The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
Participant observation
1. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.htm
IJPDLM
37,2 Participant observation in
logistics research
Experiences from an RFID
148 implementation study
˚
Henrik Palsson
Division of Packaging Logistics, Department of Design Sciences,
Lund University, Lund, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe the advantages, challenges and uncertainties of
collecting and analyzing data using participant observation in logistics research.
Design/methodology/approach – Experiences from a participant observation study of an
interorganizational radio frequency identification (RFID) implementation in an international
environment are presented and reflected on. The RFID implementation included complex
interactions between three leading companies.
Findings – The results appear to support an increased use of participant observation in qualitative
logistics research, particularly when investigating interorganizational aspects. The analysis
highlights values, general limitations and challenges of using participant observation in logistics.
The paper illustrates that using participant observation results in significant and detailed findings,
which would be difficult to achieve with other methods. Suggestions on how to take advantage of the
method’s benefits and overcome methodological challenges are provided.
Research limitations/implications – Future research may address experiences from other studies
regarding how to analyze and report data from a participant observation study. It may also clarify the
role the method is given in case studies and extend the analysis of epistemological aspects conducted
in this paper.
Practical implications – This paper may inspire logistics researchers to consider participant
observation, either as sole method or as part of a multi-methodical case study, in order to make use of
its benefits and thus broaden the dimensions of logistics research.
Originality/value – A broad literature review indicates that participant observation studies are
rather uncommon in logistics research. This paper thus highlights the potential of using this method in
logistics research, particularly when investigating the overlooked, but essential, interorganizational
aspects of logistics and SCM.
Keywords Quality, Research, Participative management, Logistics data processing
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
When writing a paper considering a participant observation study on a radio
frequency identification (RFID) implementation project, the author was going through
leading journals within the field of logistics to gain inspiration from other participant
International Journal of Physical observation studies. Surprisingly, only a limited number of logistics studies using
Distribution & Logistics Management participant observation were found. In addition, examination by Mentzer and Kahn
Vol. 37 No. 2, 2007
pp. 148-163 (1995) and by Sachan and Datta (2005) confirmed the author’s suspicion that
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0960-0035
participant observation studies within logistics are rare. In the comprehensive analysis
DOI 10.1108/09600030710734857 by Mentzer and Kahn, participant observation is not even a category. Perhaps, it is
2. included as a part in some of the case studies reviewed, but only about 3 percent of the Participant
articles published in the Journal of Business Logistics 1978-1995 were case studies. observation in
Sachan and Datta (2005, p. 666) pointed out that existing reviews show that direct
observation methods are rather unpopular and that “researchers are mainly using logistics research
peoples (sic) perception (survey and interview) or artificial methods (simulation and
mathematical modeling) for research in the discipline.”
To further examine this issue, the author conducted a general search in our internal 149
library navigator, which contains most of the logistics journals relevant to this area
and a considerable number of conference proceedings. A search for participant
observation or ethnographic studies in logistics or supply chain management resulted
in only a handful of matches. This apparent lack of participant observation research is
confirmed in a review of case study research (Seuring, 2006). Only five of 68 case
studies employed participant observation in any way. Thus, it would not be
exaggerating to say that participant observation is a rarely used method in logistics
research.
¨
However, Sachan and Datta, as well as Naslund (2002), clearly state that logistics
needs more qualitative research. Sachan and Datta (2005, p. 669) point out the need
for movement toward direct observation via case, action, and field studies, as
¨
“the methods are accessible, their legitimacy is proven, and the need is great.” Naslund
emphasizes the need for more ethnographic studies and action research.
This paper is thus designed to strike a blow for an increased use of participant
observation in logistics research. Therefore, a study on RFID implementation using
this method is offered to illustrate the potential of the method in logistics.
The purpose of this paper is to describe the advantages, challenges, and
uncertainties of collecting and analyzing data using participant observation in logistics
research. Experiences from the interorganizational RFID implementation study in an
international environment are presented and reflected on. The paper also briefly
discusses whether existing epistemological settings in logistics support or are
obstacles for participant observation.
The outline of the paper is the following. It begins with a review of participant
observation and positioning of the method compared to other qualitative methods.
Then the interorganizational RFID implementation study is summarized, with a focus
on methodological aspects. Thereafter, the study is reflected on. Subsequently,
participant observation in logistics is discussed from a more general perspective, but
with connections to the study carried out. Finally, future research is suggested.
Participant observation
Characteristics of participant observation
Different authors seem to include various aspects when they address participant
observation. Some literature (Jackson, 1983; Park, 1999) regards it as a rather broad
research strategy, including observations, interviews, and sampling from documents.
These authors almost place it on a par with ethnography, while other literature
(Merriam, 1994; Yin, 2003) has a narrower view of it. Yin considers it as more of a data
collection technique which can be used within case studies. Merriam, on the other hand,
regards it as a method and he claims it to be one of the most important methods in case
studies. Bryman (2002) also considers it to be a method, while he addresses
ethnography as a wider term. In logistics research, Yin’s approach of regarding
3. IJPDLM participant observation as a data collection technique, often as a part of a case study,
37,2 appears to be common. However, participant observation as the main research method
in logistics is also available (Ellram, 1996), which is the view adopted in this paper.
