ethics, visibility, restriction in the use of technology are major and for large sample group
observational studies are difficult. Moreover, accuracy of the data collection depends on the skill of
the observer.
For this research, the researcher observed several different recruitment interviews of employers at
Grameen Phone. In most cases, participants were informed by the manager that the researcher
would be present during the interview to gain some practical knowledge regarding recruitment
interview, hence, the collected data were not influenced by the researcher’s presence.
4.10 Ethical Issue:

Saunders et al. (2003) said, ethical issues to be anticipated and corrected during the research design
stage. Researcher need to be cautious about his / her own action and those affected by it during the
research.

In this research, the researcher try to avoid any kind of bias during prepare the questionnaire. Both
open and close ended questions were asked. Open ended questions gave the researcher chance to
gain an insight of the provided answers, however due to their ambiguity nature qualitative answers
are not easily evaluated. During the interview observation stage, the researcher was not allowed to
use any recording device by the Enrollment Officer to ensure the organizational privacy. However, the
researcher was allowed to take notes.

Privacy of the respondents and the organization is another ethical issue. According to Robson (1993),
“The researcher needs to observe certain privacy rights for those who become subjects of the
research.” To protect their employment relation, the employers completing questionnaire need
privacy. Those who did not want to be a part of the research, their refusal were accepted.

The researcher had to make sure all the information received will kept anonymous to protect the
confidentiality. Before gathering the secondary data, the originality of the sources were double
checked by the researcher.
4.11 Reliability and Validity:

Robson (1993) said, “Subject error is an issue of reliability and this happens as a result of carrying
out questionnaires on employers at different times can lead to different results.” It implies that, if the
researcher gets different results in different time by using the same questionnaire then the subject
error could take place and that is a matter of reliability of the process. Saunders et al. (2003) said,
reliability can be measured based on the similarities between the results taken by different occasions
and by different researchers. If the results are similar, the research is reliable.

Again, Robson (1993) said, “Reliability of the research can be measured by how accurate the
researcher is with the actual findings.” For this research, the researcher used various sources of
evidence which have been documented and it was essential for the researcher to achieve both
reliable and valid result.

DEFINITIONS

RESEARCH

Research means a systematic investigation designed to develop or establish principles,

facts generalizable knowledge, or any combination of them, and includes the
development, testing and evaluation of research. (PHIA section 52(c)).

PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HEALTH SYSTEM

Under PHIA section 3 (s), planning and management of the health system means the
analysis of information with respect to:

the management, evaluation or monitoring of, the allocation of

resources to, or planning for all or part of, the health system including
the delivery of services.

Only the Minister of Health and Wellness is authorized to plan and manage the health
system. Section 31(l) authorizes only the Minister to indirectly collect personal health
information for the purposes of planning and management of the health system, and
section 38(1)(g) states that a custodian may disclose personal health information without
consent only to the Minister for the purposes of planning and management of the health
system.
However, under section 35(1)(a), any custodian is authorized to use personal health
information in its custody or control without consent for the purposes of:
planning or delivering programs or services that the custodian provides;
planning or delivering programs or services that the custodian funds in whole or
in part; allocating resources to any of them; evaluating any of them; or
monitoring any of them.

EXAMPLE

Kevin, a chiropractor in private practice, wants to evaluate the effectiveness of a new

technique to reduce neck pain. Kevin may use his patients’ personal health information
without their consent to review the outcomes of the technique.

OTHER EXCEPTIONS

Pursuant to section 5(2)(a) of PHIA, the legislation does not apply to statistical, aggregate
or deidentified health information.

Section 3(g) of PHIA defines “de-identified information” as “information that has had all
identifiers removed that:

(i) identify the individual; or

(ii) where it is reasonably foreseeable in the circumstances, could be utilized, either
alone or with other information, to identify the individual.”
PHIA does not apply to personal health information about an individual after the earlier of
one hundred and twenty years after a record containing the information was created and
fifty years after the death of the individual (section 5(2)(b)). This provision may be relevant
to research where the personal health information being sought is outside the application
period for PHIA.

