The Rationale

The rationale behind choosing to establish the project objectives first, was to ensure that the direction in which the investigation following, was to achieve stated goals. Without these goals or objectives there would be no criteria for measuring any progress which was being made or to ensure that the optimal methods were being employed during the research to achieve the best results.

The questions raised as a result of establishing the project objectives served as a starting base for the investigation. It was hoped that by investigating these areas, they would lead to, or, be themselves, problem areas for which could be used as the basis for the project.

The literature research stage was then undertaken for the reasons listed below:
1. To obtain a greater understanding of the subject area with the view of identifying the important issues involved.
2. To obtain greater knowledge of the stock broking industry and to ascertain present and future trends.
3. To begin preparation for the approaching research interview in which subject understanding would be essential if the interview was to be successful.
4. To form a holistic view of the political, social, legal and economic environments with which the industry interacts.
5. To form a hypothesis this would be of use in the remaining stages of research.
The main objective concerning the author’s field research was to employ a method whereby he could validate the hypothesis which resulted from the literature review.

The research technique which appeared to suit this requirement the most was the depth interviewing method. It was essential that all problem areas were covered during the interview, and thus a pre-determined questionnaire whether administered through the post, over the phone or in person would be more susceptible to acquiring ‘static’ yes or no answers.

In a depth interview the much greater knowledge of the respondent could be attained, whereas in a questionnaire, the responses would be limited because the interviewer’s knowledge of the subject would be lesser than the respondent’s.

Thus, a questionnaire built around the interviewer’s understanding of the subject may not provide the scope for the respondent to explain the issues which he feels are important. It was obvious from the literature research that certain questions had to be asked, but it was not thought that this list of questions were exhaustive of the spectrum of problems.

A second reason why the depth interview method was used was because it was anticipated that the workings of an individual stock broking firm could be markedly different from those of the entire industry.

Thus again, it would have appeared unwise to make the assumption that every individual firm was in uniform with the picture begotten from the literature review (which tended to be concerned more about the larger broking firms anyway). The depth interview, it was thought, would allow for an explanation about the firm’s culture.

It was not thought to be essential that a full investigative survey of stock broking firms was carried out as it was anticipated that an insight in to one could form a sound basis for valid recommendations. The time factor also prohibited such a survey along with the difficulty in obtaining interviews, especially for the time needed when using the depth interview method.

The remainder of the process, the analysis of results, conclusions, the recommendations and the plans for implementation were the necessary remnants for ensuring that the research results were of a readable form and of good practical use to the organisation and thus, fulfil the author’s objectives.