Participant observation is defined by Bryman (2002). He states that a
participant observer is engaged in a group for a considerable period of time. The
behavior of the group is explored by observing conversations within the group
150 and with the researcher. Bryman also points out that it is common that participant
observation also incorporates supplementary interviews and written material.
To distinguish participant observation from other qualitative methods, it is
compared to five related methods. Ethnography may refer to either a method or a
¨
philosophical paradigm (Naslund, 2002). This method is close to participant
observation, but it is often more culturally focused (Bryman, 2002).
Participatory action research has similarities to participant observation, as a group
is investigated over a period of time. It does, however, significantly differ from this
method on the point that “some of the people in the organization or community under
study participate actively with the professional researcher throughout the research
process” (Foote Whyte, 1991, p. 20).
Case studies may be defined as an investigation of “a contemporary phenomenon
within its real-life context” (Yin, 2003, p. 13) or as the study of the complexity and nature
of a specific case (Stake in Bryman, 2002). A case may, for instance, be a program, an
event, a process, an institution, or a social group (Creswell, 1994). According to Ragin
and Becker (Ragin, 1992, p. 225) it is “a way station in the process of producing empirical
social evidence.” In a case study this evidence may be produced from data collected by
using various methods, both qualitative and quantitative ones (Ellram, 1996); hence,
participant observation may be one of them. Accordingly, case study research may have
overlapping parts with participant observation, for instance, collecting empirical
evidence from a contemporary phenomenon, interviewing, and observation. Participant
observation as viewed in this paper, however, is more distinct, focusing on spending
time in a studied group, and if interviews are used, they are complementary or less
formal. This means that interviews are mainly conducted for unobservable parts of the
studied phenomenon, while a case study may use them as the main method.
Interview studies are a stand-alone method. Compared to participant observation,
one basic and essential difference is that participant observation mainly results in
first-hand data from a contemporary phenomenon, while interviews result in data
interpreted by the respondent from a historical event. A thorough comparison
is provided by Bryman (2002). Participant observation offers better opportunities to
reveal tacit knowledge and unexpected behavior and is thus able to adapt to changed
situations. It also has advantages in being able to uncover hidden activities and
highlight contextual sensitivity. Interview studies, on the other hand, are better at
explaining certain types of emotions and underlying causes for some actions, for
example, why a person has become a vegetarian. Participant observations are suitable
for in-depth longitudinal studies of a limited period of time, but for practical reasons
interview studies are more suitable for long, longitudinal investigations and historical
events. Another practical advantage of interviews is that they often require
considerably less time. Interview studies also offer a wider scope of the study as they
may include people from various parts of an organization, while participant
observation is often limited to a small part of an organization.
4. Focus groups represent a certain type of interview where several respondents Participant
discuss questions asked by the researcher. Consequently, the comparisons between observation in
interview studies and participant observation are, to a large extent, also valid for focus
groups. However, there are some characteristics which put focus groups in another logistics research
position than interviews compared to participant observation. In accordance with
participant observation, focus groups result in large amounts of data which may be
challenging to analyze. Compared to interviews, focus groups offer slightly less 151
control, but not to the extent that is typical in participant observation. While
participant observation reveals the first-hand data of a phenomenon, Bryman (2002)
states that a focus group may come to consensus when an issue is being discussed.
A risk of this course of action is that people in a group stop thinking critically. Another
risk put forward by Bryman is that group effects may limit the results of a focus group,
as some participants may be loud and some very quiet. These risks are considered to
be less apparent in participant observation because the researcher studies the group in
its natural context.
Four phases
Four phases (preparation, data collection, analysis, and writing) which could be
identified in ethnographic studies are also valid to some extent in participant
observation studies. They are referred to below.
The preparation phase includes, similar to other research methods, research design.
An essential element is gaining access to the objects to be investigated. This often includes
seeking the permission of gatekeepers and the support of sponsors. However, access is not
only a question of physical presence or absence (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995, p. 55).
Private boundaries may, for example, be difficult to break through, as they “may be
policed by gatekeepers” (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995, p. 63).
Further, in the field relations it is essential to gain the trust of the group being
researched. Thus, Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) observe that it may be necessary
to dress similarly to the group and to clearly explain the intentions of the study. They
also recommend a researcher not to become too involved in a group if it prevents
him/her from gaining access to other groups.
After preparation, the data collection phase may begin. Various authors offer
practical advice on how to ensure accurate and trustworthy information. Glaser (1996),
for instance, claims that it is essential to:
.
Schedule strategically – be flexible, take advantage of “snowballing”
(one respondent may suggest and facilitate access to other respondents).
.
Adjust the interview request to the situation – for example, taking advantage of
time in between events to conduct short interviews.
. Obtain multiple perspectives.
.
Establish trust and gain access.
.
Reveal your purpose, suppress your opinion – be clear, but do not reveal your
opinions on different issues.
.
Do not overlook detail in the rush of activity – it is impossible to know
beforehand which details are critical in the investigation.
.
