Asking Questions

The theoretical underpinnings of the project necessitated the collection of qualitative material. I was interested in how the champions approached their role and

19 Please see Appendix B for an example feedback report. Reports were provided for companies A, B and C. The manager from company D requested a transcript of the focus group as an alternative to the report. This was provided once the transcription was complete.

20 Throughout the analysis I will refer to the language of the ‘champions’. However, I will also include responses from the managers where relevant.

89

talked about climate change in everyday interactions. The aim was to provide a detailed analysis of the discourses that were being used and how these were (a) constructing ‘appropriate’ and ‘inappropriate’ behaviour and (b) being reproduced or subverted through language and behaviour. Detailed qualitative data was a necessity.

I decided to use interviews for two reasons. The first reason is based on the intrinsic value of interviews. Interviews provide a detailed insight into the way people think and talk about an issue. Rubin and Rubin (1995) state that, ‘qualitative

interviewers listen to people as they describe how they understand the worlds in which they live and work’ (p.3). Interviews provided a context for the champions to report how they were communicating climate change to other people. They also allowed me to hear first-hand how the champions themselves talked about climate change in our own conversation. The second reason is based on the impracticality of alternatives. The alternative to interviews was a more participative approach where I would immerse myself in the workplace environment and experience the

communication of climate change first-hand. This was less feasible given (a) the time restrictions on the project and (b) the access issues I had initially encountered with the businesses. Even the managers who agreed to be involved were very conscious of time constraints and the perceived environmental image of the business. Korezynski (2004) notes that gatekeepers such as managers might be ‘concerned about potential costs’ of granting access (p.3). In modern society, the environmental image of a business is very important and managers are keen to maintain the status of the company as ‘environmentally friendly’ (Rhee and Lee 2003). Interviews provided a detailed, but not invasive insight into the everyday communication of climate change²¹.

Based on the work of Gillham (2008) I began my research with a very informal investigation into the most useful way to conduct the interviews²². Gillham (2008) promotes the use of ‘trialling’ research questions even before embarking on a pilot study:

21 It should be noted that Hargreaves (2008) did manage to obtain this kind of access to Environment Champions. He engaged in participant observation at a construction company over the course of nine months. However, Hargreaves (2008) had previously ‘developed strong links with Global Action Plan’

(p.81) and thus did not encounter the same access issues as I had in the business context. In addition, by engaging in detailed ethnographic research, Hargreaves was limited to one business as the context for his research.

22 Please see Appendix C for a full list of preliminary research activities.

90

Make it clear to the people involved what your area of interest is, that you need guidance on the detail and will be using what they tell you to develop questions for a questionnaire or similar. What are the things they think are important’ (p.47)?

I was put in contact with two climate champions through personal connections and I was able to discuss my research in an informal way. I was very clear about my research interests but less clear about the actual information that I wished to gain from my participants. These informal conversations offered an insight into the role of the champion and some perspectives on climate change as an issue. The champions were situated in unrelated areas (a hospital and a school), but this did give me a starting point for the focus of my interviews.

I followed this ‘trialling’ phase with a pilot study at Newcastle University.

Newcastle University has a network of ‘environmental co-ordinators’ who fulfil a very similar role to the ‘climate champions’ in my study. I interviewed seven co-ordinators using the broad set of questions that I had developed from my trialling phase. The interview was split into two sections with questions about (a) the role itself and (b) general views on climate change. These interviews were transcribed and analysed on the basis of my research questions and objectives. The pilot study offered a very useful insight into the strengths and weaknesses of the questions I was asking and the extent to which they would elicit the kind of information I was interested in.

In these pilot interviews the actual climate discourses came through very clearly.

Different discourses were apparent in the way champions talked about their own behaviour and motivations as well as the actions they encouraged in the workplace.

The process of reinforcing and/or subverting dominant discourses was less obvious in the data. I used this information to adjust the focus of the interview slightly. For example, in the main study, I specifically asked the champions about the possibility of change and their successes and failures as facilitators of behaviour change. These latter questions were intended to draw out, not only the various climate discourses being used, but also the perception of these discourses as ‘normal’ or ‘true’²³.

The pilot data also helped with the continuing development of my theoretical framework. For example, champions in the pilot study referred to motivations and values that I had, thus far, not considered. Reconciling this data with the literature was a useful process. I incorporated new themes and ideas into the development of

23 Please see Appendix D for the final interview questionnaire.

91

the discourse components and climate discourses. I also became increasingly aware of the need to continually reassess the theoretical material in light of the empirical analysis. This has been an iterative process over the course of the project.

Finally, the pilot study indicated the importance of a semi-structured and flexible approach. I began with a set of topics that I wanted to cover, but participants often moved to a different topic or addressed a later question. Their own thought process was a very important part of communication and this was a useful issue to be aware of as I began the main interviews. It also gave me the chance to practise my interviewing skills and make the most of my time with the participants in the main part of my study.