3. Methods and Methodology
3. 方法和方法

This section draws from Saunders et al’s (2009) research onion (Figure 5) to discuss and identify the methods and methodology behind the data collection for this research project. Firstly, the philosophical stance will be discussed before justifying the research approaches and strategy that will be adopted. Subsequently, the method of research will be discussed and determined before addressing the research design and data collection methods and additionally, limitations of the research and issues regarding validity and reliability will also be discussed.
本节借鉴了 Saunders 等人 （2009） 的研究洋葱（图 5）来讨论和确定该研究项目数据收集背后的方法和方法。首先，在证明将采用的研究方法和策略的合理性之前，将讨论哲学立场。随后，在解决研究设计和数据收集方法之前，将讨论和确定研究方法，此外，还将讨论研究的局限性以及有关有效性和可靠性的问题。

Figure 5 Research Onion
图 5 研究洋葱

Source: Saunders et al (2009)
来源：Saunders 等人 （2009）

3.1 Philosophy
3.1 哲学

The philosophy of science debates seen throughout marketing and consumer research may seem like an esoteric area to review (Tadajewski, 2004). However, as Lutz (1989) states, marketers need to be aware of the philosophical assumptions embedded in their research ‘because all research is underpinned and delimited by a particular stance toward the world they study (ontology) and how this is investigated (epistemology)’ (Tadajewski. 2004); subsequently influencing the methodology used to seek knowledge (Tadajewski, 2004).
在市场营销和消费者研究中看到的科学哲学辩论似乎是一个需要回顾的深奥领域（Tadajewski，2004 年）。然而，正如 Lutz （1989） 所说，营销人员需要意识到他们研究中嵌入的哲学假设，“因为所有研究都以对他们所研究的世界（本体论）及其研究方式（认识论）的特定立场为基础和界定”（Tadajewski. 2004）;随后影响了用于寻求知识的方法（Tadajewski，2004 年）。

3.1.1 Ontology
3.1.1 本体

The literature surrounding research philosophy identifies two key positions of ontology - subjectivism and objectivism (Easterby-Smith et al 2008 and Saunders et al 2009). Developed by Ayn Rand (1962), objectivism portrays the position that social entities exist in reality, external to social actors concerned with their existence (Saunders et al, 2009). Contextually, it could be argued that a brand is an objective entity and its basic component parts can be formally structured and conceptualised therefore adopting this stance assumes that the component parts exist irrespective of the consumer and exist for all brands. However, as Section 2.2 highlights, perceived value is subjective and therefore adopting an ontology that opposes the existence of subjective entities may be unfeasible.
围绕研究哲学的文献确定了本体论的两个关键位置——主观主义和客观主义（Easterby-Smith 等人 ，2008 年和 Saunders 等人，2009 年）。客观主义由 Ayn Rand （1962） 提出，描绘了社会实体存在于现实中的立场，而不是关心其存在的社会行为者（Saunders et al， 2009）。从上下文来看，可以说品牌是一个客观的实体，其基本组成部分可以被正式地构建和概念化，因此采用这种立场假设组成部分独立于消费者而存在，并且存在于所有品牌中。然而，正如第 2.2 节所强调的那样，感知价值是主观的，因此采用反对主观实体存在的本体论可能是不可行的。

Contrary to objectivism, subjectivism proposes that social phenomena are created from the perceptions and consequent actions of social actors. Unlike objectivism, subjectivism allows the researcher to understand the meanings that individuals attach to social phenomena through the way they perceive and act (Saunders et al, 2009). Adopting a subjective stance, it would be argued that the component parts of a brand are unique to the individual involved and cannot be applied to all brands.
与客观主义相反，主观主义提出社会现象是由社会行为者的感知和随之而来的行动创造的。与客观主义不同，主观主义允许研究人员通过个体的感知和行为方式来理解个人对社会现象的意义（Saunders et al， 2009）。 采取主观立场，可以说品牌的组成部分对所涉及的个人来说是独一无二的，不能适用于所有品牌。

When applying metaphysics to this research project it is possible to propose a case for each ontology however, the nature of this exploratory research lends itself to subjectivism because although the brand (as an entity) may exist external to the social actors involved, its value is subjective (Section 2.2) and therefore influence would not exist without the perceptions and consequent actions of those social actors. Furthermore, adopting a subjective ontology has implications on the epistemological stance of the researcher and the methods that are adopted (Tadajewski, 2004; Saunders et al, 2009).
当将形而上学应用于本研究项目时，可以为每个本体论提出一个案例 ，但是，这种探索性研究的性质适合主观主义，因为尽管品牌（作为一个实体）可能存在于所涉及的社会行为者之外，但它的价值是主观的（第 2.2 节），因此如果没有感知和后果 ，影响力就不会存在这些社会行为者的行动。此外，采用主观本体论会影响研究人员的认识论立场和所采用的方法（Tadajewski，2004 年;Saunders 等人 ，2009 年 ）。