Be a pack rat – it is impossible to know beforehand what is important.
5. IJPDLM Jackson (1983), on the other hand, identified six challenges:
37,2 (1) Problems of data handling – for example, sorting very comprehensive
information.
(2) Significant time gap between the occurrence of an event and its being recorded
as data.
152 (3) Lengthy delay between research and writing.
(4) Problems of systematic analysis and convincing presentation of infinite
amounts of data.
(5) Too heavy reliance on informants involves the dangers of an elite bias.
(6) Ethical and moral questions.
Atkinson et al. (2001) put emphasis on field notes. They state that field notes may be
either jotted down or merely mental. The jotted notes may work as reminders for
certain situations or may be the initial steps of the writing process. Mental notes are to
be conducted while the researcher is observing in detail, with the aim of writing
or participating in ongoing events in order to gain experience of certain situations or
processes.
The phase of analysis and reflection in participant observation studies is typically
ongoing throughout the investigation. Hammersley and Atkinson (1995, p. 210) offer
some advice on how to conduct the analysis in ethnography, which is useful in
participant observation too; “The first step in the process of analysis is, of course,
a careful reading of the corpus of data, in order to become thoroughly familiar with it.”
They point out that the aim of the first step is to identify patterns, seek relationships
across the whole data or see whether anything stands out. They further explain that
concepts may also be observed. The initial analysis is expected to generate fairly trivial
concepts which, further on in the analysis, become more abstract. A more in-depth
analysis strategy, suggested by Hammersley and Atkinson (1995, p. 216), is constant
comparison (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). Another strategy they propose is typology
development, where “an initial set of categories differentiating a particular range of
phenomena can be developed into a systematic typology.” Irrespective of the strategy
chosen, the interpretations in the study depend on several aspects:
.
Social context. Since, the participant observer interacts in a social context, the
audience “to which the actions or accounts being used as data were directed”
(p. 220) should be considered, as this may affect what is being said. It should be
taken into account that the people being studied may have something to gain by
not telling the truth. The audience may be the researcher, for instance, in
interviews and some observation situations.
.
Time. What is said and done depends on time, i.e. what has already occurred is
relevant to decisions and actions.
.
Personnel. Actions and perspectives of people depend on their identity and their
social relationships. For example, the position a person holds in a company
determines which information is accessible to them.
.
Respondent validation. The respondent may have more knowledge than the
researcher, but the respondent’s knowledge may be false or there may be a
motive behind an incorrect description or a misinterpretation. If the investigation
6. may be interpreted as critical or negative, respondent validation may also be Participant
problematic. observation in
.
Triangulation. Checking findings with different sources. logistics research
Another way of analyzing data in a participant observation study is to use coding
techniques from grounded theory. Strauss and Corbin (1998) emphasize the need to
carefully scrutinize data. Accordingly, they describe how to break down data with 153
extensive coding procedures. They also promote the writing of memos and notes to
gain analytical distance from data.
An essential part of any analysis is how data are interpreted. Alvesson and
¨
Skoldberg (1994, p. 12) put the emphasis on reflection, which they define as
“interpretation of an interpretation.” This means that reflection aims to critically
evaluate interpretations of empirical material conducted by a researcher. Thus, the
connection between interpreted data, for example, models, and reality in data may be
strengthened.
Finally, the phase of writing may be divided into two parts; writing field notes
and writing the finished texts. This phase is more extensive in ethnographic studies
and thus only briefly mentioned here. Atkinson et al. (2001) point out that writing field
notes often is a first analytic step. It may facilitate new insights into the research area
and give rise to new ideas. In the final text in a participant observation study, the field
notes are reported together with other empirical data, for example, interviews.
Participant observation in the RFID implementation study
A brief overview of RFID technology in logistics
Before highlighting methodological issues of the participant observation study
conducted, RFID technology in logistics, its potential advantages and challenges are
briefly presented. Without visual contact RFID technology captures data from an
object. In a typical RFID system, a reader transmits and registers radio waves which
are modified by a tag (antenna) applied to an object.
The potential of using RFID technology in logistics has attracted a great deal of
attention recently (Sheffi, 2004). Current literature has, to a great extent, focused on the
potential opportunities this technology offers in logistics. Potential advantages
reported are reduced labor hours (Jones et al., 2004; McFarlane and Sheffi, 2003), less
¨ ¨
spoilage (Karkkainen, 2003), and a reduction in shrinkage in the supply chain (Jones
et al., 2004; Rutner et al., 2004). Other potential advantages identified are increased
process efficiency (Angeles, 2005; Rutner et al., 2004), improved sales due to reduced
out-of-stock situations (Jones et al., 2004; Prater et al., 2005), improved track and trace
opportunities (Angeles, 2005; Jones et al., 2004), improved accuracy of product control
(Angeles, 2005; Rutner et al., 2004), and improved inventory management in vendor
˚ ¨
managed inventory settings (Smaros and Holmstrom, 2000).
