Data quality and trustworthiness

Quality was measured by the sampling method and the demonstration of saturation and triangulation. Quality controls for qualitative research differ from those of quantitative research in that conformability, dependability, transferability and credibility are important factors in qualitative research (Collis & Hussey, 2015). In other words, Babbie and Mouton (2015), contended that qualitative studies must reflect trustworthiness by ensuring the results are dependable, credible, confirmable and transferable. Therefore, in this study, an audit trail of the research process that includes the entire data gathering and data collection has been maintained for validation purposes. The study ensured accuracy and honesty was maintained

33 throughout the research process for credibility and dependability purposes. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim and the respondents were given sufficient time to prepare for the interview so that more thought-through answers were provided. The main themes were discussed and triangulated with literature review and secondary data to ensure all data sources converge.

According to Creswell (2014), transferability means the outcome has relevancy to a comparable situation, occurrence, or population. Therefore, the selection of IT-based projects in South African-based companies provided a real setting of what is essentially the effective implementation of a Hybrid project management methodology. Babbie and Mouton (2015) contended that conformability makes sure the results have a degree of neutrality in line with the answers without external interference. The study ensured extensive literature was sought to ensure objectivity in the results and that respondents were knowledgeable and able to articulate the research enquiry.

Validity and reliability of data was considered for accuracy in findings. Noble and Smith (2015) defined validity as the integrity and application of the methods undertaken and the precision in which the findings accurately reflect the data.

Reliability is defined as describing consistency within the employed analytical procedures. As a characteristic of validity and reliability, qualitative researchers aim to design and incorporate methodological strategies to ensure the ‘trustworthiness’

of the findings (Noble & Smith, 2015). Guba and Lincoln (1994) saw the concept of reliability as a criterion by which to judge qualitative research as belonging to the positivist or post-positivist paradigm. This is coupled with a conventional way of treating validity in qualitative research to be the recourse to triangulation. Similarities found among authors specified validity and reliability to be fundamental concerns of the quantitative researcher but seem to have an uncertain place in the repertoire of the qualitative methodologist (Armstrong, Gosling, Weinman & Marteau, 1997).

These authors differed when it comes to the certainty of validity and reliability in qualitative research and whether these two phenomena should be replaced with alternatives in qualitative research.

Lincoln and Guba (2000), adapting from their earlier study (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), offered alternative criteria to validity and reliability by demonstrating rigour within qualitative research, namely truth value, consistency and neutrality, and applicability.

34 Denzin and Lincoln (2017) suggested that terms such as credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability replace validity and reliability. “The debates within qualitative methodology on the place of the traditional concept of reliability (and validity) remain confused” (Armstrong et al., 1997, p. 597). “Major risks and threats to validity and reliability are the researcher, the participating subjects, the situation or social context, and the methods of data collection and analysis” (Brink, 1993, p.

35). “Asking the wrong questions actually is the source of most validity errors” (Kirk

& Miller, 1986, p. 30). In both quantitative and qualitative research, reliability has only relevance because it is a necessary precondition for attaining validity (Brock-Utne, 1996).

The key measures of quality that were used in the report looked at how the sampling was done and the demonstration of reaching saturation and triangulation.

Triangulation is about how the sample has been structured and looking at more than one group of people (Saunders & Lewis, 2018). Data triangulation was demonstrated in the report using one method of data triangulation which involved the researcher using different sources to collect data for the study (Saunders & Lewis, 2018).

The question of ethics arises in qualitative research Roth and von Unger (2018) as

"the emergent, dynamic and interactional nature of most qualitative research"

(Iphofen & Tolich, 2018, p. 1). Adapting from Beauchamp and Childress (1989) ethics pertains to doing good and avoiding harm (Aluwihare-Samaranayake, 2012), also inferred by the authors (Orb, Eisenhauer & Wynaden, 2001). The researcher demonstrated ethical conduct by ensuring that participation consent was solicited prior to collecting data. Ethics in research must not only consider the protection of human subjects but also consider what constitutes as socially responsible research (Schwandt, 2007). A critical ethical concern is the protection of vulnerable persons (Orb et al., 2001).

According to Roth and von Unger (2018), in some national contexts, institutional ethics reviews are obligatory not only for medical research but also for social science research, which includes qualitative research. Ethical reflexivity is a core feature of qualitative research practice as ethical questions may arise in every phase of the research process (von Unger, 2016). Some of the authors agree the researcher should solicit consent from research participants who should be informed of

35 confidentiality and anonymity (Orb et al., 2001; Aluwihare-Samaranayake, 2012;

Roth & von Unger, 2018).

“Conducting qualitative research in an area in which the researcher works or is already known, raises several issues and ethical considerations (Orb et al., 2001, p.

96)”. Therefore, the researcher needed to be mindful of possible unethical occurrences and avoid biases. It is stimulating for researchers not to treat ethics as a code but rather a relationship between research and the researcher (Roth & von Unger, 2018). The researcher can use ethics to connect to the research subject in a way that draws them closer to the subject.