3.1.2 Epistemology
3.1.2 认识论

According to Saunders et al (2009) epistemology concerns what constitutes acceptable knowledge. It is the assumption of the best way to inquire into the nature of the world (Easterby-Smith et al, 2008). Tadajewski (2004) highlights the ‘spirited debate’ between advocators of the ‘positivist, logical positivist, logical empiricist and those who conduct research under a variety of labels including: relativistic, interpretive or postmodern research’ (Tadajewski, 2004, p 312). Fundamentally however, debates are often framed or underpinned by the positions of positivism and interpretivism (Saunders et al, 2009).
根据 Saunders 等人 （2009） 的说法，认识论关注什么构成了可接受的知识。这是探究世界本质的最佳方式的假设（Easterby-Smith et al， 2008）。Tadajewski （2004） 强调了“实证主义、逻辑实证主义、逻辑经验主义”的倡导者与那些以各种标签进行研究的人之间的“激烈辩论”，包括：相对主义、解释性或后现代研究“（Tadajewski，2004 年，第 312 页）。然而，从根本上说，辩论往往以实证主义和解释主义的立场为框架或支撑（Saunders et al， 2009）。

3.1.2.1 Positivism
3.1.2.1 实证主义

According to Hair et al (2011) positivism views reality as something that can be ‘objectively ascertained and described through research.’ Equally, Saunders et al (2009) propose that positivistic researchers are concerned only with facts rather than impressions and furthermore, such facts are consistent with the notion of an observable reality. Typically, positivistic research applies existing theory to develop hypothesis that are tested and subsequently confirmed or refuted (Saunders et al, 2009). In addition, positivist research provides law-like generalisations that require highly structured methodology that supports replication (Gill and Johnson, 2002) and emphasises quantifiable observations that lend themselves to statistical analysis (Saunders et al, 2009), while the researchers must be independent from this process to eliminate bias from their statistics. However, the consequence of using such method is that it is inflexible and relies on previous research to form its foundations. Therefore, to solely adopt a static approach that disregards the existence of in-observable data and lends itself to an objective ontology is unfeasible in a research project that intends to understand the role of branding and its intangible added values.
根据 Hair 等人 （2011 年）的说法，实证主义将现实视为可以 “ 通过研究客观确定和描述”的东西。同样，Saunders 等人 （2009） 提出，实证主义研究人员只关心她所关心的事实 ，而不是印象，而且 ，这些事实与可观察现实的概念是一致的。通常，实证主义研究应用现有理论来发展假设，这些假设经过检验并随后得到证实或反驳（Saunders et al， 2009）。此外，实证主义研究提供了类似定律的概括，这需要高度结构化的方法来支持复制（Gill 和 Johnson，2002），并强调有助于统计分析的可量化观察（Saunders et al， 2009），而研究人员必须独立于这个过程，以消除他们统计数据中的偏见。然而，使用这种方法的后果是它缺乏灵活性，并且依赖于以前的研究来形成其基础。因此，在一个旨在了解品牌作用及其无形附加值的研究项目中，仅仅采用一种无视可观察数据的存在并适合于客观本体论的静态方法是不可行的。

3.1.2.2 Interpretivism
3.1.2.2 解释主义

Interpretivism is arguably the pole opposite to positivism (Kroeze, 2011), however despite the confliction between ideologies, research methods are interchangeable between them. Quantitative researchers, for example, typically adopt the positivist epistemology, but qualitative researchers can also be positivists (Hair et al, 2011). Unlike positivism however, interpretivist researchers don’t just seek to measure, but endeavour to understand phenomena through the meanings assigned to them by individuals (Hair et al, 2011). Hussey and Hussey (1997) advocate that by watching individuals in their social contexts, the researcher can attempt understand the perceptions they have of their own activities while adding contextual depth by documenting findings based on what is observed (Kelliher, 2005). However, research based on observation is questionable and has been criticised in terms of its validity, reliability and generalizability (Kelliher, 2005) because findings are arguably subjective. This argument suggests that interpretivism lends itself to the subjective ontology due to its idiosyncratic nature. However, according to Easterby-Smith et al (2008), philosophical debates are zero-sum and typically denounce each other or ignore its existence completely. Conversely, there exists another epistemology that does not require the researcher to choose between the two.
解释主义可以说是实证主义的对立面（Kroeze， 2011），然而，尽管意识形态之间存在冲突， 但它们之间的研究方法是可以互换的。例如，定量研究人员通常采用实证主义认识论，但定性研究人员也可以是实证主义者（Hair et al， 2011）。然而，与实证主义不同的是，解释主义研究人员不仅寻求测量，而且努力通过个人赋予它们的意义来理解现象（Hair et al， 2011）。Hussey 和 Hussey （1997） 主张，通过在社会环境中观察个人，研究人员可以尝试了解他们对自己活动的看法，同时通过根据观察到的内容记录调查结果来增加背景深度（Kelliher，2005）。然而，基于观察的研究是值得怀疑的，并且在其有效性、可靠性和普遍性方面受到批评（Kelliher，2005），因为研究结果可以说是主观的。这一论点表明，解释主义由于其特殊性而适合于主观本体论。然而，根据 Easterby-Smith 等人 （2008） 的说法，哲学辩论是零和博弈的，通常会相互谴责或完全忽视它的存在。相反，存在另一种不需要研究人员在两者之间做出选择的认识论。