Two generic types of logistics systems using RFID exist. First, RFID may be
implemented in a closed loop, which means that the same RFID tag is used over and over
again in a closed loop. Since, the tag is used many times, its purchase price is relatively
unimportant. Consequently, rather expensive high-performing tags may be used in such
loops. Second, RFID may be implemented in an open system, for example, in a supply
chain. In this context, several challenges arise. There are technological challenges
(McFarlane and Sheffi, 2003); the tags are disposable and must be inexpensive. Thus, it is
7. IJPDLM challenging to produce tags which are inexpensive but still reliable and durable.
37,2 In addition, implementation in a supply chain should also consider the technological
requirements of several actors; the RFID system chosen should work for all actors
involved. Furthermore, this interorganizational character of RFID implementation in a
supply chain results in other challenges. Interorganizational barriers are associated with
cost/benefit sharing, collaboration, information sharing, and technology transfer issues
154 ˚
(Palsson, 2006).
Nonetheless, RFID initiatives are currently being mandated by large retailers, for
example, Wal-Mart, Tesco, and Metro. Therefore, their top suppliers are more or less
required to implement RFID technology to be used in the supply chain.
Overall description of the RFID implementation study
To substantiate the methodological analysis, a brief description of the RFID study
conducted is offered. The description reveals social context and personnel aspects
which influenced the interpretations of the study. The investigation examined an
interorganizational implementation project of RFID technology in disposable
secondary packaging; the project was mandated by a large retailer. The study
focused on interorganizational supply chain relationships and emphasized the
implications of an RFID implementation project. It highlighted the interactions of a
project group consisting of representatives from a packaging supplier, a food
manufacturer, and a technology provider.
The unit of analysis was thus the packaging company with the focus on its
interactions with the participants in a working group aiming at implementing RFID
tags in disposable secondary packaging. This case was chosen because it represents a
leading packaging supplier and a leading food manufacturer with high levels of
technological development. Both companies aim to be at the forefront of new
technological concepts and tools in their industry.
The nature of the companies involved varied somewhat. Those investigated at the
packaging company were head office representatives. This company is ranked as one
of the top companies in Europe regarding sales and market shares. The packaging
company’s customer who was involved in the study was a very large food
manufacturer. Representatives were located at the head office. The representatives of
the third company in the study, the technology provider, were part of the company’s
European subsidiary. This company is much smaller than the other companies.
The relationship in the working group was interorganizational, which added
complexity to the study. As the relationship was interorganizational, power was
identified as impacting the collaboration substantially, both in terms of coercive and
reward power (French and Raven, 1958). It was possible to initiate the project due to
the power wielded by both the retailer and the food manufacturer. The main reason for
the packaging supplier to enter the project was fear of reprisals, but while participating
in the project the company also realized the potential of RFID technology for added
business opportunities. The complexity of the study was also affected by four essential
links between the collaborating parties. The links expressed mutuality (Dubois and
Gadde, 2000). There were activity links between the companies both operationally
and strategically, resource ties in terms of shared resources in testing and conducting
the project, continuous interaction in a working group and, finally, economic links
regarding implementation costs. Another complexity enhancer was the fact that the
8. collaborating companies had varying goals for participating. Finally, complexity was Participant
also added by a need to share costs in the interorganizational collaboration. observation in
However, besides being interorganizational, the study dealt with RFID technology
which was an unproven technology interorganizationally. This made the complexity in logistics research
the study even more evident.
The investigation identified a number of characteristics of the relationship, and
essential issues which needed to be considered in implementing RFID technology in a 155
supply chain. It revealed a need for knowledge of both packaging and the RFID
technology. Moreover, it demonstrated the impact of power on the relationship in the
interorganizational RFID implementation project as well as reasons for uncertainty in
the implementation project. It was suggested that uncertainty could be reduced with a
proactive approach, timely reporting, assigning clear roles, and early agreement of cost
sharing. The study also identified a lack of and a need for both a common goal and a
cost-sharing strategy. An agreed common goal appeared to improve project efficiency.
Preparation
The preparation phase included two main elements; designing the study and gaining
access. Participant observation was selected as the main research method for several
reasons. It made it possible to study a contemporary phenomenon and thus gain
otherwise inaccessible information (Yin, 2003) as well as to receive firsthand, detailed
information about the phenomenon. It also facilitated a holistic interpretation of the
situation. The research design further included elements such as definitions of period
of time, purpose and scope of the study, and key people and organizations in the study.
Gaining access needed particular attention. For initial skepticism to be overcome four
components were identified as helpful. First, the author had initial contact with one of
the organizations to be investigated. Thus, it was decided to first come to an agreement
with this organization to use its staff as sponsors later on. This proved to be important
as the sponsors had a key role in convincing the most skeptical project group members.
Second, a thorough description of the background of the author led to both a better
working relationship and helped convince the investigated group that the author could
contribute to the implementation process. Third, once the purpose of the study was
clearly revealed, it was easier for it to be accepted. Finally, making clear that the author
would contribute to the progress of the implementation also facilitated the project
group’s acceptance of a researcher as a member.
The process of data collection and data analysis
Participant observation was the main element of a single case study on implementation
of RFID technology in a German retail supply chain (Figure 1). The participant
observation was mainly conducted in a working group and in an experiment.
Participant
observation
Case Figure 1.