Under section 49(2), retention schedules require that information no longer required to
fulfill the purposes identified in the schedules (e.g. direct patient care) be securely
destroyed, erased or de-identified. Section 49(3) allows information to be de-identified
and retained for purposes other than the original purposes for which it was collected.

EXAMPLE

Ingrid wants to do a research project on Alzheimer’s disease using hospital records for
patients who died 60 years before the research will be initiated. In this case, PHIA would
not apply, as the personal health information is outside of the application period for PHIA.

Section 51 of PHIA requires that the hospital ensure that its retention and destruction
schedule for personal health information has been followed. However, section 49(3)
permits the hospital to retain the information in a de-identified form to be used for
secondary purposes, including research.

If the hospital has retained the information in a de-identified form, Ingrid would still be
able to undertake the research.

USE OF PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION IN THE CUSTODY OR CONTROL OF A

CUSTODIAN FOR RESEARCH

PHIA has introduced rules to provide protection of personal health information in

circumstances where a custodian wants to use personal health information in their
custody or under their control for research.

Pursuant to section 55 of PHIA a custodian may use personal health information for
research if, before commencing the research, the custodian:

prepares a research plan that meets the requirements in

section 59; submits the research plan to a research ethics
board (REB); receives the approval of the research ethics
board; and meets any conditions imposed by the REB.

“Use” is defined by PHIA as meaning to handle or deal with the information, but does not
include disclosing the information.

Pursuant to section 55 of PHIA, a custodian may use personal health information in its
custody or control if the custodian submits a research plan to an REB that meets the
requirements of section 59. When developing a research plan, a custodian may reference
the Research Plan Checklist to ensure they have satisfied all requirements. See Template
7-1 Research Plan Checklist.

In addition to submitting a research plan to an REB, the custodian must also receive
approval from the REB, and meet any conditions imposed by the REB.

Unlike the disclosure of personal health information for research purposes, a custodian is
not required to enter into a data disclosure agreement when using the personal health
information in its custody or under its control.
Although the personal health information is in the custody and control of the custodian,
consent of the subject individuals is still required unless an REB has determined that the
consent of the subject individuals is not required, or that it is impracticable to obtain
consent.

“IMPRACTICABLE”

PHIA section 52(b) defines “impracticable” as “a degree of difficulty higher than

inconvenience or impracticality but lower than impossibility.”

In the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Tri-
Council
Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans ,1 “impracticable” refers
to “undue hardship or onerousness that jeopardizes the conduct of the research.” This is
consistent with the intent in PHIA, which requires that the researcher consider and
attempt all available means of requesting consent.

In practice, it may be helpful to consider circumstances where it is impracticable to obtain

consent. The Canadian Institutes for Health Research has set out circumstances where this
may be the case:
the size of the population being researched;

the proportion of prospective participants likely to have relocated or died

since the time the personal information was originally collected; or

the lack of an existing or continuing relationship between prospective

participants and the data holder who would need to contact them (e.g. a
patient database that does not have a regular follow-up program to maintain
a complete and accurate record of changes in registrants’ contact information
over time);

such that:

there is a risk of introducing bias into the research because of the loss of data
from segments of the population that cannot be contacted to seek their
consent, thereby affecting the validity of results and/or defeating the purpose
of the study; or

the additional financial, material, human, organizational and other resources

needed to obtain consent could impose a hardship or burden on the

1 Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social
Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research
Involving Humans, December 2010 available at http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/index/
 researchers or organization so burdensome that the research could not be
done. 2

DISCLOSURE OF PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION IN THE CUSTODY OR

CONTROL
OF A CUSTODIAN FOR RESEARCH

Pursuant to section 56 of PHIA a custodian may disclose personal health information about
an individual to a research if the researcher:

(a) submits to the custodian:

(i) an application in writing;

(ii) a research plan that meetings the requirements of section 59; and

(iii) a copy of the submission to and decision of a research ethics board that
approves the research plan; and

(b) enters into the agreement required by section 60.