3.1.2.3 Pragmatism
3.1.2.3 实用主义

According to Easterby-Smith et al (2008), pragmatism argues that there are in fact no predetermined theories and frameworks that shape knowledge and understanding and instead, any meaning structure must derive from the experience of the individuals concerned with the research. Contrary to on-going debates, Brandi and Elkajaer (2008) propose that pragmatism offers synthesis between features often regarded as irreconcilable dualisms including positivism and interpretivism. Furthermore, Tashakkori and Teddlie (1998) suggest that it is more appropriate to think of the philosophy adopted as a continuum rather than opposing positions; which may be somewhat unrealistic in practice (Saunders et al, 2009).
根据 Easterby-Smith 等人 （2008 年）的说法，实用主义认为，实际上没有预先确定的理论和框架来塑造知识和理解，相反，任何意义结构都必须来自与研究有关的个人的经验。与正在进行的辩论相反，Brandi 和 Elkajaer （2008） 提出，实用主义提供了通常被认为是不可调和的二元论（包括实证主义和解释主义）的特征之间的综合。此外，Tashakkori 和 Teddlie （1998） 建议将所采用的哲学视为一个连续体而不是对立的立场更合适;这在实践中可能有些不切实际（Saunders et al， 2009）。

Pragmatism argues that the foremost determinant of epistemology and ontology is the research question (Saunders et al, 2009) and therefore, adopting a mixed-method that utilises the strengths of both positions and does not constrain the researcher within the boundaries of a particular position is considered highly appropriate.
实用主义认为，认识论和本体论的首要决定因素是研究问题（Saunders et al， 2009），因此，采用一种混合方法，利用两种立场的优势，不将研究人员限制在特定立场的界限内，被认为是非常合适的。

Therefore, adopting a pragmatic philosophy, this research project favours interpretivism but does not solely implement it. By adopting pragmatism, this research project is not constrained by the requirements of either positivism or interpretivism and does not engage in arguably meaningless debates about branding as truth or reality but instead, focuses purely on the research question and the most appropriate way to answer it.
因此，本研究项目采用实用主义哲学，支持解释主义，但并不仅仅实施它。通过采用实用主义，本研究项目不受实证主义或解释主义要求的束缚， 也没有参与关于品牌为真理或现实的无意义辩论，而是纯粹专注于研究问题和最合适的回答方式。

3.2 Research Approach
3.2 研究方法

The second stage in Figure 5 proposes that after adopting a philosophy, the researcher must select an approach that underpins the research design. Generally, this approach is framed by a choice between induction and deduction and additionally, each approach shares characteristics with a particular research philosophy (Appendix 1).
图 5 中的第二阶段 提出，在采用一种哲学之后，研究人员必须选择一种支撑研究设计的方法。一般来说，这种方法是在归纳和演绎之间进行选择的， 此外， 每种方法都与特定的研究理念（ 附录 1） 具有共同特征 。

3.2.1 Deduction vs. Induction
3.2.1 演绎与归纳

There are significant differences between the processes followed by each research approach. According to Henn et al, (2006) deduction is reflective of the theory-then-research strategy as Figure 6 expresses whereby a hypothesis is developed and subjected to rigorous testing (Saunders et al, 2009).
每种研究方法所遵循的过程之间存在显着差异。根据 Henn 等人 （2006 年）的说法，演绎反映了理论后研究的策略，如图 6 所示 ，即提出假设并接受严格的测试（Saunders 等人，2009 年）。

Figure 6 The Deductive Process
图 6 演绎过程

Source: Bryman and Bell (2011)
来源：Bryman 和 Bell （2011）

Unlike deduction, induction endorses the development of theory through the observation of empirical data, emphasising the meanings that individuals attach to phenomena (Saunders et al, 2003). However, inherent within this dichotomy, and (Appendix 1) is the argument that deduction owes more to positivism and induction owes more to interpretivism (Easterby-smith et al, 1991). Conversely, this distinction does not fully or accurately describe the processes adopted by qualitative or quantitative researchers in practice (Hyde, 2000).
与演绎不同，归纳法通过观察经验数据来支持理论的发展，强调个人赋予现象的意义 （Saunders et al， 2003）。然而， 这种二分法中固有的论点是（附录 1）认为演绎更多地归功于实证主义，而归纳更多地归功于解释主义（Easterby-smith et al， 1991）。相反，这种区别并不能完全或准确地描述定性或定量研究人员在实践中采用的过程（Hyde，2000 年）。

Figure 7 Inductive Research Process
图 7 归纳研究过程

Furthermore, research that adopts an inductive approach is likely to be concerned with the context in which such events are taking place therefore study of smaller sizes may be more appropriate. Additionally, researchers in this tradition are more likely to work with qualitative data, using a variety of methods and sources to establish different perspectives of such phenomena (Saunders et al, 2009: p 126), which The Author proposes to be most appropriate within this research project.
此外，采用归纳方法的研究可能关注此类事件发生的背景，因此较小规模的研究可能更合适。此外，这一传统的研究人员更有可能使用定性数据，使用各种方法和来源来建立此类现象的不同观点（Saunders 等人 ，2009：第 126 页），作者建议这最适合本研究项目。

3.3 Research Strategy
3.3 研究策略

According to Saunders et al (2009, p 139) ‘the classification of research purpose often used in the research methods literature is threefold one of exploratory, descriptive and explanatory’ as Table 2 illustrates.
根据 Saunders 等人 （2009 年，第 139 页）的说法，“研究方法文献中经常使用的研究目的分类分为三重：探索性、描述性和解释性”，如表 2 所示。

