Penn State Penn State: College of the Liberal Arts
CRANET RESEARCH NETWORK

Methodology

  1. Home
    2.  | Methodology

CRANET provides a rigorous methodology in order to manage its complex international comparative survey. To do so, the members provide systematic assessment of the development of the international comparative questionnaire, data collection procedure, process for generating a systematic dataset for analysis, and the guidance of network members in analyzing the data. For details, see Parry, E., Farndale, E., Brewster, C., & Morley, M. (2020). Balancing rigour and relevance: the case for methodological pragmatism in conducting large-scale, multi-country, comparative management studies. British Journal of Management, 32(2): 273-282. The data collection is coordinated by the Center for International Human Resource Studies at Penn State.

.

CRANET was featured in Sage Research Methods Case Studies, view the full feature:

Questionnaire Development

The questionnaire was first developed in 1989 based on the literature available and on discussions within a network of academics with expertise in HRM. The survey has since been repeated several times and has been revised on each occasion with two goals in mind:

  • Maintaining consistency between data collection rounds.
  • Considering what is relevant and new in the field.

Any changes have been introduced based upon updated literature reviews and discussions within the research team and with senior HR practitioners.

For each survey round, the questionnaire is designed by a subsection of the Network in cooperation with the coordinator and is then approved by the rest of the Network. The questionnaire is developed in English and then translated into the national local language where appropriate. Translations of questions are slightly amended between national questionnaires to capture the nuances in meaning between languages. The questions are translated into the national language by a translator with some familiarity with HRM and then translated back into English by a different translator. Any differences are discussed in order to capture the universal international comparative meaning of the terms as closely as possible. As much as possible, the questionnaire items are held comparable over the years, although insights and developments in HRM have led to a number of changes to the questionnaire. Some countries developed a panel throughout the early rounds of data collection.

The survey is focused on factual questions about HRM practices in organizations and not opinions. This is to be able to capture the more objective elements of the HRM architecture and to be able to create a comparable base.

Data Collection

In most cases, the survey is conducted using an online or postal questionnaire. Response rates in each country average 25%. In each instance, the respondent is the person with responsibility for HRM in the organization. The survey provides questions about the background of the respondent. The unit of response in each country is therefore the ‘organization’: this can mean the firm in its entirety or a relatively self-contained unit within a company, such as a subsidiary. There are questions in the survey that control for the nature of the organization.

The sampling frames used in each country were designed to produce stratified representative samples (by sector and size) and do so for all the countries involved. However, due to slightly different sampling procedures in each country, (descriptive) analysis of the CRANET data cannot claim to provide a representative global overview. In analysis, prospective authors introduce control variables to overcome possible biases.

The data collection is conducted under the responsibility of each country in coordination with the Center for International Human Resource Studies (CIHRS) and the Network as a whole. The intellectual ownership of the data resides with each country. The data is checked and cleaned by CIHRS in order to develop a clean data file that is made available for members with the proper permissions. Any processing, analysis, and reporting is done by members under the consent of all members that are part of the survey round in a particular year.

Monitoring and Guidance in Analysis

The Network meets twice per year to discuss important issues concerning the survey, analysis, and prospective publications. It discusses experiences in validating and analyzing items from the questionnaire. This guarantees constant monitoring of the quality of the survey, of the analysis, and of the comparability of the outcomes and subsequent publications.