Working group Interviews
study Methods used in the
Experiment
Study visit interorganizational RFID
implementation study
9. IJPDLM The phase of data collection began when an interorganizational project regarding
37,2 implementation of RFID technology in the supply chain (Figure 2) was started.
The main part of the project was an active working group, consisting of six permanent
members, including the author, originating from the packaging supplier, the food
manufacturer, the technology provider, and academia. Temporary members were
represented as knowledge resources when needed. The working group had an
156 international character as the permanent members represented three nationalities and
the temporary members another two. The role of the author was mainly to document
and observe the progress of the project and secondarily to participate in discussions
and some project tasks.
The overall goal of the implementation project was somewhat unclear. Given the
complexity of the study, this is unsurprising. However, the goal was interpreted by
the working group as making an RFID system work on secondary packaging, i.e. all
secondary packages should be labeled individually with RFID tags and all tags should
be read simultaneously on several places in the supply chain. Thus, in order to further
evaluate the new technology, the working group identified two vaguely defined tasks.
First, a working, robust RFID system should be chosen, including both technological
choices such as RFID tags, positioning of tags on packages, readers, effects, etc. and
logistical effects such as supply chain design, efficiency improvement, reading locations,
etc. Second, a financial evaluation of introducing RFID technology was needed.
The working group existed for approximately six months. After a kick-off in
September 2005 the group operated on a regular basis until February 2006. The closing
of the working group was rather turbulent and abrupt as one of the project leaders left
the packaging company due to downsizing. This led to a hiatus in the project.
One type of knowledge resource used in the project was study visits at companies
with knowledge of RFID technology. This facilitated the working group’s
understanding of the technological requirements and limitations of RFID
technology. It also served as inspiration in the process of considering future
opportunities of RFID technology.
Another knowledge resource utilized was that of experiments conducted at the
technology provider’s. Together with the technology manager, the author carried
out technology tests of RFID technology. The goal was to reach a high read-rate for
RFID tags in packaging. Each transportation package on a pallet had a unique RFID
tag, and as the pallet was pulled between two readers all tags should be read. To obtain
a 100 percent accurate read rate we had to find a good combination of type (brand) and
position of tag, as well as type, frequency, and effect of readers.
Data were thus collected using participant observation in three general types of
environments. In these environments the level of participation/observation varied
(Figure 3). During the working group meetings the focus of the researcher was
Knowledge
resources
Packaging Food
Retailer
supplier manufacturer
Figure 2.
Actors involved in the Technology
RFID project provider
10. primarily to observe, and secondarily to participate. The observation regarded Participant
documentation and interpretation of the project progress reported and discussions observation in
carried out in the meetings. To fully make use of these events the author complemented
the observations with informal interviews or discussions with the participants. logistics research
The second type of environment for data collection was that of experiments. Here, the
situation required the author to take a fairly active role due to lack of resources in the
field of RFID knowledge. The RFID testing was carried out by the technology manager 157
at the technology provider’s and the author. The final environment for data collection
was that of study visits. Since, the overall aim of the whole working group was to
observe, the observer role of the author was quite natural. To gather even more data,
semistructured interviews were conducted. Thus, it was possible to obtain reflections
from both working group members and external interested parties.
The phase of analysis was to some extent ongoing throughout the investigation.
The aspects which would influence data interpretation were applied in various degrees.
Most data were written in documents and were continuously interpreted and analyzed.
The information was analyzed through coding, inspired by grounded theory (Glaser
and Strauss, 1967; Strauss and Corbin, 1998). The information was structured and
analyzed both chronologically, to take the time aspect into account, and according to
content. To emphasize the need for variation and width in the interpretations,
¨
interpretative reflection (Alvesson and Skoldberg, 1994) was applied in the analysis.
Conducting a reflexive analysis required a careful, detailed use of, and reflection on, the
empirical material involved (Thomsson, 2002). Thus, the interpretations were
compared to theories and the author’s prior understanding of the subject. It was also
possible to take into account the aspects of social context and personnel. Respondent
validation was only considered to a limited extent, because the study was slightly
negative and hence this aspect is judged to be problematic. Instead, another reflection
was applied using triangulation, i.e. one part of the empirical material was
strengthened in other parts of the empirical material.
Reflections on the study – pragmatic issues
Reflections on pragmatic issues from the RFID implementation study are presented
here to illustrate the real effects of the methodological choice. This illustration
facilitates a concrete evaluation of the advantages, challenges, and uncertainties of
participant observation in logistics. Thus, the methodological aspects of participant
observation in logistics investigated are firmly tied to empirical data on a pragmatic
level. The reflections are mainly directed at the phases where the current study
identified the main challenges, which were in data collection and analysis. These
phases are not explicitly pointed out in this reflection as they interacted throughout
most of the study.
Working
Study visit group Experiment Figure 3.
meeting Role of the researcher in
different parts of the
research
Observation Participation
11. IJPDLM Methodological pros in the RFID implementation study
37,2 A critical issue in participant observation is gaining access. Access to the working
group was difficult to obtain, but once gained new opportunities arose. It provided
opportunities to gather information from busy people through informal interviews.