Table 2 Different research strategies
表 2 不同的研究策略

Source: Hair et al (2011)
来源：Hair 等人 （2011）

Swaddling and Zobel (1996; in Hair et al, 2011) propose that ‘exploratory research provides a window into consumer perceptions, behaviours, and needs’. Considering the nature of this study, it may seem appropriate that this research project follows an exploratory design. However, Saunders et al (2009) advocate that research projects can consist of stages and propose it may be effective to employ interviews at an exploratory stage to develop a broad understanding of the context before using questionnaires to provide description and explanation; consistent with the sequential mixed method approach (Section 3.4.2). Therefore, The Author proposes that this research project will utilise multiple stages and designs to answer the research question and will conclude with the appropriate design in Section 3.4.2.
Swaddling 和 Zobel （1996;in Hair et al， 2011） 提出“探索性研究提供了一个了解消费者感知、行为和需求的窗口”。考虑到这项研究的性质，本研究项目遵循探索性设计似乎是合适的。然而，Saunders 等人 （2009） 主张研究项目可以由多个阶段组成，并提出在使用问卷提供描述和解释之前，在探索阶段采用访谈来发展对背景的广泛理解可能是有效的;与顺序混合方法方法一致 （第 3.4.2 节）。因此 ，作者建议该研究项目将利用多个阶段和设计来回答研究问题，并将在第 3.4.2 节中以适当的设计结束。

3.3.1 Strategic Implications
3.3.1 战略影响

Figure 5 highlights some of the core research strategies offered by Saunders et al (2009). What’s more, no research strategy is inherently superior on inferior but instead should be chosen on the basis of the most appropriate to the research question (Saunders et al, 2007). According to Robson (2002), the ‘case study’ strategy involves an empirical investigation of a particular contemporary phenomenon, in this case branding, within its real life context using multiple sources of evidence. Additionally, Tellis (1997) argues that this method is selective and focuses on one or two issues that are fundamental to understanding a particular phenomenon and would therefore, typically, be preferred if the researcher wishes to develop an in-depth understanding within a particular context (Morris and Wood, 1991; in Saunders et al, 2009). However, considering the multiple sources of data that will be collected, this research project will adopt a pseudo ‘case study’ strategy.
图 5 突出显示了 Saunders 等人 （2009） 提供的一些核心研究策略 。更重要的是，没有一种研究策略本质上是优于劣势的，而是应该根据最适合研究问题的方式来选择（Saunders et al， 2007）。根据 Robson （2002） 的说法，“案例研究”策略涉及使用多种证据来源在其现实生活背景下对特定的当代现象进行实证调查，在这种情况下是品牌推广。此外，Tellis （1997） 认为这种方法是选择性的，专注于一两个对理解特定现象至关重要的问题，因此，如果研究人员希望在特定背景下发展深入的理解，通常首选这种方法（Morris 和 Wood，1991;在 Saunders 等人中，2009 年）。然而，考虑到将要收集的数据的多个来源，本研究项目将采用伪“案例研究”策略。

3.4 Data Collection Methods
3.4 数据收集方法

This section briefly discussing secondary research before moving on to primary and the variation of primary research available based on the adopted research strategy.
本节在继续进行初级研究之前简要讨论了二级研究以及基于所采用的研究策略可用的初级研究的变化。

3.4.1 Secondary Research
3.4.1 二次研究

Hair et al (2011, p 111) define secondary data as ‘data used for research that was not gathered directly or purposefully for the project under consideration.’ Figure 8 demonstrates the various sources of secondary data available to the researcher.
Hair 等人 （2011 年，第 111 页）将二手数据定义为 “用于研究的数据，这些数据不是直接或有目的地为正在考虑的项目收集的”。图 8 显示了研究人员可用的各种二手数据源。

Figure 8 Types of Secondary Data
图 8 辅助数据类型

Source: Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009)
资料来源：Saunders、Lewis 和 Thornhill （2009）

3.4.2 Primary Research
3.4.2 初级研究

According to Saunders et al (2009, p 598) ‘primary data is data that is collected specifically for the research project being undertaken.’ Within marketing research literature the collection of primary data is divided between either qualitative or quantitative which is typically derived from the research philosophy and approach adopted by the researcher; the key differences are demonstrated in Appendix 2.
根据 Saunders 等人 （2009 年，第 598 页）的说法，“原始数据是专门为正在进行的研究项目收集的数据。在市场研究文献中，原始数据的收集分为定性或定量，这通常来自研究人员采用的研究理念和方法;附录 2 中演示了主要区别 。

This research project adopts a pragmatic philosophy that lends itself to interpretivism, following an inductive approach and a pseudo case study strategy, which according to Yin (1994) primarily facilitates the collection of qualitative data. However, Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003) argue that adopting multiple research methods allows the researcher to substantiate their answer to the research question, provide a ‘better means’ of evaluation, and provide sustenance to the validity and reliability (Saunders et al, 2009).
该研究项目采用了一种实用主义哲学，适合解释主义，遵循归纳方法和伪案例研究策略，根据 Yin （1994） 的说法，这主要促进了定性数据的收集。然而，Tashakkori 和 Teddlie （2003） 认为，采用多种研究方法可以让研究人员证实他们对研究问题的回答，提供“更好的评估手段”，并为有效性和可靠性提供支撑（Saunders 等人 ，2009 年）。

According to Harrison and Reilly (2011), multi-methods and mixed-methods are commonly used within contemporary marketing research and are differentiated by the following criteria:
根据 Harrison 和 Reilly （2011） 的说法，多方法和混合方法在当代营销研究中常用，并通过以下标准进行区分：

Multi-method: involves multiple types of qualitative inquiry OR multiple types of quantitative inquiry
多方法：涉及多种类型的定性调查或多种类型的定量调查

However mixed-methods facilitate the use of both qualitative and quantitative inquiry (Morse, 2003)
然而，混合方法促进了定性和定量调查的使用（Morse，2003 年）

Bryman (2006) offers six reasons for using a mixed-method strategy, one of which he labels ‘Facilitation’. Its significance is that it allows the researcher to employ one data collection method or research strategy to develop contextual knowledge that informs the design of another data collection method or research strategy (Saunders et al, 2009; Bryman and Bell, 2011). As discussed previously and concluding Section 3.3, this research project will follow Steckler et al’s (1992) Model 1 mixed method design that advocates the use of qualitative methods (exploratory) to develop quantitative measures (explanatory and descriptive); also termed the Sequential Exploratory Design Sequence (Figure 9).
Bryman （2006） 提供了使用混合方法策略的六个原因，其中之一他将其标记为“促进”。它的重要性在于，它允许研究人员采用一种数据收集方法或研究策略来开发上下文知识，从而为另一种数据收集方法或研究策略的设计提供信息（Saunders 等人 ，2009 年;Bryman 和 Bell，2011 年 ）。如前所述， 在第 3.3 节结束时，本研究项目将遵循 Steckler 等人 （1992） 的模型 1 混合方法设计，该设计提倡使用定性方法（探索性）来开发定量措施（解释性和描述性）;也称为顺序探索性设计序列（ 图 9）。

Figure 9 Sequential Exploratory Design Sequence
图 9 顺序探索性设计序列

Adapted from Creswell et al (2003) and Bryman and Bell (2011)
改编自 Creswell 等人 （2003） 和 Bryman 和 Bell （2011）

Furthermore, The Author proposes that triangulation can then be used to cross-reference the data between how the role of branding is perceived within the financial services industry and how it is perceived by its’ customers (Deacon, Bryman and Fenton, 1998).
此外，作者提出，可以使用三角测量法来交叉引用金融服务行业中品牌角色与其客户如何看待品牌的角色之间的数据（Deacon、Bryman 和 Fenton，1998 年）。

3.5 Data Collection
3.5 数据收集

This section identifies and discusses the data collection methods used within this research project and subsequently advances to discussing the issues surrounding bias, validity and reliability, and any limitations of the research.
本节确定并讨论了本研究项目中使用的数据收集方法，随后进一步讨论围绕偏倚、有效性和可靠性的问题，以及研究的任何局限性。

3.5.1 Primary Data Collection
3.5.1 主要数据收集

Due to the sequential design adopted by this project, it seems appropriate to discuss qualitative data collection methods first. This research project used interviews to collect qualitative data and subsequently, Appendix 3 illustrates the key differences between two interview types.
由于该项目采用的顺序设计，首先讨论定性数据收集方法似乎是合适的 。该研究项目使用访谈来收集定性数据，随后，附录 3 说明了两种访谈类型之间的主要区别。

3.5.1.1 Semi-Structured Interviews
3.5.1.1 半结构化访谈

To complete the qualitative stage of this research project, semi-structured face-to-face interviews were used. It was felt that semi-structured interviews provided the most appropriate opportunity to develop in-depth understanding of the topic while the option to conduct it face-to-face also provided opportunity to read body language and facial expressions (Bryman and Bell, 2011). The interviews were conducted in the relevant company offices. This method was chosen over focus groups because specific examples of the company’s branding activities were discussed and the participants may have been reluctant to divulge this information in front of their competitors; this would have had implications on the validity and reliability of the research.
为了完成本研究项目的定性阶段，使用了半结构化的面对面访谈。人们认为，半结构化访谈提供了最合适的机会来深入了解该主题，而面对面进行访谈的选择也提供了阅读肢体语言和面部表情的机会（Bryman 和 Bell，2011 年）。访谈在相关公司办公室进行。之所以选择这种方法而不是焦点小组，是因为讨论了公司品牌活动的具体示例 ，并且参与者可能不愿意在竞争对手面前透露这些信息;这将对研究的有效性和可靠性产生影响。

The interviews were used to discuss themes emanating from the literature review (Ting and Cho, 2008), and identify and discuss any disconfirmation between findings within the literature review and contemporary application of branding within financial services. The primary concern of the interviews was to develop an in-depth contextual understanding of branding within financial services and the role of the brand in customers choice.
访谈用于讨论文献综述中产生的主题（Ting 和 Cho，2008 年），并确定和讨论文献综述中的发现与品牌在金融服务中的当代应用之间的任何不一致。访谈的主要关注点是深入了解金融服务中的品牌形象以及品牌在客户选择中的作用。

