Diary studies in research: More than a research method

The case for diary studies as a research tool

Diary studies is the use of unsolicited or solicited diaries as a research instrument (Alaszewski, 2006) and is one of the few ways of observing transition, change and processes (Griffiths & Jordan, 1998; Jones, 2000). Defined as “self-report instruments used repeatedly to examine ongoing experiences”, diaries “offer the opportunity to investigate social, psychological and physiological processes within everyday situations” (Bolger et al., 2003, p. 580). This self-report element of diaries differentiates it from other data collection methods and reduces the incidents of bias in the interpretation of participant data (Rausch, 2014). Thus, diary entries can show patterns of the diarist’s perspectives and interpretation of event, thereby enhancing theoretical value. Consequently essential information that could have been missed or ignored while interviewing or observing can be brought to light in a diary study because of the diarist placing emphasis on it (Woll, 2013). In addition to the advantages of richer data capture, diary studies have minimal recall bias since most diaries are captured contemporaneously (Jones & Woolley, 2015) and therefore reduce the likelihood of retrospection (Ohly et al., 2010). Furthermore, contextual biases are reduced since data is gathered in the participants natural setting (Jarrett, 2000). This in itself is advantageous for studies of personal phenomena occurring in hard-to-reach groups (Zimmerman & Wieder, 1977), who may resist other approaches deemed insensitive to their unique contexts (Chan et al., 2023).

When used to study processes, the chronological manner in which the events are recorded (Furness & Garrud, 2010) enrich the narrative of understanding processual phenomena. This is because process studies focus on outcomes resulting from a culmination of events, which likely occur in succession (Van de Ven & Engleman, 2004) and have hitherto been studied through longitudinal research design (Gehman et al., 2018; Langley et al., 2013).

Longitudinal research is defined as “research emphasizing the study of change and containing at minimum three repeated observations (although more than three is better) on at least one of the substantive constructs of interest” (Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010, p. 97). These give insight into how a variable or the participant changes over time. Hence, longitudinal studies of change enable the researcher to move beyond the shallow insight and potentially incorrect results that could result from a solely cross-sectional design (Maxwell & Cole, 2007). In addition, qualitative longitudinal studies afford the researcher the opportunity to illuminate process patterns in a manner that gives voice to the researched. Furthermore, longitudinal research is useful in preventing the study of experiences post hoc from the participants recollection because capturing the individuals experience during the process, rather than in a retrospective manner reduces the potential of retrospective bias (Galloway et al., 2015) which diaries are also credited for. Despite the advantages offered by longitudinal studies, it is fraught with issues of high attrition rates and disengaged participants over time (Bell, 1998), as showcased in Galloway et al. (2015). This has led to the adoption of diaries as a viable method of data collection as diaries offer both the longitudinal aspects that allow the dynamism of processual changes to be captured while only requiring a time span of a few days to a year (Lovett & Peres, 2018). Diary studies therefore, fare better in terms of participant engagement because of the characteristically shorter time intervals, thereby reducing the longitudinal drawback of disengaged participants (Van Burg & Karlsson, 2020). While incentives have typically been used to mitigate this issue of disengagement (Martin et al., 2023; Silber et al., 2023), the ability of a research design that uses diaries for data collection to also mitigate this is laudable.

Diary studies in research projects

Diary studies have been used widely in medical studies (Janssens et al., 2018) and especially in work and psychology studies to transcend static behavioural models to more process-driven perspectives that relay changes and transformation in states and behaviour within a short period of time (Ohly et al., 2010). In organisational studies, successful use of diary studies include Patterson (2005) marketing study where 122 texters were recruited to maintain introspective diaries for a week, recording incoming and outgoing messages as well as the personal thoughts that each communication initiated. Their findings showed that qualitative diary research is suited to exploration of processes, settings, relationships, products and customers.

Another use of diary study by Jones and Woolley (2015) utilized emails as a form of correspondence, using the receipt of the email as triggers and the responses as data which captured how the hosting of the London 2012 Olympic games impacted on commuters in London. Again, the conclusions drew on the opportunities provided by email-diary as an alternative to pen-and-paper diary and reified the email-diary as a credible research method. Lastly, Lovett and Peres (2018), capitalising on the popularity and accessibility of mobile phones in their study concluded that diaries entered through mobile phones had a higher data entry rate than the other diary entry methods and again ascertained it as an invaluable research method in marketing.

Contextual use of diary studies in entrepreneurship research

In spite of the successful use of diary studies in other disciplines, the dangerously reductive path of a lack of diversity in qualitative methodology and/or methodological narrowing in entrepreneurship studies (Baker et al., 2017) has limited the exploitation of diary studies as a viable methodology. For instance, an entrepreneurship methodology review by McDonald et al. (2015) revealed that of the 3749 journal articles published in the top entrepreneurship journals between 1985 and 2013, 1720 were based on survey data, 519 were categorized as case studies and only three (.09%) used diary studies. Considering that key entrepreneurship phenomena like learning (Cope, 2003), opportunity identification (Corbett, 2005) and venture creation (Bhave, 1994) are all processual, entrepreneurship research could benefit immensely by adopting methodology, such as diary studies which support studying phenomena as processes (Van Burg et al., 2020; Van Burg & Karlsson, 2020). Also, entrepreneurial processes, like ideation or writing of business plans, need not be studied over expansive time spans and therefore merely require longitudinal designs like diaries, which capture short-term dynamics (Ohly et al., 2010)

In lieu of what advances entrepreneurship research, the consensus is that drivers of change in entrepreneurial processes are best suited to studies that adopt the ‘within process’ approach of temporality, especially since past and current events often influence future actions (Bolger et al., 2003, 2003, 2003; Kaun, 2010). Thus, not only is entrepreneurship study recommended to be processual, but that this processual study is designed in such a way that captures temporality (Baron & Markman, 2000; McMullen & Dimov, 2013; Van Burg & Karlsson, 2020). Furthermore, the advantages of diary studies being “a unique window on human phenomenology” (Bolger et al., 2003, p. 610) enable the researcher to get close to the participant in a non-evasive way (Kaun, 2010) and makes it an invaluable research method, particularly in entrepreneurship studies (Patterson, 2005).

Yet a benefit much less talked about, but which is key to entrepreneurship, particularly entrepreneurial learning is the ability of the process of writing diaries to facilitate learning through reflection (Rausch, 2014; Woll, 2013), thereby enhancing the development of metacognition which facilitates self-regulated learning (Wallin & Adawi, 2018). This implies that when this method is used in studies involving early stage entrepreneurs and/or solo entrepreneurs, the study not only benefits the researcher but impacts on the researched (Van Burg & Karlsson, 2020). Despite knowing its importance and the need for outputs that benefit the researched (Yallop et al., 2022), not many researchers utilise this methodology in entrepreneurship research. By researching on how diary studies impact on the researcher and interestingly the researched, this study aims to address this gap.

Participants selection

The participants were recruited through volunteering links shared by leaders of direct selling ¹ teams in companies registered as members of the UK Direct Selling Association (DSA). This was done because open recruiting, that is using social media channels and directly through the DSA companies themselves, did not yield enough volunteers who were only within 3months of their direct selling business. It was important to have the diarist within 3months of their direct selling business because a pre-study interview with directsellers who had been running their direct selling business for five or more years showed that the average period that it takes a new direct seller to ‘learn the ropes’ of the business and run it competently, with evidence of career progress was 3–6 months. There were of course nuances to this with some learning earlier and others much later. Still, it was decided that understanding what was learnt, if anything in the first 6 months would offer a within-individual experience view of how sellers develop entrepreneurial skills and competence. Additional restrictions on the participants who could be part of the diary study included (1) never previously running a business (2) having no close family members as previous or active entrepreneurs (3) having the intention of running their direct selling business as a viable opportunity or someday starting an autonomous venture. These boundaries were put in place based on understanding derived from the entrepreneurial learning literature and to ensure that the observed learning in the study was as a direct result of the selling experience.

Diary study design

The aims of the study necessitated the contemporaneous capture of customer interactions that triggered the learning process and, consequently, the development of entrepreneurial skills. Therefore, diarist had the option of making event-based entries in addition to time-based entries. While the event-based entries were triggered by events judged by the diarists as important to acquiring entrepreneurial skills, the time-based entries were a more holistic capture of the previous months' experiences and was entered on the 1st day of each month. Although these time-based entries may appear to be retrospective of the event, the memory decay within a month was considered acceptable and also allowed for events to be interpreted holistically, rather than in silos.

The diary study lasted 6 months and was bookended by two interviews as recommended by both Zimmerman and Wieder (1977) and Flaherty (2016). Figure 1 summarises the design flow, which facilitated the successful use of diary studies for the case in question.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Summary of research design implemented in the diary study.

The first set of interviews (participant coaching phase) lasted 15–30 minutes and acquainted the diarists with the details of the study, including how data entry should be made. This was important because the study utilised a bespoke user-friendly form, which was accessed via a shortcut icon on the home page of the diarist mobile phone. Diarists therefore had to be educated on how to create this shortcut on their phone and how to select event or time-based entry modes. This participant coaching interviews also explained the difference between event-based and time-based entris in the Data collection phase. In the event-based option, entries were made at the discretion of the diarist and when they felt something worth mentioning occurred. The time-based option captured a summary of the previous month and were made on the 1st of each month. To support regularity of time-based entries, a reminder text (Saunders & Kulchitsky, 2021) was sent at 8 am on the 1st of the month. These reminders were automated using the SMS scheduling feature. The pre-study interview concluded by allowing diarists to ask questions and clarify points of ambiguity.

At the end of the 6-months data entry (covered in detail in the next session), follow-up interviews (debriefing phase), lasting 30 mins to 1 hour were conducted in month 8. These follow-up interviews were very enlightening, especially for this paper as diarists were able to share how the study influenced their selling experience and development of entrepreneurial skills and competence. Interestingly, a few of the question prompts on the diary were asked at this follow-up interview and the responses seemed to have suffered from varied recollection, to further reify the adoption of this methodology as effective for the study conducted.

Twelve participants completed the study and produced seventy-two entries of varying lengths. While some participants wrote in extensive details, others simply whizzed through the questions and were scanty in their responses, as is common with diary studies (Alaszewski, 2006). The diary study responses were analysed longitudinally, with each participant treated as a separate case study and revealed very interesting results for the study. The ensuing narratives thereby demonstrated a chronological narrative of each person’s experience of entrepreneurial learning, and thus the development of entrepreneurial skills and competence while selling. Lastly, data and meta data from the diary study were analysed in combination with the follow-up interview data to proffer better understanding for the use of diary study as the research methodology.

Data collection and diary capture tools

Jones and Woolley (2015) recommended the use of familiar data entry tools as a way of improving engagement of diarist in a study, so this study utilised the diarist’s mobile phone. WordPress forms were used in the back end and a shortcut to this form was put on the diarist’s phone home screen to mimic an app. Also, considerable effort was put into making the form user-friendly, with only a single question on the page at any time, thereby reducing the overwhelm that long forms may create. The first question, “Is this entry the regular monthly entry or based on an event you want to share?” triggered the appropriate logic i.e. a single memo block to capture the event and learnings if the diarist selected event-based entry or a question loop which explored themes on interconnected selling and learning if the diarist selected the time-based entry option.

Even though the study was completely qualitative, open questions were interjected with closed questions to guide the data entry. This was done intentionally to mitigate a known drawback of diary studies, which is the tendency for diarists to completely deviate from the focus of intended study (Alaszewski, 2006). Although Z. Chen et al. (2022b) suggest that break-off in question sequence was higher when the responded realises that their answer would trigger more questions, this was not observed in this study. The design however employed a logic that introduced and explored themes based on response to carefully worded closed questions, and simulated a semi-structured interview (Saunders et al., 2019). For instance, as shown in Figure 2, exploring the effect of goals on the outcome of the previous month only became visible if the diarist admitted to setting goals.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Semi-structured Question logic which guides diarists.

In addition to the data entry logic, another crucial design choice was preventing the diarists from viewing past entries. While this might be advantageous to some studies, this decision was made to avoid diarists simply copying and pasting from previous entries. Apart from improving the authenticity of the data gathered, this also compelled the diarists to reflect before data entry was made.

Methodological differences: Comparison of diary entries with interview data

Suggested as a way to ensure methodological rigour when using diary studies, it is recommended that the diary entry period is preceded and followed-up by interviews (Flaherty, 2016; Zimmerman & Wieder, 1977). The first interview is designed to familiarise diarists with the intended data collection nuances while the follow-up interviews should serve as a debrief, and an opportunity for the researcher to clarify ambiguous entries with the diarists. As interest in writing this paper piqued during the case study, the follow-up interviews with six diarists who seemed most engaged in the study were varied, to also serve as a means of comparing and triangulating the data collected during the diary study. For these six diarists, the interview lasted about 30mins more and some of the question prompts in the diary study were asked again. Interestingly evidence of memory decay was visible. The time-based entries were made monthly, which meant that each diarist had a minimum of six recollections of scenarios where interaction with customers led to a change of business process. Yet, in the interview, the maximum number of scenarios recounted by any of the participants when being interviewed was three. This infers that had the study been conducted as a single cross-sectional interview, incidents which were recorded in the diary, because at the time the diarist placed emphasis on them, would have been completely missed out. Additionally, participants struggled to remember exact details, even though the recollected incidents were within 1 year. Again, this raises the question of the integrity of data gathered about processes through cross-sectional methods and reifies the need to employ more non-evasive longitudinal methods like diaries, which both capture rich narratives and the processual dimension needed to accurately investigate processes.

That said, diary entries which responded to specific questions appeared briefer than when asked in the interview, probably because of the absence of the interviewer to moderate the responses of the participants. For example, while ID1 recorded “During a 5 min presentation session with a potential client, her feedback to me was to be more targeted with my presentation. I worked harder at the needs extraction when qualifying my prospects and the presentations delivered better outcomes of satisfied customer and increased sales. It worked like magic” as a reflection of how customer interactions influenced business processes in her diary, the same question asked at interview produced the following transcript:

Researcher: Can you recount scenarios where customer interactions and/or feedback influenced your business process?

The ability of the researcher to delve deeper into the narrative thus produced a richer narrative, which even though lean (because fewer scenarios were shared compared to those documented in the diary), gave opportunities to understand the selling process and the learning opportunities better. Even though this showcases the researcher as the lead in interviews, it further reinforces the diarist as lead in diaries. The researcher therefore has less power over the direction, quality and nature of data in qualitative diaries. The aim and objectives of a study, including whose narrative is preferred as lead should therefore determine which method is adopted. Alternatively, both methods can be combined, with one triangulating the other. Analysis of both data collection methods could however follow the same structures, with the researcher able to draw themes from the raw data.

Peculiarity of diary studies in entrepreneurship research, especially entrepreneurial learning

Rausch (2014) suggested collecting data on-site and (near) real-time as the preferred approach to understanding incidents of workplace learning. While the case study did not investigate workplace learning, the parallels of learning from experience resonate. Furthermore, the use of mobile phones, an accessible and familiar means of data entry (Hensel et al., 2012), in the study design, made the task less foreign and therefore easily adopted by the diarists. These mobile phones provided, through the observed time stamps, meta data about the research and had the added advantage of tracking and observing behavioural patterns, which may not be readily noticeable in other data collection methods. Therefore, this case study also benefitted from higher ecological validity and rich data capturing pre and post learning because of the adoption of diary studies as the methodological choice.

Kolb’s theory which was used in the case study, posits learning as being a process initiated by concrete experiences which upon being reflected on, leads to abstract conceptualisation and active experimentation (Kolb, 1984). This experimentation then initiates a new concrete experience and the cycle continues. Therefore, utilising a methodology such as diary study which stimulates reflection (Stopka et al., 2004) to understand learning amongst the sellers interwove with the learning process because by reflecting on experiences, the participants were also learning. This is beneficial to understanding entrepreneurial learning because the diary study itself led to an intense self-interrogation factor, which is peculiar to this methodology. Self-interrogation, in this sense depicts a series of conversation with oneself that both questions, examines and refines past action and experiences. Reflections such as those shown below captured discussions with self, with the diarist criticising actions taken after customer interactions and questioning if an alternative action could have been taken.

“still wonder if I should have sent her the shade. It exposes me… now she can buy from anywhere, Amazon or from another consultant” – ID3

Cope (2003) argues that reflection, especially on negative outcomes result in EL. Therefore, when methodology facilitates this without the need for the researched to go through a complete business failure, it proposes diary studies as a panacea for EL research.

In addition to facilitating learning through reflection, the use of diary studies in this case study revealed chronological growth in the participant which a different methodology might have struggled to capture. The diarists matured in their thought process and decision making capability. Additionally, their reflection on what constituted essential learning changed from a focus on selling better/more to building a business from their sales experience as seen in ID4’s entries in months 2,3, 5 and 6 below:

Month 2: I think what stood out for me at the training was that I shouldn't let the ‘NO' from prospects affect me.

Lastly, the study design restricted participants from being able to access past entries. While this decision was made because of a diary study the researcher had participated in prior and the observation that past entries intervened with studies, the diarist’s inability to revisit past entries seemed to improve the integrity of data entry. This is because diarists had to make entries on what had actually happened rather than what they imagined was expected as a continuation of their previous entry. This again is important in EL research, where the findings and/or deductions are as a result of direct interpretation of data from participants.

A few drawbacks were however noticed in the use of the diaries, for instance there were significant differences in the writing styles of the diarists – some diarist went into lots of details while others wrote scantily. Also, the novelty of data entry wore off after the first couple of months, resulting in scantier entries that were not as rich a narrative as that of the first month. Additionally, entry fatigue seemed to set in, and participants entries either became sporadic or completely tailed off (Miles, 2017). Thus, it is recommended that the study design incorporate ways of motivating the diarists, especially in qualitative designs. This dilemma is, however, not unique to diary studies, but longitudinal studies in general. Hence the trade-off of capturing data as it happens, with reduced incidents of data decay or memory loss somewhat justifies the effort and additional costs of ensuring participants keep entries up-to-date and regular. It is therefore recommended that once the commitment of the intended diarist has been confirmed, detailed training sessions should be conducted so that the participant understand both the protocol and entry requirements (Reis & Gable, 2000). Additionally, it is worthwhile that researchers design studies in such a way that questions, when used, can be completed quickly (Bolger et al., 2003; Z. Chen et al., 2022b).

Diary studies and participant learning

The uniqueness of the study is its focus on the study as it impacted the participants monthly reflection, which were cited by diarists as being both a cathartic experience and a growth stimulant. Apparently, the imminent diary entry on the 1st of each month served as a catalyst to work harder in achieving their set goals as the month drew to a close, so they could document impressive accounts “I remembered this time, and I didn’t even get the prompt. It was an exciting month – I finally had a meeting with the accountant and I am officially a businesswoman. I was going to do it all by myself, but when I had an appointment with …., she gave me her card because she works with small businesses, and the appointment with her was worth every minute. So, yes, I achieved my goal of putting my finances in order and in answer to your question, this month, my customer interactions have taught me that this is a business and financial literacy is important for success” – ID4. The excitement of the diarists also influenced when data was entered, which meant if the diarist felt their results the previous month was praise-worthy, they could hardly wait to complete the diary, and this was evidenced by the timestamp when one of the diarists completed just a few minutes after midnight “common now…. I did it! Sales doubled and all I did was follow the advice of fellow team members” – ID1.

According to the diarists, by the third month, familiarity with the questions made them more attentive to incidents as they happened (attention factor). Therefore, entries like - “setting goals seemed a good idea. I saw it in the questions, I tried it and I think last month was better, so I will continue” – ID2; “I didn’t hurry. I waited for the customer response. I figured I might be up to something… following them instead of making them follow me” - ID4 demonstrate how focus was enhanced through the diary study process. These insinuations that the diary entries enhanced focus suggests that deep reflections were made. Consequently, these deep reflections gave the diarist an idea of what growth in entrepreneurship entailed and as a result impacted on entrepreneurial learning (Kolb, 1984). Malshe and Al-Khatib (2023) found that overall, qualitative research benefits from being tailored to the phenomenon, and/or context being investigated. However, the presence of the question ‘What goal did you set for last month and how did this affect your outcome?’ in the diary study design also unintentionally brought awareness of the importance of goal setting, as a practice to the diarist, thereby influencing their business processes. This exchange of academic knowledge from previous research with the researched leans to the outcomes of research benefiting practice in a practical way.

Diary studies and participant well-being

The findings of this study reveal that beyond being a rigorous method that adequately captures the learning process, diary studies helped the participants to confront loneliness and mitigate challenges that are synonymous with new ventures. In addition to verifying data, the post-study interview also sought to understand participants view and use of the data collection method that is diary studies. First, participants suggested that the process of diary entry, was not only cathartic, but provided them with a buddy and an opportunity to express their highs and lows to a distant friend –

“I feel unsure of what a good or bad question is. I don’t know what makes me come across as having no clue, but writing the monthly entries makes me feel good. Sometimes, its like chatting to an imaginary agony aunt, at other times, its like celebrating with cheerleaders” – ID6

Considering that loneliness is rife in these start-up stages, this offered inherent benefits to the researched. Secondly, participants commended the accountability that regular entries necessitated as helping them persist with pre-set goals – “Keeping records is not my strong point, but question 1 is ‘how much did you sell last month’, which means I need to collate the figures before I make the entry. It was good actually because when I notice a drop, it makes me think ‘why’?”- ID7. Lastly, the themes explored in the diary design refocused the participants on areas of the business which may have been overlooked, but which because they were mentioned in the diary themes inferred their level of importance. In all, the influence of the study itself in shaping these diarists as entrepreneurs, as they built resilience, learnt instruction and pursued their goals more intently was the reason for persisting with the study. Hence, the study transcended one that was intended to help a researcher to one which equipped the researched as an entrepreneur.

Implication for practice and policy

This assertion of diary studies as more than just a method for processual research has implication for practice and policy.

Firstly, the suggestion that diary study methodology can impact the researched highlights its policy implications. Specifically, in entrepreneurial start-ups, it can be used as an intervention tool for nascent or novice entrepreneurs who may be suffering the effects of loneliness or a plethora of uncertainties, and thereby facing closure. Therefore, policy makers looking to address high start-up death rates can design similar tools which are provided for entrepreneurs in the early stages.

Secondly, the implications for practice go beyond entrepreneurship, and extends to other management disciplines. Researchers who are keen to study micro processes could employ diary studies, not only for its ability to sustain engagement from participants, but because of its methodological rigour. The within-individual data which diary studies capture could enrich market research and better inform the design of products and services in a more efficient manner. Additionally, participants’ within-individual experiences could be better captured and could serve to triangulate data, especially in qualitative research, as well as inform choices made within the research project.

Limitations and future research

The context in the case study, which provides empirical data for this paper is entrepreneurship, and thus nuances the discussions to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial learning. However, the findings of diary study rigour in processual research, and especially its ability to impact participants through ‘attention’ and ‘self-interrogation’ factors are extendable to other management disciplines. Therefore, this paper is intended to spark conversations and scholarship that unearths the peculiarities of diary study methodology in other disciplines, as a future research agenda.