Research Design

This study focuses on a comparison of relative data in three regional countries (Thailand, India and Singapore) in order to assess how Taiwan might improve the development of its own medical tourism industry. Through a literature review of the related medical / health care industries in these respective Asian countries, successful factors leading to development may be determined. At the same time, it is possible to make use of tables and in-depth interview for a case study approach that may lead to exploratory research seen in the different aspects of data provided.

3.1.1 Qualitative Research

Shank (2002) defines qualitative research as “a form of systematic empirical inquiry into meaning”. By systematic this definition means “planned, ordered and public”, following rules agreed upon by members of the qualitative research community. By empirical, it means that this type of inquiry is grounded in the world of experience. Inquiry into meaning says that researchers try to understand how others make sense of their experience. Denzin and Lincoln (2000) claim that qualitative research involves an interpretive and naturalistic approach: This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them.

Denzin and Lincoln emphasizes qualitative research is a method of inquiry employed in many different academic disciplines, traditionally in the social sciences, but also in market research and further contexts. Qualitative researchers aim to gather an in-depth understanding of human behavior and the reasons that govern such behavior. The qualitative method investigates the why and how of decision making, not just what, where, when. Hence, smaller but focused samples are more often needed, rather than large samples.

Qualitative methods produce information only on the particular cases to be studied, and any more general conclusions are viewed as only propositions (informed assertions).

Quantitative methods can be used to seek empirical support for such research hypotheses to be concluded.

The advantages of doing qualitative research on leadership may include the following (Conger, 1998, Bryman, 1988, Alvesson, 1996):

1. Flexibility to follow unexpected ideas during research and explore processes effectively;

2. sensitivity to contextual factors;

3. ability to study symbolic dimensions and social meaning;

4. increased opportunities - to develop empirically-supported new ideas and theories for in-depth and longitudinal explorations of leadership

phenomena, and for more relevance and interest of practitioners.

3.1.2 Semi-Structured Interviews

Semi-structured interviews are conducted with a fairly open framework which allow for focused, conversational, two-way communication. They can be used both to give and receive information. Unlike the questionnaire framework, where detailed questions are formulating ahead of time, semi structured interviewing starts with more general questions or topics. Relevant topics (for example, as with cookstoves) are initially identified and the possible relationship between these topics and the issues such as availability, expense, effectiveness become the basis for more specific questions which do not need to be prepared in advance. (Tony Grove, 1990)

Not all questions are designed and phrased ahead of time. The majority of questions are created during the interview, allowing both the interviewer and the person being

interviewed the flexibility to probe for details or discuss issues. Semi-structured interviewing is guided only in the sense that some form of interview guide, such as the matrix described below is prepared beforehand, and provides a framework for the interview.

The purpose of the tool is to obtain specific quantitative and qualitative information from a representative sampling of the population. In addition, the purpose is also to obtain general information relevant to specific issues and to gain a range of insights on specific issues of interest to the researcher.

3.1.3 Major Benefits of Semi-structured Interviews

Semi-structured interviews are less intrusive to those being interviewed since semi-structured interviews encourage two-way communication between interviewer and interviewed. Those being interviewed can ask questions of the interviewer. In this way it can also function as an extension tool.

Semi-structured interviews help to confirm what is already known but also provides the opportunity for learning. Often the information obtained from semi-structured interviews will provide not just answers, but the reasons for the answers. When individuals are interviewed they may more easily discuss sensitive issues. Help field staff become acquainted with community members. Outsiders may be better at interviewing because they are perceived as more objective. Using both individual and group interviews can optimize the strengths of both.

3.1.4 Using the Tool

There are several considerations that a researcher should be aware of prior to utilizing semi-structured interviews as a tool. These are as follows, but not limited to:

1. Design (facilitator and/or interview team) an interview framework such as the matrix example. Include topics or questions for discussion.

2. Establish the sample size and method of sampling.

3. Interviewers can conduct a number of practice interviews with each other and/or with a few community members, to become familiar with the questions, and get feedback on their two-way communication skills.

4. Record only brief notes during the interview and immediately following the interview elaborate upon the notes.

5. Analyze the information at the end of each day of interviewing. This can be done with the interview team or group.

6. Discuss the overall results of the analysis with community members so that they can challenge the perceptions of the interview team. This can make the process even more participatory.