The participants were emailed individually two days before the interview was conducted, outlining its content, which allowed participants to prepare appropriately. While it can be argued this adds an element of bias as participants are given time to prepare, it is instead proposed that this preparation allowed for deeper contextual responses.
在访谈进行前两天，参与者收到了单独的电子邮件，概述了其内容，使参与者能够进行适当的准备。 虽然可以说这增加了偏见因素，因为参与者有时间准备，相反，有人提出这种准备允许更深入的情境反应。

The interviews were conducted within 45-minute slots due to time restrictions in the availability of participants. Ideally, an hour slot would have been preferred to allow additional time for divergence from the topic guide however, 45 minutes proved to be adequate as most of the interviews were completed within the given time frame.
由于参与者的时间限制，采访在 45 分钟的时段内进行。理想情况下，最好有一个小时的时间段，以便有额外的时间与主题指南不同，但是，45 分钟被证明是足够的，因为大多数访谈都是在给定的时间范围内完成的。

A topic guide was developed (Appendix 4 and 5) to ensure direction throughout the interviews and that the relevant topics were covered. However, free-flowing conversation was encouraged and the interviewer capitalised on probing opportunities where available. On some occasions, multiple questions were answered at once which allowed for deeper understanding of their context and application. What’s more, areas deemed important to the researcher that were not identified in the topic guide were used to inform subsequent interviews; Saunders et al (2009) term this Hermeneutics. However, this is open to the researcher’s subjective interpretations and is exposed to criticism by positivists regarding its reliability. Despite this, considering the exploratory nature of this research it could be argued that this method actually provides deeper insight into relevant branding issues and applications within financial services that may not have been identified in the literature review.
制定了一份主题指南 （附录 4 和 5），以确保整个访谈的方向并涵盖相关主题。然而，鼓励自由流动的对话，面试官在可能的情况下利用探索机会。在某些情况下，可以同时回答多个问题，从而更深入地了解它们的上下文和应用。更重要的是，主题指南中未确定的对研究人员认为重要的领域被用来为后续访谈提供信息 ; Saunders 等人 （2009） 将这种解释学称为解释学。然而，这受到研究人员的主观解释的影响，并受到实证主义者对其可靠性的批评。尽管如此，考虑到这项研究的探索性，可以说这种方法实际上提供了对金融服务中可能尚未确定的相关品牌问题和应用的更深入见解。

The participants were made aware of their rights (Appendix 6, 7 and 8) and every participant agreed for the entire interview to be recorded prior to any questions commencing. Recording the interview allowed the interviews to be later transcribed word-for-word (Appendix 6, 7 and 8). Adopting this method helps counter accusations that analysis might have been influenced by the researchers values, aiding the reliability and validity (Bryman and Bell, 2011). All interviews were transcribed within one week of the interview and a summary was sent to the participants to ensure they were satisfied with the outcome of the interview – all of who agreed on the summaries provided.
参与者了解他们的权利（附录 6、7 和 8），并且每个参与者都同意在任何问题开始之前记录整个访谈。记录采访后可以逐字转录采访（ 附录 6、7 和 8）。 采用这种方法有助于反驳分析可能受到研究人员价值观影响的指控，从而有助于提高可靠性和有效性（Bryman 和 Bell，2011 年）。所有访谈都在访谈后一周内转录，并向参与者发送了一份摘要，以确保他们对访谈结果感到满意——所有人都同意所提供的摘要。

A ‘Purposive Sampling’ (Saunders et al, 2009) method was adopted. The participants were chosen based on the Authors knowledge and experience of working within all three of the organisations. Consequently, the most appropriate individuals were chosen based on their knowledge of the topic area and its contextual application. However, out of the total sample size requested (four interviews), only three were conducted due to unforeseen circumstances that meant one individual could not attend. A replacement could not be found in time because none of the appropriate individuals had enough time. Although this does not have implications on the current research, it may have increased its reliability and validity by increasing the sample size. Furthermore, it was requested by one participant that an additional member join the interview due to the individual’s knowledge and expertise within the topic area. Ideally it would have been preferred if the two participants were interviewed separately however, it was not made aware that there would be an additional member until the arrival of the researcher; this interview therefore followed the dyad format. Despite this unforeseen circumstance, the interview went well and useful information was gathered from both participants. The remainder of the interviews followed the standards one-to-one, face-to-face format.
采用了 “有目的的抽样”（Saunders 等人，2009 年）方法。参与者是根据作者在所有三个组织中工作的知识和经验来选择的。因此，根据他们对主题领域的了解及其上下文应用来选择最合适的个人。然而，在请求的总样本量（ 四次访谈 ） 中 ，由于不可预见的情况意味着一个人无法参加，只进行了 3 次。由于没有合适的人有足够的时间，因此无法及时找到替代者。虽然这对当前的研究没有影响，但它可能通过增加样本量提高了其可靠性和有效性。此外，一名参与者要求另一名成员参加访谈，因为该成员在该主题领域的知识和专长。理想情况下，最好分别采访两名参与者，但是，在研究人员到来之前，并不知道会有一名额外的成员;因此，这次采访遵循了 Dyad 格式。尽管出现了这种不可预见的情况，但采访进行得很顺利，并从两位参与者那里收集了有用的信息。其余的访谈遵循标准的一对一、面对面的形式。