The relationship between the working group members also gave insight into sensitive
occurrences behind the scenes. For example, it was found that internally at the
158 packaging supplier’s, nobody was really interested in the project. Once this had been
realized, its effect on the project could be observed. A lack of goals, for instance, was
recognized and investigated further. Another occurrence behind the scenes which
would have been tricky to identify without observation was how the cost-sharing
strategy was carried out by one of the companies in the project. By consistently
ignoring the issue of cost sharing, one of the participating companies postponed this
issue. On occasions, when the matter was brought up, the company hushed it up.
By gaining access to a group, participant observation can give insight into
otherwise inaccessible firsthand information. In the RFID study, it was found that the
participant organizations in the working group had different goals. As a result, this
diversity and its effect were studied and analyzed. Detailed firsthand information
regarding a minor conflict which arose regarding cost sharing was also accessed.
By participating and observing it was possible to directly discover several areas of
uncertainty in the project. Part of the uncertainty, for example, unstructured
experiments, an ad hoc approach, and vague responsibilities, would not have been
recognized through using another method.
Comprehensive amounts of data may improve the quality of a study. Here, an
in-depth understanding of the implementation process was offered, as the method
facilitated detailed data collection. Interesting information was, for example, gained by
the author studying mail correspondence in the working group, discussions, and
working group meetings. This information facilitated an analysis of the relationship in
the working group identifying, for example, what was lacking for an effective
relationship to be assured. Furthermore, in-depth data also gave insight into power
balance in the relationship. Hereby, follow-up interviews could be based on experiences
which took the investigation further.
Methodological cons in the RFID implementation study
During the research process several challenges arose. In the following paragraphs
these will be reflected on.
As a consequence, of close cooperation, a risk of a lack of distance between the
researcher and the researched group may appear. At best, this is a major advantage as
“the true” picture is revealed. However, the current study also indicated that it is easy
to adopt an internal perspective without critically examining taken-for-granted
information and accepting it as fact. Put another way, a researcher may adopt the
blindness to defects of the researched object and thus lack an outside perspective
which often is claimed to result in fresh inputs.
Being an active part in the process investigated, it may be difficult to set
the boundaries between participating and observing. It was a balance to decide to what
extent the researcher should affect the process and still not conduct action research.
For instance, with the author being one of two participants in an experiment, where one
crucial element was to brainstorm about how to solve problems, the line between
12. participant observation and action research was rather thin. This issue was dealt with Participant
by actively discussing problems, but still letting the company representative come to observation in
the final decisions. However, the boundaries between participating and observing must
be reflected on in every single case and the choice of boundary is of a subjective nature. logistics research
It may be difficult to question the researched group’s behavior without affecting it.
The researcher needs to scrutinize the researched group, but critical questions might
affect the group’s forthcoming behavior. This might not necessarily be wrong, but 159
needs to be taken into consideration when reporting the investigation. It was a delicate
and tricky issue to analyze.
Six pragmatic challenges, previously identified by Jackson (1983), are likely to
appear in participant observation. In the RFID study, these challenges were tackled in
various ways. First, the extensive amount of data was sorted and analyzed with a great
deal of effort and reflection. Second, to avoid the negative impact of a time gap between
the occurrence of the event and its being recorded as data, which might result in vital
details being omitted, the author tried to take detailed notes during the whole study.
Third, to minimize the risk of the negative influence of a lengthy delay between
research and writing, recording and analysis of data were carried out continuously
during the investigation. Furthermore, follow-up interviews were conducted after
participant observation. Fourth, the difficulties of analyzing infinite amounts of data
were overcome by systematic analysis using analysis techniques inspired by grounded
theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Strauss and Corbin, 1998), for example, coding and
continuous comparison. Fifth, to try to avoid bias from key informants, triangulation
was conducted. Thus, several data sources for similar events were sought, for instance,
follow-up interviews of observed findings, or documents and observations which
provided similar results. Finally, ethical challenges, such as, how to report disputes,
lack of management support, and protect against intrusion on personal privacy, were
dealt with by the author. He explained the intentions of the study to the observed group
and assured them that their anonymity was guaranteed in the report.
Participation vs observation
The degree of participation, and consequently the effect of a researcher may vary in
different parts of an investigation. This was relevant in the progress of the project
studied. The study visits were thoroughly objective as they mainly comprised
observation, while the experiment was fairly subjective because participation was
emphasized. The working group meetings were somewhere in between. The author’s
main stance was to observe, but his role was also to contribute with knowledge which
may have moved the project in certain directions.
However, to be able to further reflect on the implication of degree of
participation/observation in the different data collection methods used in the project,
the meaning of subjective and objective needs to be clarified. According to Longman
Dictionary of Contemporary English (2005), “a statement, report, attitude, etc. that is
subjective is influenced by personal opinion and can therefore be unfair.” Objective, on
the other hand, is “based on facts, or making a decision that is based on facts rather
than on your feelings or beliefs.”
