The data was collected through a process that utilized interviews and document analysis. The two data collection methods are described below.
Interview is a research tool in which data is obtained through verbal interaction. Face-to-face interview is a method that can be adaptable to various situations, allows for follow up, and permits in-depth clarification (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996). The researchers conducted face-to-face interviews with eight workforce diversity managers/directors in charge of diversity initiatives in eight multinational corporations in the state of Illinois. The researchers developed a semistructured interview guide to assist in collecting the data from the interviews. The semistructured interview guide addressed the following areas: diversity initiatives; context in which diversity initiatives take place; planning of diversity initiatives; implementation of diversity initiatives; evaluation of diversity initiatives; success factors of diversity initiatives; barriers to diversity initiatives; and future plans to address workforce diversity.
Semistructured interviews were chosen because they are "reasonably objective while still permitting a thorough understanding of the respondent's opinions and the reasons behind them" (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996, p. 452). Semistructured interview "provides a desirable combination of objectivity and depth and often permits gathering valuable data that could not be successfully obtained by any other approach" (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996, p. 452). Therefore, flexibility was retained to probe into each participant's statements and replies and to pursue additional issues related to the focus of the study that were not included in the interview guide.
Names and phone numbers of the eight diversity managers/directors who participated in the study were also obtained from the Directory of Diversity in Corporate America (1994). Initial contacts with the diversity managers/directors were made over the telephone, at which time dates, interview appointments, and arrangements were made. Participants were selected based on their willingness to take part in the study. All eight diversity managers/directors that were contacted consented to participate in the study. Each interviewee received a letter confirming the interview appointment and a copy of the interview guide two weeks before the scheduled interview. The participants had the opportunity to examine the interview questions prior to the interview. The interviews were conducted on-site at each participant's corporation during the months of January and February 1997. All interviews were tape recorded, and extensive notes were also taken during each interview. Before starting the interviews, each interviewee was asked for his/her approval of taping the interview.
Each participant was asked to complete a Demographic Information Form during the final stage of the interview. The form asked the participant to share information about themselves in eight areas: (1) gender, (2) age range, (3) race/ethnicity, (4) educational background by degree, (5) major field of study, (6) present position/title, (7) number of years in current position, (8) number of years with the corporation, and (9) number of years of work experience. A University of Illinois coffee mug and a thank you letter were sent to each of the individuals who participated in the study.
A study advisory committee made up of three HRD educators reviewed the study procedures and made suggestions for improvement. Also, a pilot study was conducted with two of the multinational corporations headquartered in the state of Illinois to determine content validity and appropriateness of the interview guide. The two companies that participated in the pilot study were also included as part of the study. The pilot study showed that it was necessary to change the order of some of the items on the interview guide so that the interview could flow more smoothly. No items were deleted from the original interview guide. There was agreement by the study's advisory committee and the pilot test participants that the interview guide and the data being collected were appropriate for meeting the objectives of the study.
Documents are materials that have been produced in some written or printed form. These materials can take varied forms such as legal records, newspapers, books, magazines, memos, committee reports, annual reports, newsletters, periodicals, and so forth (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996; Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996). According to Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996), by studying past documents, researchers can achieve a better understanding of present practices and issues. In addition, documents can be accessed at a time that is convenient to the researcher and saves time and expense in transcribing (Creswell, 1994).
The document collection process in this study included collection and organization of two basic types of documents: (1) annual reports and (2) related documents. Annual reports were collected for each corporation for fiscal year 1996 (the most current fiscal period). The effort to collect related corporate documents focused on solicitation and collection of corporate documents related to the diversity initiatives process. These documents included corporate newsletter articles, corporate newspaper articles, corporate profiles from general business directories, research reports, journal articles, magazine articles, and chapters from diversity books. Appendix A lists the types of documents collected about the corporations.