A researcher who seeks disclosure of personal health information for research must
submit a research plan to an REB for approval. These conditions are clearly outlined in
sections 56 - 60 of the Act and include, but are not limited to:

a description of the research proposed to be conducted; a description of the

personal health information required and the potential sources of the
information; and
a description of how the personal information will be used in the research.

See section 59 of PHIA or Template 7-1 Research Plan Checklist for a complete list of
conditions.

Pursuant to section 57 of PHIA, within the research plan, the researcher must highlight if
consent is being sought for subject individuals. If not, the researcher must provide an
explanation as to why seeking consent is impracticable – and the custodian must accept
this explanation.

If the custodian is satisfied under section 57 that consent is not required, the custodian is
required to inform the Review Officer that personal health information is being disclosed
for research without consent. See Template 7-2 Review Office Notification for a sample
letter to submit to the Review Office.

2 CIHR Best Practices for Protecting Privacy in Health Research 2005, at page 7
http://www.cihrirsc.gc.ca/e/documents/et_pbp_nov05_sept2005_e.pdf
Where a custodian discloses personal health information to a researcher, the researcher
shall enter into an agreement (see Template 7-3 Data Disclosure Agreement) with the
custodian to adhere to requirements including:

to comply with any terms and conditions imposed by a research ethics board or
custodian;
to use the information only for the purposes outlined in the research plan as
approved by a research ethics board; and
to notify the custodian immediately and in writing if the personal health
information is stolen, lost or subject to unauthorized access, use, disclosure, copying
or modification.

See section 60 of PHIA for a complete list of requirements.

THE RESEARCH PLAN

The research plan referenced in the research sections of PHIA does not have to be a
separate document from the existing research project protocol already created for other
purposes, including submission to the REB, applications for funding or thesis approval
provided that all the information required under section 59 is included in the existing
document.

See Template 7-4 Request for Access to Personal Health Information Held by Custodians.
This form includes all requirements under section 56(a)(i) of PHIA and can be used as a
template application form for data held by custodians.

SUMMARY OF REQUIREMENTS

Note: For a complete list of requirements under section 59,

see Template 7-1 Research Plan Checklist

CUSTODIAN USING PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH

Before commencing research using personal health information in his/her custody or
control, the custodian shall:
(a)prepare a research plan that meets the requirements in section 59;
(b)submit the research plan to a research ethics board;
(c) receive the approval of the research ethics board; and
(d)meet any conditions imposed by the research ethics board.
RESEARCHER REQUESTING PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION FROM
CUSTODIAN – WITH CONSENT OF SUBJECT INDIVIDUALS

Before commencing the research, the researcher shall:

1. submit to the custodian

a) an application in writing;
 b) a research plan that meets the requirements of Section 59; and

c) a copy of the submission to and decision of a research ethics board that approves
the research plan; and

2. enter into the agreement required by Section 60.

RESEARCHER REQUESTING PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION FROM

CUSTODIAN – WITHOUT CONSENT OF SUBJECT INDIVIDUALS

Before commencing the research:

1. the researcher shall submit to the custodian:

a) an application in writing;

b) a research plan that meets the requirements of Section 59; and

c) a copy of the submission to and decision of a research ethics board that approves
the research plan;

d) enter into the agreement required by Section 60

2. A research ethics board has determined that the consent of the subject individuals is
not required;

3. the custodian is satisfied that:

a) the research cannot be conducted without using the personal health information;

b) the personal health information is limited to that necessary to accomplish the

purpose of the research;

c) the personal health information is in the most de-identified form possible for the
conduct of the research;

d) the personal health information will be used in a manner that ensures its
confidentiality; and

e) it is impracticable to obtain consent; and

4. the custodian informs the Review Officer that personal health information is being
disclosed without the subject individuals’ consent (see Template 7-2 Review Officer
Notification letter).