This discrepancy between the characteristics of subjective and objective, which to
some extent is associated with participation and observation, did not lead to obvious
difficulties in the study but may have affected the outcome. Theoretically, the
13. IJPDLM researcher could have had a less active participative role in the experiment, but due to
37,2 pragmatic reasons this was not feasible because the researcher was needed as a
resource. Furthermore, the interaction between researcher and practitioner in the
experiment was fruitful and accordingly the participatory approach probably
improved the outcome. The interaction certainly increased the researcher’s
understanding of the project.
160 It was found that access could be divided into two types. First, in the preparation
phase there was a rather formal basic access which means obtaining permission to
conduct the study and then collect data. The second type is slightly more difficult
to describe, but we can call it fresh access. It was more informal and needed to be
maintained on a regular basis in the data collection phase. It may be assured by
gaining trust and continuously showing contribution. In the working group the
researcher was involved in discussions and tried to contribute with knowledge.
Consequently, it was possible to ask questions, which also facilitated the researcher’s
understanding. Additionally, the author found that active engagement in the project
resulted in greater trust from the group and thus more access was gained.
Discussion and conclusion
The interorganizational RFID implementation study
Even though relationships are commonly studied in logistics and that SCM has received
increased attention, a recent study reveals that there are very few interorganizational
studies and that “the current research has failed to look at that perspective of the SCM”
(Sachan and Datta, 2005, p. 674). The RFID investigation discussed in this paper
highlighted opportunities to conduct research on interorganizational settings with
participant observation, and it proved to be beneficial. Accordingly, it indicated that this
method was suitable to investigate this essential perspective of SCM.
The fact that direct observation methods, such as, participant observation, appear
to be rather uncommon in logistics research may contribute to the lack of
interorganizational studies. Therefore, in order to fill the increased need for
interorganizational research, in the form of, for example, SCM and collaboration, the
author suggests that more logistics researchers would benefit from considering
participant observation in their studies.
The interorganizational RFID implementation offered an example of the value and
challenges of participant observation in logistics. First, it demonstrated that access may be
difficult to obtain, but when this has been achieved a whole new world of detailed
information may be discovered. Second, it presented the opportunity for researchers to
acquire an in-depth understanding of a studied phenomenon, which in this case was an
interorganizational relationship in an implementation project. Third, the in-depth
information gained served as a frame of reference, which facilitated reflection. Fourth, the
study identified a challenge regarding how to avoid internal prejudices. The challenge is to
be able to take a step back. Fifth, this challenge is connected to the previous point and
considered a difficulty in setting boundaries between participating and observing. Sixth, it
was also found that investigating the group without affecting it too much was a delicate
balance to achieve. Finally, the paper identified a number of pragmatic challenges in data
collection and handling which have been previously reported.
Based on the RFID implementation study presented in this paper, a proposition is
that more logistics research would benefit from participant observation with a slight
14. ¨
influence from ethnography. This view supports Naslund (2002, p. 332), who puts Participant
emphasis on the need for logistics researchers “to gain extreme relevance by spending observation in
more time in organizations . . . by ‘hanging out.’” Thus, the currently overlooked
interorganizational perspective in SCM would be more likely to be researched. logistics research
The opportunities presented by participant observation are also found elsewhere.
Ellram (1996, Table 3) highlighted the usefulness of this method in qualitative
research. She claimed that it could be used for research aiming to explore, explain, 161
describe, or even predict. By “hanging out” in organizations, participant observation
combined with other methods could result in more thorough logistics studies.
The dominance of the positivistic paradigm in logistics research (Mentzer and
¨
Kahn, 1995; Naslund, 2002; Nilsson, 2005) may affect how participant observation
research is valued in the logistics field. Considering paradigm, Easton (1995, p. 381)
claims that in positivism “cases are only useful as exploratory devices,” but for a realist
one case is enough as realists are “not generalizing to any population but to a real
world that has been discovered.” These quotes indicate two essential issues. First, it
might be challenging to generalize from a participant observation study in logistics.
Second, it might be important to reason about epistemological standpoints when
making an analytical generalization in logistics.
¨
In addition, Naslund (2002, p. 332) points out that:
. . . to some extent, ethnography is based on the rejection of positivism, and particularly the
rejection of the view that (social) research should adopt scientific methods consisting of
rigorous testing of hypotheses utilizing quantitative measurements.
This comment is valid for participant observation too, as it bears similarities to
ethnography. Obviously, rejecting positivism or at least keeping an open mind to other
epistemological positions to make use of participant observation might be a major
challenge, but previous studies appear to call for such a stance. Moreover, the quote
also indicates that the dominance of positivism plays down the value of participant
observation research. Therefore, the author suggests that it may be essential to discuss
and argue for the significance of results obtained with this method. Another issue to
examine further is epistemological obstacles for participant observation in logistics.
In summary, this paper showed different views of participant observation in
traditional logistics research (Ellram, 1996; Yin, 2003) and more socially focused
research (Atkinson et al., 2001; Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995). In addition, it
presented an overview of the characteristics of participant observation and compared
it with other qualitative methods. It also demonstrated the usefulness of participant
observation in logistics and particularly when investigating interorganizational
aspects. This usefulness was illustrated with an RFID implementation study, which
revealed concrete methodological issues. The study also served as input to a more
overall discussion of participant observation in logistics. Future research should report
experiences from other participant observation studies regarding, for example,
opportunities and obstacles, and to what extent a participant observation study should
be subjective and objective. It may also be directed at a deeper investigation of how to
analyze and report data from a participant observation study, and the role of this
method in a case study. In addition, the brief analysis of epistemological aspects in this
paper needs to be extended.
