An interactive research design

process (e.g. conceptual framework, research questions, and empirical material).

According to Maxwell (2012, p. 3), “you can’t just develop (or borrow) a logical strategy in advance and then implement it faithfully.” This approach consists of five elements that are interconnected: goals, conceptual framework, research questions, methods and validity. In this model, the research questions are not the starting point but rather form the center of the research. The research questions are not fixed at the start of the study but they might need to be revisited and modified as a result of changes in the purposes or conceptual frameworks or what the researcher has been learning during the research. The relationship among the five components is showed below.

Personal insights about the research design

As I was formulating the questions I intended to use in my interviews with the participants in the Eco-Innovation Cooperation programs, I realized that the earlier interviews conducted for a different study could complement my research project. Although this is not a comparative study, there are similarities and differences that can be drawn from the three STI cooperation programs and conclusions that can be elicited from the case studies. I interviewed the actors who translate policy into practice (e.g. academic and industrial researchers, company managers and business owners) and who continually respond to funding opportunities. I also interviewed policy actors and government officials across Swedish funding agencies and ministries.

Interviews with these individuals enabled me to reach the conclusion that the motivations, decision-making processes, design and implementation of these programs differed. In addition to having contrasting purposes, design and implementation, the common feature among the three case studies is their embeddedness in the Swedish research system illustrating the importance of external funding. Regarding the research process, acknowledging potential research biases and discussing them with my supervisors was a good exercise but writing them down regularly was equally important.

Note-taking after interviews and meetings where I was an observer, helped me to identify my research goals and to improve my research questions. In addition, taking in-depth notes during and after meetings with my PhD advisors aided in gaining new insights. These

practices also helped me to see how the different components of my research design are interrelated. In the beginning of the research project, I wrote down several pages of potential research questions. As my research progressed and as interviews were conducted, I narrowed down the questions. More importantly, I tailored them to my topic.

As I continued to design my study, I revisited the elements of my research design. On the map that I constructed (see below), I lay out the different elements and explain how they are connected. This is based on Maxwell’s (2012) design model which has been adapted to fit my research subject. The map below shows five elements in the research design that are closely related: the research questions, the theoretical building blocks, methods, research purpose and validity.

Note that the research questions are positioned at the center as they affect the other components of the design and, in turn are affected by them. The research questions have been regularly revisited and improved; therefore, they were not predefined. Also, they have not emerged from or followed a strict and linear process. I have chosen this research design that follows a cyclic characteristic because it is most appropriate for explorative qualitative research which is the kind of study I have conducted. This design is useful when not much is known about an issue or a phenomenon. In this case, my aim has been to gain a better understanding of the underlying issues concerning decision-making processes, rationales and views of internationalization. For instance, I am interested in how certain policy ideas gain traction and emerge giving rise to specific science, technology and innovation cooperation programs. Following the research design map, I present the relationship between the research questions (what), research purpose and interests (why) and the methods I have selected in order to answer my questions (how). Also, I present some of the conclusions and potential explanations for the questions I am posing. Finally, I have included how I have tried to establish validity for the results of my study.

Research Design map

The research design map below (Figure 2) shows an interactive research process in cyclic format. In this type of model, all five parts of the cycle interact with each other and are closely related. For instance, the methods chosen are influenced by the types of questions asked. The purpose of the research can be answered based on the research questions and in some instances, declarative purposes are derived from research questions. Given the multidisciplinary characteristic of my research topic, it was appropriate to select a series of building blocks as the theoretical framework for this research. From the beginning, I did not have one pre-determined theoretical concept or concepts that were selected in advance. Instead, I decided to first conduct interviews and embrace the explorative model of approaching the field to try to familiarize myself with the issue and learn as much as possible about the topic STI internationalization and research and innovation policy.

Based on data gathered through interviews, observations and government reports, I began to understand the types of concepts that were a better fit to the topic of study. Although I had already selected a few theoretical concepts for my research, based on feedback I received from faculty at the university and an external reviewer and based on my own assessment, I made changes to the theory chapter later on. This shows that the five components of the research design are integral moving parts. As the research questions were refined and the theory chapter was redefined, I also revisited my research purpose a number of times. To establish validity, this study has undergone a number of verifications.

These include asking clarifying questions to respondents/check interpretation with them. Given the challenges and limitations of this study, I consider this model to be the best possible approach applied to this study as there are no perfect research projects or ideal research design.

Figure 2 Research design map. Source: Maxwell (2012)

Table 3 Relationship between questions, purpose and methods

What What do I want to know (research questions)

Why Why the interest in the topic (Purpose)

How What type of data will answer the research questions (methods)

Analytic

al tools Potential

conclusions Motives/Ex

planation Validity

Why do governments promote the inter-nationalization of science, technology and innovation?

To understand motivations that support decisions

Interviews with government officials in funding agencies and ministries (semi-structured and open-ended)

Text interpret ation, coding

There could be several interests supporting decisions to invest (e.g.

political, economic).

These interests not always contrast; they might overlap

To help domestic companies to gain access to large markets;

boost domestic industry

Follow-up and clarifying questions;

four readers

Research Questions

Methods

Theoretical building

block

s

Verification for validity Research

purpose

What factors shape the formulation of government-supported programs for the inter-nationalization of STI?

To understand the factors involved in the design and implemen-tation of policies; to understand how programs emerge; to inform contribute to the policy implemen-tation field; to understand how government intentions are formulated and implemented funding by agencies

Interviews with government staff in Swedish funding agencies responsible for program design

Text interpret ation, coding

Discrepan-cies between policy formulation as we know it and policy implementati on as “the reality” on the ground.

Initially the intentions for policy formulation are one but in practice they can be different

Pragmatism;

bounded rationality;

need to fulfill policy goals; need to meet the terms of existing government agreement (e.g. MoUs)

Follow-up and clarifying questions;

4 readers

How does funding affect researchers’

views of and responses to STI inter-nationalization?

To understand actors’

conceptuali-zation of S&T inter-nationalization;

to understand the meaning and interpretation attributed to S&T internalization and the functions it fulfills

Interviews with actors most affected by government funding:

researchers at universities and research institutes and businesses partici-pating in programs funded by government

Text interpret ation, coding

Research institutes, universities and companies as well as funding agencies are part of a larger funding system for research coop in STI that is quasi-centralized, funding-laden and project-based

Emerging research dilemma and trade-offs;

resource competition more relevant and as relevant as collabo-ration but not less

Follow-up and clarifying questions;

4 readers