• No results found

Chapter 3. Methodology

3.2 Study design

3.2.2 Preliminary data collection – explorative phase 0

Preliminary data collection begins with explorative phase 0. Given my study’s object, I develop a set of criteria that a potential case firm should satisfy:

(1) To adhere to the study’s understanding of a new firm, the case selection pool consists of firms that are in the process of attaining the development stage,

where there is a sustainable balance between resource in- and outflow, but have not yet achieved this stage.

(2) To fulfill the study’s interest in substantial resource needs, my case firms operate a resource-demanding, product-developing business, where it is most plausible to find a variety of entrepreneurs’ behaviors to address the substantial resource needs.

(3) To fulfill the study’s interest in individual (non)perceptions on the study’s object, my case firms are entrepreneur-driven, and not owned or controlled by any other firm that could otherwise influence such perceptions.

(4) To fulfill the study’s interest in observing and understanding the possible outcomes of resource needs being addressed through bootstrapping behaviors, my case firms should have operated long enough to allow for some outcomes to be observed and asked about, while still complying with the adopted definition of a new firm.

(5) To fulfill the condition of the researcher’s in-depth involvement in the firm over a prolonged period of time, my case firms are such where the founder(s) are willing to share information to the desired extent, and are available to partake in the study over its whole duration.

In close proximity to my physical location, I found a number of new firms. In order to establish which of them, if any, satisfy the above criteria, I decide to conduct a series of explorative unstructured talks with the founders of seven firms. These seven firms were identified with the help of a contacts directory, and advice from my employer. In order to minimize the selection bias, I excluded such firms where I might have had any relationship with the founders – prior common professional relationships, common personal network, and so on. Neither have I decided at this point that the shortlist of seven firms is exhaustive. I started my study’s explorative phase 0 with this number of firms, being ready to discover that any number of them, or none of them, may fit my study as a case.

I contacted the individual founders of the shortlisted firms, introducing my study and asking for an informal meeting. Four of the approached seven founders responded positively, and I met them individually during the first half of 2017. As a result of these meetings, two firms were found suitable for my study, based on the above criteria. My final shortlist thus included two potential cases. The founders of these two firms were reinterviewed during the summer of 2017, and both expressed an interest and readiness to partake in the study. Soon after, however, the founders of one of the firms informed me that they are unable to be a part of research for longer than a few months. I considered this to be a significant risk for my longitudinal study, and excluded this firm

as my potential case. To best support my study’s longitudinal ambition, I decided to begin collecting the empirical data at one selected firm, staying open to the possibility of including additional cases once some preliminary insights have emerged from the work on my one case.

Although not resulting in selection of more than one firm, interviewing the four firms’ founders was a vital research step. The step-wise selection process allowed me to verify that data-driven study design is indeed able to offer interesting individual perspectives on my study’s object. I was also able to establish that connections exist between the firm’s resource needs and bootstrapping behaviors, and that these may lead to various outcomes. For instance, firm founders shared the following insights5:

Question: How about friends and family as resource providers?

“No, not so much. In a way it is kind of tricky, I feel, if something goes bad, I do not want to be responsible for ruining the relationship.” (founder of firm 3, interview on 1708186) Question: Tell me about your experiences with raising grants and subsidies

“It is… you know, it has been driving me crazy, and I have spent… 99% of my energy has gone in this direction, and only 1% has been about moving things forward with the company.” (founder of firm 4, interview on 170113)

Question: Why is it so important for you to build personal relationships with people?

“One thing is – you sit in your whatever egg shell, and you can dream and think about whatever you want, but what is important is what other people think. […] you are not just going to go and give 1000 kronor7 to someone on the street, but there has to be trust from the start.” (founder of firm 2, interview on 170607)

Having selected a case firm to begin the empirical work with, I start by positioning the firm within its context and mapping out the firm’s retrospective and prospective development timeline. I also define, together with my informant, the resource needs, behaviors to address such needs, and the firm’s related stakeholders. These initial steps are strictly data-driven, and include only the aspects perceived by the entrepreneur. I do not at this point apply any judgement or interpretation of what I hear from the entrepreneur. Neither do I yet conduct any observations of documents study that could help me to develop the understanding of possible non-perceived aspects.

5 Most of the interviews for the study are conducted in Swedish, transcribed, and then translated into English.

6 Here and further, I abbreviate the dates as YYMMDD.

7 Here and further, all financial figures are provided in the Swedish national currency, SEK, unless otherwise specified.

At this stage, I discover that resource needs, bootstrapping behaviors, tasks and activities involving various resource-providing stakeholders, as well as the possibilities for tapping into the possible outcomes – as perceived by the entrepreneur – are rich and varied. I am intrigued by various specific instances – potential cases-within-a-case, representing my study’s object within this one firm, and now begin to consider whether including more case firms is reasonable. I continue structuring my empirical work in a phase-wise fashion, as illustrated in Figure 3 below. Following the figure, I will offer a descriptive presentation of my study’s two core phases, one by one.

Figure 3 The study’s empirical phases

The explorative phase 0 sparked my interest in discovering the possible meaningful subunits – cases-within-a-case – within my overarching case. To understand what these subunits might be, I design the study’s core phase 1. I work with data following the path of pure discovery – in other words, I do not develop any template, other than a dedicated Excel spreadsheet where I work practically through the material repeatedly, and develop new angles of inquiry as the new, more focused and relevant to study’s

purpose insights emerge from data. The study’s phase 2 is informed by phase 1 analysis, as well as the theoretical frame of reference selected as a result of phase 1. During the data-driven phase 1, I discover that resource needs, bootstrapping behaviors, and outcomes should possibly be the main focus of the inquiry going forward with empirical investigation. However, I stay open to the possibility that my data may show some other categories as well.

The detailed account of phase 1 data interventions will be given later in this chapter, and a presentation and analysis of phase 1 data will be offered in Chapter 4. The detailed account of phase 2 data interventions will also be offered later in this chapter, while the empirical Chapter 6 will present the data and analysis.