15. IJPDLM References
37,2 ¨
Alvesson, M. and Skoldberg, K. (1994), Tolkning och reflektion – Vetenskapsfilosofi och kvalitativ
metod, Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Angeles, R. (2005), “RFID technologies: supply chain applications and implementation issues”,
Information Systems Management, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 51-65.
Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., Delamont, S., Lofland, J. and Lofland, L. (2001), Handbook of
162 Ethnography, Sage, London.
¨
Bryman, A. (2002), Samhallsvetenskapliga metoder, Liber Ekonomi, Malmo. ¨
Creswell, J.W. (1994), Research Design – Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Dubois, A. and Gadde, L-E. (2000), “Supply strategy and network effects – purchasing behaviour
in the construction industry”, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management,
Vol. 6 Nos 3/4, pp. 207-15.
Easton, G. (1995), “Case research as a methodology for industrial networks; a realist apologia”,
in Turnbull, P., Yorke, D. and Nande, P. (Eds), IMP 11th International Conference
Proceedings, pp. 368-91.
Ellram, L.M. (1996), “The use of case study method in logistic research”, Journal of Business
Logistics, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 93-138.
Foote Whyte, W. (1991), Participatory Action Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
French, J.R.P. and Raven, B.H. (1958), “Legitimate power, coercive power, and observability in
social influence”, Sociometry, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 83-97.
Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory – Strategies for
Qualitative Research, Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago, IL.
Glaser, J.M. (1996), “The challenge of campaign watching: seven lessons of participant –
observation research”, PS: Political Science and Politics, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 533-7.
Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (1995), Ethnography – Principles in Practice, Routledge,
Abingdon.
Jackson, P. (1983), “Principles and problems of participant observation”, Geografiska Annaler:
Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 39-46.
Jones, P., Clark-Hill, C., Shears, P., Comfort, D. and Hillier, D. (2004), “Radio frequency
identification in the UK: opportunities and challenges”, International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 164-71.
Ka ¨
¨ rkkainen, M. (2003), “Increasing efficiency in the supply chain for short shelf life goods using
RFID tagging”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 10,
pp. 529-36.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2005), available at: www.ldoceonline.com
(accessed 3 March 2006).
McFarlane, D. and Sheffi, Y. (2003), “The impact of automatic identification on supply chain
operations”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Mentzer, J.T. and Kahn, K.B. (1995), “A framework of logistics research”, Journal of Business
Logistics, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 231-50.
Merriam, S.B. (1994), Fallstudien som forskningsmetod, Studentlitteratur, Lund.
¨
Naslund, D. (2002), “Logistics needs qualitative research – especially action research”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 32 No. 5,
pp. 321-38.
16. Nilsson, F. (2005), “Adaptive logistics – using complexity theory to facilitate increased Participant
effectiveness in logistics”, doctoral thesis, MediaTryck, Lund.
˚ lsson, H. (2006), “Implications of interorganizational RFID implementation – a case study”,
Pa
observation in
Conference Proceedings of ELA 2005, Vol. 10, pp. 85-100. logistics research
Park, P. (1999), “People, knowledge, and change in participatory research”, Management
Learning, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 141-57.
Prater, E., Frazier, G.V. and Reyes, P.M. (2005), “Future impacts of RFID on e-supply chains in 163
grocery retailing”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 134-42.
Ragin, C. (1992), “‘Casing’ and the process of social inquiry”, in Ragin, C.C. and Becker, H.S. (Eds),
What is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, pp. 217-26.
Rutner, S.M., Waller, M.A. and Mentzer, J.T. (2004), “A practical look at RFID”, Supply Chain
Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 36-41.
Sachan, A. and Datta, S. (2005), “Review of supply chain management and logistics research”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 35 No. 9,
pp. 664-705.
Seuring, S. (2006), “The rigor of case study research in supply chain management”, in Persson, G.
and Jahre, M. (Eds), Nofoma 2006, Oslo.
Sheffi, Y. (2004), “RFID and the innovation cycle”, International Journal of Logistics
Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
˚ ¨
Smaros, J. and Holmstrom, J. (2000), “Viewpoint: reaching the consumer through e-grocery VMI”,
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 55-61.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998), Basics of Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Thomsson, H. (2002), Reflexiva Intervjuer, Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Yin, R.K. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
About the author
˚
Henrik Palsson is a PhD Candidate in Logistics at Lund University, where he also received his
MSc in Mechanical Engineering. His doctoral thesis is focused on interorganizational
collaboration in logistics. Prior to his PhD studies, he has worked at a logistics consultancy firm
for four years and at a manufacturing company for one year. Henrik has published in conference
proceedings and he was awarded for best paper at the Nofoma Conference 2006. Henrik Palsson ˚
can be contacted at: henrik.palsson@plog.lth.se
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints