Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the potential of computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) to support qualitative evaluation of corruption prevention initiatives, especially those focusing on behavioral changes. To achieve this objective, this paper applies the principles of qualitative inquiries to establish a foundation for developing effective means for evaluating behavior-oriented corruption prevention initiatives in Indonesia.

Through exploratory study, this paper assesses current corruption prevention evaluation practice in the Indonesian public sector to highlight major deficiencies thereof primarily through examination of publicly available documents on anti-corruption practice in Indonesia. Furthermore, this paper also discusses how qualitative methods using CAQDAS may strengthen the existing anti-corruption regime by aiding decision-makers to better evaluate the success or failure of their corruption prevention initiatives in particular those aiming for behavioral changes. To illustrate how a qualitative data analysis application can support anti-corruption evaluators, NVivo will be used as a reference from which multiple analytical tools will be discussed to highlight their potential for qualitative qualitative analysis analysis in corruption prevention evaluation.

The author establishes that the existing quantitative measures of evaluation are insufficient in generating a comprehensive picture of the success or failure of the existing anti-corruption initiatives in Indonesia. Evidences suggest that the existing quantitative measures appear to be unable to cope with the growing complexity of various corruption problems in the country in particular to those related to organizational culture and behavior. Despite the numerous behavior-oriented initiatives to reduce the risk of corruption in the Indonesia public sector, it is still unclear if such initiatives actually have made a difference in preventing corruption, as many of their elements cannot be measured quantitatively. Therefore, the author believe that deeper insights into corruption problems can be obtained through proper qualitative assessments in which evaluators play the role as the primary analytical instrument. To enhance evaluators’ capability in obtaining and analyzing qualitative data, the author proposes the use of CAQDAS and the evaluation of corruption prevention initiatives. With a special reference to NVivo, the author argues that using CAQDAS will enable evaluators to conduct qualitative analysis more efficiently to identify patterns within the data, as it offers various tools to look deeper into context, diversity, nuance and process so as to gain deeper understanding of the meaning of human action and how it may affect the risk of corruption within organizations.

This study is self-funded and is relying primarily on documentary analysis in assessing the existing corruption prevention evaluation measures in Indonesia. Future studies may benefit from in-depth interviews with anti-corruption evaluators in particular from the country’s anti-corruption agency.

This paper contributes to the development of corruption prevention strategy by proposing a framework for systematically performing qualitative evaluation on behavior-oriented corruption prevention initiatives.

This paper highlights the importance of qualitative measures in evaluating behavior-oriented corruption prevention initiatives in the Indonesian public sector.

Urban renewal through the regeneration and redevelopment of public housing estates has become a major policy initiative in most Australian state housing authorities since the mid-1990s. These policies have involved a mix of both physical renewal and community development in response to the problems that have emerged in the public housing sector over the past two decades. While the origins of these problems are well established and reflect the changes experienced by public housing sectors in other comparable countries (Hayward, 1996; Peel, 1995), the impact of policies to address these problems in the Australian context has attracted less attention in the academic literature (Arthurson, 1998; Randolph & Judd, 2000). While there is an emerging body of evaluation and research that has attempted to assess the outcomes of renewal programmes and policies, it can be argued that there is still a relatively poor level of general understanding of what aspects of renewal are effective or what outcomes have actually been achieved. At the same time, there has been little effective development of an exchange between researchers or evaluators on the effectiveness of the various evaluation methodologies – qualitative and quantitative – that have been used to assess renewal policies. This is particularly evident at the national level (Spiller Gibbin Swan, 2000).

This paper aims to address the reporting of validation and evaluation criteria in qualitative management accounting studies, which is a topic of critical debate in qualitative social science research. The objective of this study is to investigate the ways researchers have reported the use of evaluation criteria in qualitative management accounting studies and whether they are associated with certain paradigmatic affiliations.

Building on the work of Eriksson and Kovalainen [Eriksson and Kovalainen (2008) Qualitative Methods in Business Research. London, Sage], the following three approaches are examined: the adoption of classic concepts of validity and reliability, the use of alternative concepts and the abandonment of general evaluation criteria. Content analysis of 212 case and field studies published during 2006 to February 2015 was conducted to be able to offer an analysis of the most recent frontiers of knowledge.

The key empirical results of this study provide partial support for the theoretical expectations. They specify and refine Eriksson and Kovalainen’s (2008) classification system, first, by identifying a new approach to evaluation and validation and, second, by showing mixed results on the paradigmatic consistency in the use of evaluation criteria.

This paper is not necessarily exhaustive or representative of all the evaluation criteria developed; the authors focused on the explicit reporting of criteria only and the findings cannot be generalized. Somewhat different results might have been obtained if other journals, other fields of research or a longer period were considered.

