2 We used a variety of methods to undertake our examination, from qualitative approaches such as document review to the quantitative method of statistical analysis, aimed collectively at ensuring logical rigour and technical robustness in the final report. Table 1 shows the different methods we used, by study phase:
Methods used to undertake our examination
T1 |
| Methods used to undertake our examination | ||||||||
|
|
| ||||||||
|
| Study phase | ||||||||
|
|
|
| Issue identification | Audit programme | Evidence collection and analysis | Report Drafting | |||
|
|
| Stakeholder interviews (e.g. LUL; infracos; HSE) | ✖ |
| ✖ |
| |||
|
|
| Brainstorming | ✖ |
|
|
| |||
|
|
| Internet research | ✖ |
|
|
| |||
|
|
| Issue Analysis (see note 1) |
| ✖ |
|
| |||
|
| Method | Statistical/financial analysis (see note 2) |
|
| ✖ |
| |||
|
|
| Review of key documents (e.g. PPP contracts; board minutes; Transport for London submissions |
|
| ✖ |
| |||
|
|
| Dinner PartyTM (see note 1) |
|
|
| ✖ | |||
|
|
| Consultation with expert panel (see note 3) | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ |
| |||
|
|
| Storyboarding (see note 4) |
|
|
| ✖ | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||