Microsoft Word doctoral thesis final[1]. doc

1.6.2  Empirical investigation 
 
An overview of the empirical investigation is given in this section. Details of the 
methodology and research design are presented in chapter 4.  
 
A non-experimental cross-sectional survey research design is employed as the present 
study is partly descriptive, exploratory and explanatory in nature. 
 
A combined quantitative (survey) and qualitative (interviews) methodology is chosen 
because the two methods complement each other. The quantitative method, on the one 
hand, has the potential to gather a large amount of standardised information from several 
informants. The standardisation of responses facilitates scoring and analysis and the 
method can be used to obtain factual, less personal information (McMillan & 
Schumacher 1993:251). On the other hand, a qualitative method gathers in-depth and 
elaborate information from a small purposefully selected sample. In this study the sample 
for this group is drawn from the same population as that from which the survey sample is 
drawn consequently increasing the likelihood of obtaining consistent data. The qualitative 
method supplements the quantitative one as it elicits information of a personal nature and 
allows the participants to express feelings and opinions on issues which the questionnaire 
items do not allow. The video conference focus group interview was chosen as the 
qualitative method because it creates a social environment in which group members are 

---

 
10
stimulated by each others’ perceptions and ideas and so increases the quality and richness 
of data (McMillan & Schumacher 1993: 432). Moreover, the focus group method serves 
to cross validate data collected by means of the questionnaire. While the method “gauges 
consensus of feeling on the research issues” (Briggs 2005:31), the combination of 
quantitative and qualitative methods in the design of the study allows ‘triangulation’ with 
the more in-depth responses from interview participants (Lumby, J. 2003). In the words 
of Collard (2001:345), it also serves to “generate [a] more comprehensive account” of the 
experiences of women academic HoDs and hence provide a strong basis for the 
generation of theory.  
 
1.6.2.1 Phase one: the survey 
 
a) 
Selection of respondents 
 
Respondents are female academic HoDs selected by means of purposive or judgement 
sampling techniques which is a strategy to choose small groups or individuals likely to be 
knowledgeable as well as informative about the phenomena of interest (McMillan & 
Schumacher 1993:413). The participants were selected because of their position as HoD 
and with a minimum of two years in the position.  In South Africa these were drawn from 
retained universities, namely, those which were not merging or merged with other 
universities. Informants from South African universities were first located by means of 
telephone contact with a human resources department person at a relevant institution. 
Once contact with the prospective respondent was established, a brief telephone interview 
was conducted to screen her. She was also informed that an email would follow shortly 
with more details about the research. When all the prospective respondents were thus 
screened, a list was drawn up with all their relevant details. This list was then carefully 
scrutinised to determine which of the prospective respondents to invite for the survey and 
which ones for the interviews. Once the selection was made, the prospective respondents 
were contacted by email and/or by telephone. 
 
Respondents from the UK were first identified through a search of the respective 
university’s website and then contacted by email. Of the four universities selected in 

---

 
11
South Africa one was traditionally English; one traditionally Afrikaans; one traditionally 
African and one traditionally ‘coloured’/Indian. The two universities in the UK were both 
traditionally English with black and other ethnic minorities. 23 female academic HoDs