The findings of this study enhance the knowledge of alternative approaches and criteria to validation and evaluation. The findings can aid both in the evaluation of management accounting research and in the selection of appropriate evaluation approaches and criteria.

This paper presents a synthesis of the literature (Table I) and new empirical findings that are potentially useful for both academic scholars and practitioners.

This article presents an investigation of the suitability of using quantitative or qualitative data for individual competencies assessment. Specifically, the primary purpose of this article is to identify if the results provided by quantitative and qualitative instruments focused on individual competencies are convergent.

In order to do the investigation proposed, a survey on individual competencies comprising a group of employees of the administrative area of a steel company was carried out. A total of 268 evaluations were collected and analyzed.

The analysis of the employee's performance appraisals provided by ratings and narrative comments indicates a low correlation between these assessments. The reasons for such low correlation include the qualitative assessments variability, the restricted list of competencies used in the quantitative assessments and the analytical format of quantitative assessments.

The study indicates that quantitative and qualitative assessments should be carried out jointly so that they can generate more comprehensive results. When the combined use is not possible, the quantitative approach is better suited for assessing performance, while the qualitative approach provides more valuable insights for boosting people development processes.

Purpose. To provide an overview of the approach to EIS evaluation taken by the eVALUEd toolkit and relate this to other work in this area. Design/methodology/approach. The eVALUEd toolkit was designed to fill a gap in EIS evaluation in relation to qualitative techniques, user‐focused evaluation and the utilisation of evaluation findings. Findings. The eVALUEd toolkit makes a distinct contribution to EIS evaluation through its focus on people rather than resources or technology, emphasis on qualitative methods and promotion of all aspects of the evaluation cycle. Research limitations/implications. Further work is required in relation to mixed methods of EIS evaluation and case studies would provide greater insight into the ways in which such data can be used in practice. Practical implications. There should be greater consideration given to the use of qualitative methods of EIS evaluation as statistical data alone are rarely sufficient for investigating complex problems and planning and managing services. However, there is a need for further guidance and training in this area. Originality/value. Aimed at library practitioners and researchers and others who provide support with evaluation. Reports on a practical tool and offers a balance to work focused on quantitative evaluation methods.

The voice of school principals represents the principals' thoughts and experiences because of their as teachers' evaluator. It provides principals' perception on making sense the teacher evaluation. In qualitative research, voice can provide the truth and meaning of principals' experience in teachers evaluation. Their voices in the qualitative interviews are recorded and transcribed into words (Jackson and Mazzei, 2009 and Charteris and Smardon, 2018). By listening to the voices of principals in five provinces in Indonesia, this study, a qualitative research, intends to explore the principals' sensemaking in teacher evaluation.

This study adopted a qualitative approach, as it was principally concerned with capturing participants' direct experiences in their natural setting as both the teachers' evaluator and school leader (Patton, 2002). The qualitative interview and content analysis were used in this study. The qualitative interview is a type of conversation used to explore informants' experiences and interpretations; in this study, the headmaster (Mishler, 1986; Spradley, 1979 in Hatch, 2002). Researchers used the interviews to uncover the structure of meaning used by principals in making sense the policies that determine teacher evaluations and that are used to carry out evaluations within principal's local authority. The implicit structure can be discovered from direct observation, and the qualitative interviews can bring this meaning to the surface (Hatch, 2002). Therefore, by applying the qualitative interviews, it is expected that information or “unique” interpretations from the principal can be obtained (Stake, 2010). Content analysis is a research technique for making valid conclusions from oral texts into a research context. This analysis can provide new insights, improve researchers' understanding of certain phenomena, or inform other practical actions through the use of verbal data collected in the form of answers to open interview questions (Krippendorff, 2004).

There are three important findings relating to principals' sensemaking of teachers' evaluation; they are teachers' length of service, principals' perceptions of teacher evaluations and consistency in teacher performance improvement. The principals' perception greatly influences their beliefs and sensemaking of teacher evaluation. In essence, teacher evaluation has not been used to identify high-quality teachers. Principals focus more on the improvement of teachers' welfare than teacher actual performance.

Future research should explore principals' attitude toward the stakeholders when student achievement is not in line with the consistent increase in teachers' performance ratings. And, it is also necessary to investigate the policy makers response to see the consistent improvement in teacher's evaluation is not in line with student achievement. Finally, how to eliminate the culture of joint responsibility without causing frictions in the school environment.

The authors hereby declare that this submission is their own work, and to the best of their knowledge, it contains no materials previously published or written by another person, or substantial proportions of material that have been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma any other publishers.

This paper aims to propose a new qualitative indicator for the evaluation of the productions of researchers in any discipline.

