International Association for Management of Technology
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
DETERMINING THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTORS FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGY SELECTION IN AFRICA: APPLICATION OF THE FOCUS GROUP TECHNIQUE
MARIE-LOUISE BARRY
Graduate School of Technology Management, University of Pretoria, Lynnwood Road, Pretoria, Gauteng 0001, South Africa,
PROF HERMAN STEYN AND PROF ALAN BRENT Graduate School of Technology Management, University of Pretoria
Pretoria, Gauteng 0001, South Africa
[email protected] and [email protected]
The supply of sustainable energy is a crucial factor for development in Africa. This is important both for business development and also for supply of energy to households in order to save time and thus enable members of households to be economically active. Without sustainable energy poverty reduction and economic development in Africa is not achievable. Africa has limited skilled human resources and thus the selection of successful, integrated technological systems is imperative. This study focuses on the identification of factors to be taken into account when identifying the most sustainable technological systems for Africa. Focus groups, using the nominal group technique, can be used successfully in problem definition and first order identification. The purpose of this focus group was to identify the first order factors for the study, which would then be used to inform the Delphi study that was to follow. A pre-existing group of specialists in the energy field was used. During this process, 38 factors deemed important were identified. The factors were categorized into six clusters namely: technology factors, social factors, institutional or regulatory factors, site selection factors, economical or financial factors and achievability by the specific organization factors.
Introduction
The need of energy for economic development in developing countries was vividly illustrated recently when
South African power supplier Eskom could not supply sufficient power to the gold and platinum mines. Each day of the shutdown translated into R193 million ($ 26,8 million) of lost production for the mining sector
(Mathews, 2008). According to Toman and Jemelkova (2003) more energy is used by advanced industrialised societies than by poorer societies, which implies that energy is required for effective development. Marie-Louise Barry, Prof Herman Steyn and Prof Alan Brent When selecting sustainable energy projects in Africa, a myriad of factors should be taken into account, and normally only the availability of finance and other financial issues are addressed. This implies that some projects fail as the optimal technological solution is not selected. This study was undertaken to determine the most important factors to take into account when selecting sustainable energy technological systems in Africa.
The study was to address not just the financial or economic factors but also the social, technological, regulatory factors and factors around the organisations performing the installation and operation of the technological system.
The complete study utilises four research methods namely: a focus group, a Delphi study and selected case studies as shown in Figure 1. This paper presents the methodology and results of the focus group phase.
Literature survey
Focus Group
Delphi study
Case studies
Final conclusion
Figure 1: Methodology of study of which case study forms a part IAMOT Proceedings According to McGrath (1982, cited Sandura and Williams, 2000, 1249) the important factors that need to be
taken into account in research design are: generalisability to the population that supports external validity,
precision in measurement and control of behavioural variables, affecting internal and construct validity and
realism of context.
Generalisability
Precision in measurement Realism of context
Figure 2: Important factors to consider in research design Source: McGrath (1982, cited Sandura and Williams, 2000, 1249)
According to McGrath (1982, cited Sandura and Williams, 2000, 1249) literature reviews maximise population
generalisability but are low on realism of context and precision of measurement. Judgment tasks (or in this case
Delphi study and focus group) are moderately high on generalisability and precision of measurement but low on
realism of context. Lastly field studies (or case studies) are high in realism of context but low in generalisability
and precision in measurement. This can be presented as shown in Figure 6where items indicated in bright green
are high, those in lighter green are moderately high and those in red are low:
Literature survey Judgment task Field study Generalisability Generalisability Generalisability
Realism of Realism of Realism of Precision in Precision in Precision in context context context measurement measurement measurement Figure 3: Generalisability, precision in measurement and realism of context for applicable research methods Source: McGrath (1982, cited Sandura and Williams, 2000, 1249)
Grath (1982, cited Sandura and Williams, 2000, 1249) further stated that any chosen research method will have
inherent flaws and the choice of method will always limit the conclusions that can be drawn. For this reason it
is essential to obtain corroborating evidence by using a variety of methods. This is also known as triangulation. Marie-Louise Barry, Prof Herman Steyn and Prof Alan Brent In this case a triangulation of research strategies will be used. A focus group can be used in research in the preliminary or exploratory stage as a method in its own right or to complement other methods (Gibbs, 1997 and
Blackburn and Stokes, 2000).
According to Sandura and Williams (2000) the use of a variety of methods in examining a topic might result in findings with a higher external validity. In their study of patterns of research methods in management research across the middle 1980s and 1990s indicated that researchers are increasingly employing research strategies and methodological approaches that comprise triangulation.
Background on the focus group technique
The focus group technique is also called the group depth interview and the focused interview in literature.
Different authors in the literature ascribe the origin of the focus group method to different sources. Hutt (1979) states that the technique grew out of group therapy techniques applied by psychiatrists, Robinson (1999) avers that they originated with Market researchers in the 1920’s whilst Blackburn credits Merton and his colleagues with developing the technique for data collection on the effectiveness of World War II training and propaganda films.
Regardless of the origin of focus groups, they have been successfully used in many areas of research. By definition, focus groups are organized discussions or interviews, with a selected small group of individuals
(Gibbs, 1997 and Blackburn and Stokes, 2000), discussing a specific predefined and limited topic under the guidance of a facilitator or moderator (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000 and Robinson, 1999). A focus group is also a collective activity, where several perspectives on the given topic can be obtained, and where the data is produced by interaction (Gibbs, 1997). According to Merton and Kendall (1946 as reference in Gibbs, 1997) the focus group is populated by individuals with specific experience in the topic of interest which is explored during the focus group.
Patton (1990 as referenced in Robinson, 1999) avers that the focus group has the following purposes: basic research where it contributes to fundamental theory and knowledge, applied research to determine programme effectiveness, formative evaluation for programme improvement and action research for problem solving. In this study, the focus group technique was used for basic research with the goal of contributing to the fundamental theory and knowledge of important factors for the selection of energy projects in Africa. IAMOT Proceedings One of the common uses of focus groups is during the exploratory phase, to inform the development of later stages of a study (Bloor et al, 2001, p 9). One of the four basic uses of a focus group given by Morgan (1998, p
13) is that of problem identification. For this reason, it was decided to use the focus group technique in this study to explore the factors which would later be confirmed and rated in the Delphi study.
Focus group research has been applied in many generic applications. These include: determination of respondent attitudes and needs (Robinson, 1999), exploration and generation of hypotheses (Gibbs, 1997 and
Blackburn and Stokes, 2000), development of questions or concepts for questionnaire design (Gibbs, 1997), interpreting survey results (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000), pretesting surveys (Ouinet et al, 2004), counselling
(Hutt, 1979), testing research methods and action learning (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000), identification of strengths and weaknesses and information gathering at the end of programmes to determine outputs and impacts
(Robinson, 1999).
Focus group research has been applied in many fields including: social sciences, medical applications (Gibbs,
1997), market research, media, political opinion polls, government improvements, business, consulting, ethics, entrepreneurship research (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000), education (Ouinet et al, 2004) and health care
(Robinson, 1999).
The benefits to the focus group participants include the opportunity to be involved in decision making, the fact that they feel valued as an expert and the chance to work in collaboration with their peers and the researcher
(Gibbs, 1997). Interaction in focus groups is crucial as it allows participants to ask questions as required and reconsider their responses (Gibbs, 1997).
The advantages of the focus group method are many and include:
(i) It is an effective method of collecting qualitative data as common ground can be covered rapidly and inputs can be obtained from several people at the same time (Hutt, 1979 and Robinson, 1999).
(ii) During discussions, the synergistic group effort produces a snowballing of ideas which provokes new ideas (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000 and Hutt, 1979)
(iii) Data of great range, depth, specificity and personal context is generated (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000).
(iv) In the process, the researcher is in the minority and the participants interact with their peers (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000) The disadvantages include: Marie-Louise Barry, Prof Herman Steyn and Prof Alan Brent (i) Not all respondents are comfortable with working in a group environment and may find giving opinions in the bigger group intimidating (Gibbs, 1997 and Robinson, 1999)
(ii) The outcome can be influenced by the group effect in that the opinion of one person dominates, that some are reluctant to speak and that an opportunity is not give for all participants to air their views (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000).
(iii) The researcher has less control over the data than in for example a survey due to the open-ended nature of the questions (Gibbs, 1997). The disadvantages can be mitigated by ensuring that the moderator has sufficient skills, reliable data collection and the use of rigorous analytical methods. (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000)
Objectives of this study
The purpose of this focus group was to obtain the opinions of the group at the Council for Scientific and
Industrial Research (CSIR), tasked with helping the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) select sustainable energy research projects for Africa, as to the most important factors for the selection of these projects.
The main objectives of the focus group were then as follows: i) Inform the focus group participants on the purpose and future plans of the study ii) Identify as many factors as possible that should be considered when selecting sustainable energy projects in
Africa to be used as an input to the Delphi study. iii) Identify knowledgeable participants for the Delphi study.
Study design
The main stages of the focus group process (see are: planning, recruiting, moderating, and analysis and reporting (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000). During the planning stage, the researcher familiarized herself with the focus group technique and did a literature survey on sustainable energy selection factors. IAMOT Proceedings Planning
Recruiting
Moderating
Analysis and reporting
Figure 4: Main stages of the focus group process Source: Blackburn and Stokes, 2000
The role of the moderator or facilitator is critical in the success of the focus group (Gibbs, 1997 and Blackburn
and Stokes, 2000). The moderator must clearly state the expectations and purpose of the group, facilitate
interaction (Gibbs, 1997) by outlining the topics to be discussed and controlling the direction of the conversation
(Blackburn and Stokes, 2000). The moderator is the conversational controller (Hutt, 1979) who must promote
open debate by using open-ended questions and probe deeper as to the motivations (Gibbs, 1997). The
moderator must further ensure that the conversation does no drift but that the group addresses the key topics of
interest (Gibbs, 1997 and Blackburn and Stokes, 2000).
Robinson (1999) further emphasizes that focus groups are in depth and open-ended group discussions which
implies that the focus group is not very structured. Hutt (1997) advocates that focus groups should be semi-
structured and not highly structured. The use of an interview guide or list of questions to be answered during
the focus group is recommended (Hutt, 1979, Robinson, 1999 and Blackburn and Stokes, 2000). It is important
to limit the numbers of questions and whether the interview is more or less structured will depend on the
application (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000).
To this aim, a presentation was prepared during the planning stage to be used to inform the participants on the
purpose of the focus group. The structure planned for the focus group is shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Focus group structure Item Description Marie-Louise Barry, Prof Herman Steyn and Prof Alan Brent 1 Purpose, rationale and methodology of the study 2 Identification of the most important factors for project selection 3 Classification of factors 4 Preliminary ranking of factors 5 Identification of Delphi study participants
The literature survey during the planning stages identified the factors eleven factors listed in Table 2.
Table 2: Factors identified during the literature review Quantitative factors: Qualitative factors: • Economic measures • Political and senior management support • Future savings in capital • Client and public support • Operational and maintenance costs • Environmental impact • Profits • Technical and educational relevance • Improvement in productivity • Interface to existing projects • Impact on project portfolio Focus groups can consist of pre-existing groups if those groups have the expertise required (Bloor et al, 2001, p
23). For this study, the existing group in the CSIR were selected due to the fact that these scientists all have
interest and experience in the filed of sustainable energy.
In the literature, various sizes of focus groups are recommended. These include four to fifteen participants
(Gibbs, 1997), six to ten (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000) although it must be noted that in practice this study used
three to ten and on to fourteen (Ouinet et al 2004). Blackburn and Stokes (2000) found that group sizes of more
than 8 become less manageable. Focus groups can vary in size from three to fourteen participants and small
groups can be an advantage if the topic is complex or when dealing with experts (Bloor et al, 2001, p 27). It is
important to choose a group of people that are not too heterogeneous so that participants will be comfortable in
sharing their views (Gibbs, 1997).
The existing CSIR group knew each other from previous projects and consisted of five individuals. Each of
these individuals was contacted personally and asked to participate and all five agreed. The arrangements were
made at the beginning of December 2006 for the end of January 2007. This could explain the fact that only
three individuals participated in the focus group in the end. December is a vacation period in South Africa and
individuals often make new plans after the holidays without considering previous commitments.
The typical duration of a focus group can be one to two hours (Gibbs, 1997 and Robinson, 1999) or 75 to 90
minutes (Ouinet et al, 2004). The focus group in this study was scheduled for three hours. The focus group was
semi-structured. An introduction was given by the moderator, participants were then allowed to discuss the IAMOT Proceedings parameters in the study, and a nominal group technique was then used to identify factors. The factors were classified and participants were asked to supply the names and contact details of possible participants for the
Delphi study.
Some of the disadvantages, discussed above, can also be mitigated by using the nominal group technique in conjunction with the focus group technique as was done by Ouinet et al (2004). The nominal group technique is a group meeting technique which is structured in a way that participants silently generate ideas after which these ideas are discussed by the group (Delbecq, 1975). This ensures that all participants air their views and that the ideas of one participant do not dominate. This method was also used in this study.
The ethical standards of a focus group, in line with the requirements of the University of Pretoria were met. Full information on the purpose and objectives of the study must be given to the participants beforehand (Gibbs,
1997). It is important that focus group sessions are tape recorded to facilitate data analysis (Gibbs, 1997, Hutt,
1979, Blackburn and Stokes, 2000, Ouinet et al, 2004 and Robinson, 1999) but permission must be obtained from the respondents before doing so (Hutt, 1979). The confidentiality of the participants must also be ensured by not identifying individuals in any publications (Blackburn and Stokes, 2000).
The permission of the participants was obtained and the focus group session was tape recorded.
It is important that a facility is selected that will be neutral to the group or if a pre-existing group exists, their regular meeting room can be used (Gibbs, 1997). The focus group was held in a conference room at the CSIR as this was a place familiar to all participants.
Results
Focus group data are analysed by identifying key issues (Ouinet et al, 2004), systematic coding and content analysis (Hutt, 1979 and Blackburn and Stokes, 2000) or ethnographical summary (Blackburn and Stokes,
2000). In this case systematic coding was applied during the focus group session and separate coding after the session was not required.
The nominal group technique was used to identify the most important factors. This technique was used rather than the interacting group technique as according to Delbecq (1975) the nominal group technique produces better ideas as it does not inhibit the creative process.
The focus group was conducted as follows: Marie-Louise Barry, Prof Herman Steyn and Prof Alan Brent Each participant was given six pieces of paper. The participants were then asked to independently write down the six factors which in their opinion was the most important for the selection of renewable energy projects.
The participants were asked to work independently and not discuss their ideas.
Before the participants started this task however, the question was raised as to how sustainable energy project are defined. Does it mean that projects will continue after implementation or does it mean that projects will have a triple bottom line, ie make a profit, be environmentally friendly etc. In the discussion it was decided that for this study it includes all these definitions.
After this each participant identified six factors. The pieces of paper where then taken in by the moderator.
Each factor was then discussed by the group and if what the participant wrote on the piece of paper was not clear it was clarified. Any new factors that came out during the discussion were written down on a new piece of paper and also classified. The factors where pasted on a white board and a preliminary classification of factors was done by placing similar factors together on the white board.
Once all 18 the initial factors had been discussed, participants were given the opportunity to write down independently any other factors that they felt had been overlooked. The same process of discussion, clarification and classification was then followed.
Figure 5: Identification, classification and preliminary rating of factors IAMOT Proceedings In conclusion, the researcher presented factors which she had identified from the literature. Those factors that had not yet been added and where deemed important by the participants where then added. A total of 38 factors were identified in this manner.
During the identification a preliminary classification of factors was made by pasting the pieces of paper on the whiteboard in different clusters. To classify the factors, some of the clusters where added together. The following final classifications were decided on:
1. Technology factors
2. Social factors
3. Institutional regulatory factors (compliance)
4. Site selection factors
5. Economic/ Financial factors
6. Achievability by the specific organisation
The thirty-eight categorised factors are shown in Figure 6. Marie-Louise Barry, Prof Herman Steyn and Prof Alan Brent
Technology factors Social factors •Create employment/ not •Maturity of technology – proven Achievability by the eliminate jobs track record •Equity/ GIMI – income for more specific organisation •End of life, exit strategy or than one sector of the economy •Proper Project Management decommissioning plan in place •Education – skills development •Training of personnel •Maintenance/Support •Empowerment for education •Capacity •Transfer of knowledge and skills •Local content (Labour •Financial capability component) Create industry
Site selection •“Local Hero” – champion to continue after implementation •Passion/ ownership/ buy-in/ adoption Institutional Regulatory Economic/ Financial by community, Responsibility •Replicability (upscaling) factors (compliance) factors (profit and •Must match available resources (HR. •Regulatory financial incentive, tax return) natural, wind, solar, water, gas, regimes must be supportive, •Must positively affect GDP at geothermal etc) Infrastructure institutional capacity national level •Pilot study site selection issues •Does it fit under national priorities •Resource beneficiation/ optimisation •Economic development (community (Self evident? eg role of women) eventually able to pay) economic land, water etc. •Must contribute to and not detract •Partnerships along the value chain sustainability from energy security •Efficient use of energy •Ability to profitably sustain after •Community engagement •Environmental impact assessment funding ends •Community acceptance (can traditional •Available budget – the finances to •Synergies (salt production and structures be accommodated?) support a project desalinated water) •Society/Institution trust – see •Equity financing •Add value to raw product community acceptance •Compliance for green funding •Community income generation •Specific local factors – Resource availability, Access to market, size and skills level of community
Figure 6: Categorised factors For a first order indication of the importance of factors, the participants where then given five stickers numbered
one to five and asked to stick them next to the factors that they feel are the most important. The important
factors where identified as shown in
Table 3: Identification of most important factors by respondents Importance Respondent 1 Respondent 2 Respondent 3 1 Regulatory financial Community engagement Economic development
incentive, tax regimes must
be supportive, institutional
capacity 2 Does it fit under national Must match available Community income
priorities (Self evident? eg resources (HR. natural, generation
role of women wind, solar, water, gas,
geothermal etc) IAMOT Proceedings Importance Respondent 1 Respondent 2 Respondent 3 Infrastructure 3 Replicability (upscaling) Ability to profitably sustain Regulatory financial
after funding ends incentive, tax regimes must
be supportive, institutional
capacity 4 Maintenance/Support Local content (Labour Specific local factors
component) Create industry including resource
availability, access to
market, size and skills level
of community 5 Create employment/ not Must contribute to and not Synergies (salt production
eliminate jobs detract from energy and desalinated water)
security Only one factor was rated important by more than one respondent. This factor is “Regulatory financial
incentive, tax regimes must be supportive, institutional capacity” which scored a one and a three. The rest of the
factors in Table 3 were only selected by one respondent. Due to the fact that there were only 3 participants and
that a wide range of factors were identified by them as important, this is not the final answer but rather a
preliminary indication of the importance of factors which must be further explored in the Delphi study.
At the end of the session, each participant was given a sheet to complete with individuals whom they thought
might be willing to participate in the Delphi study. They were asked to provide the following information for
each individual:
1. Name and surname
2. Organisation
3. Why is this person a good candidate for the Delphi?
4. Contact details if available
5. Where can contact details be obtained?
6. Will this person participate?
7. Can we say who recommended the person? Marie-Louise Barry, Prof Herman Steyn and Prof Alan Brent Conclusions and recommendations
The focus group technique can be successfully for technology management research, especially during the definition phases. The thirty eight most important factors that need to be taken into account during the selection of energy technological systems in Africa were identified, categorised and rated. The eleven factors identified during the literature survey were expanded to thirty eight factors in the focus group. The participants in the focus group also contributed names of energy experts that can take part in the Delphi study.
When conducting focus groups in technology management it is important that participants who are experts in the field be selected, that participants be contacted the day before the focus group and a nominal group technique is recommended for the generation of ideas.
The outputs of this study must be further validated using a Delphi study and case study research.
Acknowledgements The experts that took part in the focus group session are thanked for their participation that went beyond the call of duty.
References Blackburn, R., 2000. Breaking down the barriers: Using focus groups to research small and medium-sized enterprises. International Small Business Journal, 19(1), 44-63.
Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M. AND Robson, K., 2001. Focus Groups in Social Research. Wiltshire:
SAGE Publications, .
Gibbs, A., 1997. Focus Groups. Social research Update, 19, 1-7.
Hutt, R.W, 1979. The focus group interview: a technique for counseling small business clients. Journal of Small
Business Management, 17(1), 15-18.
Mathews, C. 2008. Eskom costs stricken mines R193m a day. Business day, 28 January, p.1b.
Morgan, D.L., 1998. The Focus Group Guidebook. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Ouimet, J.A., Bunnage, J.C., Carini, R.M., Kuh, G.D and Kennedy,J., 2004. Using focus groups, expert advice and cognitive interviews to establish the validity of a college student survey. Research in Higher Education,
45(3), 233-250.
Robinson, N., 1999. The use of focus group methodology - with selected examples from sexual health research.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(4), 905-913. IAMOT Proceedings Sandura, T.A and Williams, E.A., 2000. Research methodology in management: Current practices, trends and implications for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1248-1264.
Toman, M.A and Jemelkova, B., 2003. Energy and economic devopment: An assessment of state of knowledge.
Energy and economic development, 24(4), 93-112.