3.5.1.2 Questionnaire
3.5.1.2 问卷

The quantitative element of this research project are used to support any assumptions and conclusions but do not solely form the basis of these because arguably larger samples sizes of quantitative research is required to support any conclusions and assumptions made.
本研究项目的定量元素用于支持任何假设和结论，但不仅仅是这些假设和结论的基础，因为可以说需要更大的样本量的定量研究来支持所做的任何结论和假设。

10 question Likert Scale Questionnaires (Bryman and Bell, 2011) were used to support the findings made in the interviews from. Key themes were drawn out of the qualitative element and to inform questions to understand the extent to which these elements are applicable from a consumer perspective (Appendix 11).
10 个问题的李克特量表问卷（Bryman 和 Bell，2011 年）用于支持访谈中的发现。从定性要素中得出关键主题，并为问题提供信息，以从消费者的角度了解这些要素的适用程度（附录 11）。

Ideally, more questions would have been preferred to develop a deeper understanding. However, the website used to administer the survey only allows this amount for free; any addition must be paid for and financial restrictions meant the researcher was unable to administer a larger questionnaire. What’s more, this method was chose over a postal administration because The Author felt it would make it easier for respondents to reply. Upon reflection, it may have been more appropriate to administer physical forms in terms asking additional questions however it is arguable that this may have had implications on the number of responses.
理想情况下， 为了更深入地理解，最好有更多的问题 。但是，用于管理调查的网站只允许免费提供此金额;任何额外的费用都必须付费，而财务限制意味着研究人员无法管理更大的问卷。更重要的是，选择这种方法而不是邮政管理部门，因为 The Author 认为它会让受访者更容易回复。经过思考，在提出额外问题的情况下管理实体表格可能更合适 ，但可以说这可能对回答的数量产生了影响。

A ‘Snowball Sampling’ method (Saunders et al, 2009) was adopted due to the researcher’s contacts within the financial services industry that referred individuals that would complete the questionnaire. Consequently, the sample size was 31 participants; to which all 31 responded to the survey.
由于研究人员在金融服务行业内的联系人推荐了将完成问卷的个人，因此采用了 “雪球抽样”方法（Saunders 等人，2009 年）。 缺点因此，样本量为 31 名参与者;所有 31 人都回答了调查。

3.5.2 Secondary Data Collection
3.5.2 二次数据收集

According to Saunders et al (2009) documentary secondary data is often used in research projects that also use primary data collection methods. In regard of this research project it is arguable that the secondary data collected is demonstrated within the literature review. The data in this context was collected using academic journals and textbooks from highly accredited authors and researchers, and arguably underpins this project.
根据 Saunders 等人 （2009） 的说法，文献二手数据通常用于也使用原始数据收集方法的研究项目。关于这个研究项目，可以说收集的二手数据在文献综述中得到了证明。在这种情况下，数据是使用来自高度认可的作者和研究人员的学术期刊和教科书收集的，可以说是该项目的基础。

3.6 Bias, Reliability and Validity
3.6 偏差、可靠性和有效性

The subjective nature of this research suggests that issues will arise regarding validity and reliability of the findings.
这项研究的主观性质表明，研究结果的有效性和可靠性将出现问题。

Sykes (1990) proposes that the issues regarding validity of research are twofold; inferences made from qualitative data and the goodness of data.
Sykes （1990） 提出，关于研究有效性的问题是双重的;根据定性数据和数据的优点做出的推断。

Purposive sampling encompasses issues over the range of topics covered, and inaccurate reflection of the prevalence of phenomena within the sample. The key themes were drawn from the literature and informed the interview structures. However, no coverage of the literature can ever be exhausted (Chernatony and Riley (1998) and therefore, additional themes may have emerged that may have supported the research more appropriately.
目的抽样包括所涵盖主题范围内的问题，以及对样本中现象普遍性的不准确反映。关键主题来自文献，并为访谈结构提供了信息。然而，文献的覆盖范围永远不可能穷尽（Chernatony 和 Riley （1998），因此，可能已经出现了其他主题，这些主题可能更恰当地支持了这项研究。

The key question concerns the confidence with which inferences can be made from qualitative data. Central to this is the notion that smaller samples sizes may not be sufficient for supporting any conclusions or generalisations. However to discount this issue, a larger quantitative sample was taken to support any inferences made from the qualitative data; which it did. What’s more, to support any conclusions, the data was triangulated from the industry and branding specialist perspectives along with a client perspective.
关键问题涉及从定性数据中做出推断的置信度。其核心概念是，较小的样本量可能不足以支持任何结论或概括。然而，为了消除这个问题，取了一个更大的定量样本来支持从定性数据做出的任何推论;它确实做到了。更重要的是，为了支持任何结论，数据是从行业和品牌专家的角度以及客户的角度进行三角测量的。

Attride-Sterling (2001) identifies that thematic analysis can present validity issues due to the subjective interpretation of the researcher when identifying themes. However drawing from the literature review, interview transcripts and questionnaire results, it is arguable that the themes that were discussed were consistent with each other and used as little subjective interpretation as possible.
Attride-Sterling （2001） 确定，由于研究人员在确定主题时的主观解释，主题分析可能会带来有效性问题。然而，从文献综述、访谈记录和问卷调查结果来看，可以说讨论的主题彼此一致，并且尽可能少地使用主观解释。