Based on the study of existing quantitative indicators, the authors’ approach consisted of the hybridization of two indicators. This hybridization is based on the individual H_index (Hi_index) and H_index contemporary (Hc_index) weighted by qualitative factors. The initial sources of the data are online bibliographic databases, such as Google Scholar and Publish or Perish.

A new scientometric indicator was used to compare the scientific production quality of researchers and their classification (as part of a research community) as the classification of national and international research institutions. The authors have applied a new indicator to compare and classify the members of their laboratory, RIADI, according to their quality of scientific production.

The indicator is an improvement of the H_index. It is a measure that can have an impact on society (influencing research attitudes, affecting quality of research). By this contribution, the authors measure more than one aspect by involving all the external factors that can affect the quality of research.

This paper fulfils a gap in the literature concerning the absence of a qualitative indicator among the set of existing quantitative measures. Additionally, this paper addresses the limitations of the existing qualitative practices, such as peer review and citation analysis. In the new qualitative indicator, the authors involve all of these qualitative aspects: the influence of the age of the paper, the number of co-authors, the order of the co-authors, the impact factor of journals and the conference rankings.

The open science movement calls for transparent and retraceable research processes. While infrastructures to support these practices in qualitative research are lacking, the design needs to consider different approaches and workflows. The paper bases on the definition of ontologies as shared conceptualizations of knowledge (Borst, 1999). The authors argue that participatory design is a good way to create these shared conceptualizations by giving domain experts and future users a voice in the design process via interviews, workshops and observations.

This paper presents a novel approach for creating ontologies in the field of open science using participatory design. As a case study the creation of an ontology for qualitative coding schemas is presented. Coding schemas are an important result of qualitative research, and reuse can yield great potential for open science making qualitative research more transparent, enhance sharing of coding schemas and teaching of qualitative methods. The participatory design process consisted of three parts: a requirement analysis using interviews and an observation, a design phase accompanied by interviews and an evaluation phase based on user tests as well as interviews.

The research showed several positive outcomes due to participatory design: higher commitment of users, mutual learning, high quality feedback and better quality of the ontology. However, there are two obstacles in this approach: First, contradictive answers by the interviewees, which needs to be balanced; second, this approach takes more time due to interview planning and analysis.

The implication of the paper is in the long run to decentralize the design of open science infrastructures and to involve parties affected on several levels.

In ontology design, several methods exist by using user-centered design or participatory design doing workshops. In this paper, the authors outline the potentials for participatory design using mainly interviews in creating an ontology for open science. The authors focus on close contact to researchers in order to build the ontology upon the expert's knowledge.

While investor relations have become an established corporate function, research into how investor relations officers (IROs) practice measurement and evaluation is limited. The purpose of this paper is to examine which approaches and metrics IROs use to gauge their success.

To address this gap in the literature, this study surveyed (n=384) the corporate membership of the National Investor Relations Institute (NIRI), the world's largest investor relations association, on the topic of measurement and evaluation.

The results indicate that IROs strongly (80 percent) believe that mixed-methods (i.e. both quantitative and qualitative methods) should be used to measure the success of investor relations. Mixed-methods advocates place significantly more importance on measurement than IROs that prefer quantitative- or qualitative-only approaches.

The results of this survey indicate that IROs typically place the most value on metrics that are qualitative, non-financial and relationship-oriented. These findings suggest that IROs believe they should be evaluated in large part on their competency at relationship management.

From a benchmarking perspective, these findings suggest that IROs looking to align with their peers should use a mix of both quantitative and qualitative evaluation measures that are non-financial and relationship management-focused.

These findings contribute to recent efforts to explicate a general theory of investor relations. While investor relations scholarship has grown in recent years, up until this point, little attention had been paid to measurement and evaluation.

The purpose of this paper is to conduct an in‐depth quantitative and qualitative evaluation of a family‐based weight loss and healthy life style programme for clinically obese children in England.

The mixed method case study evaluation used included obtaining pre and post measurements of anthropometry and a range of attitude and behavioural attributes. The qualitative phase of the study involved in‐depth interviews and focus groups.

The programme is demanding and resource intensive and designed as an intervention for children needing most help with their weight. Participants included the families of five referred children (n=18 individuals) and the intervention team (n=7). All but one child had reduced BMI centiles at the end of the programme. There were also improvements to a number of self‐report aspects of healthy eating and levels of activity and quality of life, self‐esteem and levels of depression indicators. The qualitative evaluation generated a number of insightful data themes.

Limitations include the case study design and small sample numbers. Also weight loss is an important indicator of any weight management programme's success however the short length of time programme was run is a barrier to seeing any substantive changes in any of the participating children's weights.

The evaluation conducted gives insights into the positive aspects of the programme and can inform development of similar programmes.

There are few examples of in‐depth and comprehensive quantitative and qualitative approaches used to evaluate this type of intervention.