The more I write about my methodology - the less logic I see in what I was going to do. In general I think that with I have access to 1 virtual team (D object), but there is no signs of a VT in my other research object(E). There is virtual work, but the teams do not exist at all. How was I going to interview them, I mean whom, I mean why?
Thinking further - if I will drop the idea at all and just interview D team - it seems that I can get some more or less clear data there. But is it good to have clear data? The real world is not clear and everything is complicated and congested and the logic is hidden. Therefore...
It is better to interview both.
But how would I find the correct strategy to dig out any useful information?
Maybe my uncertainty is my bias?
How do I deal with that? If I feel that the processes in one organization are overcomplicated and unmanageable - it might be not true, it might be just my personal view of it.
I need a clean way to extract data, hmmm - wanted to say - objective - but I'm not looking for objectivity. Though I'm looking for something verifyable and internally consistent. If I have a bias against one of my research objects - it is internally invalid, isn't it?
Lost and confused...
I wonder if I have to start with the question - is there a virtual team at all?
No comments:
Post a Comment