Angen (2000) argues that the validity of research is dependent on the quality of the researcher, which has implications on the ‘goodness of research’ (Sykes. 1990). This may present the largest problem regarding validity, as the researcher was amateur. However, the exploratory nature of the research meant that the topic guide provided merely a guidance and the interviews were not confined to strict rules allowing for deviation from the questions within the confines of the topic area. Moreover, the researcher was well informed prior to the research and therefore divergence from the topic guide was not an issue.
Angen （2000） 认为，研究的有效性取决于研究人员的素质，这会影响“研究的好坏”（Sykes. 1990）。这可能是关于有效性的最大问题，因为研究人员是业余的。然而，研究的探索性意味着主题指南仅提供指导，访谈并不局限于允许偏离主题领域范围内的问题的严格规则。此外，研究人员在研究之前已经消息灵通，因此与主题指南的分歧不是问题。

Furthermore, the qualitative element was informed by the quantitative research, which raises issues regarding the substance of the questionnaires. However, these were merely used to support the key findings throughout the qualitative research from a customer’s perspective any conclusions or inferences regarding the finding will not be based solely on themes identified through the questionnaires but through a combination of both qualitative and quantitative findings.
此外 ，定量研究为定性因素提供了信息，这引发了有关问卷内容的问题。然而，这些只是用于支持整个定性研究的关键发现，从客户的角度来看，关于发现的任何结论或推论都不会仅仅基于通过问卷确定的主题，而是通过定性和定量结果的结合。

Sykes (1990) proposes that validity emphases the meaning and meaningfulness of data whereas reliability focuses on the consistency of results. Unfortunately, the inherent characteristics of exploratory qualitative methods – flexibility and absence of rigid experimental control – provide doubt in their ability to produce reliable findings (Sykes, 1990). Additionally, the interviewees were contacts of the researcher (Qualitative) or referrals from highly regarded sources (Quantitative) and therefore, participants may have been more open to discussion but may be reluctant to discuss similar issues with unfamiliar individuals.
Sykes （1990） 提出，有效性强调数据的意义和意义，而可靠性侧重于结果的一致性。不幸的是，探索性定性方法的固有特征——灵活性和缺乏严格的实验控制——使人们对它们产生可靠结果的能力产生了怀疑（Sykes，1990）。此外，受访者是研究人员的联系人 （Qualitative） 或来自备受推崇的来源 （Quantitative） 的推荐，因此，参与者可能更愿意讨论，但可能不愿意与不熟悉的人讨论类似的问题。

With regards for bias concerns, the nature of interpretive research does not eliminate bias from the process, proposing the researcher must enter the world of the research subject to understand matters from their perspective. Therefore, eliminating bias would contradict the very nature of this research.
关于偏见问题，解释性研究的性质并不能消除过程中的偏见，建议研究人员必须进入研究对象的世界，从他们的角度理解问题。因此，消除偏见将与本研究的本质相矛盾。

3.7 Limitations
3.7 限制

The primary limitation to this research is the accessibility of participants – both industry specialists and clients.
这项研究的主要限制是参与者的可访问性——包括行业专家和客户。

Qualitative – the main limitation was the time and availability of individuals to interview. Their demanding jobs sharing time between monitoring stock markets and meeting companies meant it was difficult to get interview time. What’s more, the time of the interviews was limited for the same reason. Ideally, one hour would have been preferred.
定性 – 主要限制是采访个人的时间和可用性。他们的工作要求很高，在监控股票市场和与公司会面之间分配时间，这意味着很难获得面试时间。更重要的是，出于同样的原因，采访的时间是有限的。理想情况下，最好使用 1 小时。

Quantitative - The ‘customer base’ individuals are high net worth and are extremely busy which therefore has implications on the sample sizes. Although the researcher gained 100% response rate due to connections with these individuals, a larger sample size will be required in future research to independently provide generalisations and support conclusions. Additionally, the questionnaires were limited to ten questions, which had implications on the amount of collectable qualitative data.
定量 - “客户群”个人是高净值人士，并且非常忙碌，因此对样本量有影响。尽管研究人员由于与这些人的联系而获得了 100% 的回复率，但在未来的研究中将需要更大的样本量来独立提供概括和支持结论。此外，问卷仅限于 10 个问题，这对可收集的定性数据的数量有影响。

Furthermore, due to the tight-knit nature of financials services samples will always be non-random which can have implications on the validity of the research.
此外，由于金融服务的紧密性，样本总是非随机的，这可能会对研究的有效性产生影响。

3.8 Ethical Considerations
3.8 道德考虑

Ethics can be defined as ‘Ethics in terms of a code of behaviour appropriate to academics and the conduct of research’ (Wells, 1994, p 284). There are various ethical considerations that need to be addressed prior to most research however, considering the area of study of this research project, and the relationship between the researcher and the participants, no ethical issues arose. Prior to the interview, the participants were told that they did not have to answer any questions if they did not want to and permission requested to record the interviews; which was granted in all cases.
道德可以定义为“适合学术和研究行为的行为准则的道德”（Wells，1994 年 ， 第 284 页）。在大多数研究之前，需要解决各种道德考虑，但是，考虑到该研究项目的研究领域以及研究人员与参与者之间的关系，没有出现道德问题。在访谈之前，参与者被告知，如果他们不想回答任何问题，他们不必回答任何问题，并请求允许录制访谈;在所有情况下都得到了批准。

3.9 Summary
3.9 总结