Conducted qualitative analyses

As described above there are different qualitative analysing methods available for interviews. But prior to the analysis method used by the researchers and the performance of the actual analysis that is described in Chapter 5, the expert interviews have to be prepared. This part of the research has been divided into four sub-items; these include expert selection, preparation of the interview guideline, interview planning, and conducting the interview.

3.8.2.1 Selection of experts

First step should be in any case the selection of the experts. In order to make a selection of the experts for the interviews, the first step is to determine who counts as an expert. According to Meuser & Nagel (2009) an expert is a person who is responsible for the development, implementation or control of solutions, strategies, policies and a person who has privileged access to information about groups of persons or decision processes. According to Bogner, Littig, & Menz (2009) experts are people who, with specific practical knowledge or experience from a specialist area, have influenced this area in a meaningful and structured manner (Bogner, Littig, & Menz, 2009). In 2013, Littig made this statement ‘an expert has special expert knowledge which is related to a special professional field. This includes

176

expertise as well as implicit /tacit knowledge about maxims of action, rules of decision- making, collective orientations and social patterns of interpretation and has at least partially the chance to be realised in practice. (Littig, 2013)’ The Technical University of Kaiserslautern describe in the manual for expert interviews during scientific research experts as individuals who have specific knowledge / skills due to many years of experience, at least 10 years (Kurzrock, 2014). This area-specific knowledge is the essential criterion that should be met when selecting experts. Other areas of knowledge or general education are not relevant to the selection (Mieg & Näf, 2005).

The researcher selected the experts for this study according to the following criteria: • Experience in a responsible position in sales and / or marketing (at least 10 years’) • The firm had been in operation/institution for more than five years

• Specific knowledge

• Reputation and current position

The first interview partners in Germany come from the researcher's personal network. All others are based on recommendations from the interviewed experts. All meet the three criteria.

The second round of interviews was conducted to explore the validity of the conclusions. In these interviews, another criterion was added. The experts also had to be in a position and to be able to introduce a new customer segmentation model.

3.8.2.2 Preparing the interview guideline

In preparing and creating the guideline, the researcher sets the following rules for the interviews and the way in which they should be conducted. The interviews should be recorded to facilitate later transcription. There should be 10–15 questions in the guideline; these should be open or interrogatory questions so that the interviewee cannot answer the questions with the responses ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

The researcher decided to start the guideline with a simple introductory question; this was chosen to induce ease of conversation and simultaneously connect the discussion to the main subject. The main portion included questions on individual topics, such as customer segmentation and customer value as well as other related topics. Finally, the review/outlook was composed on the basis of conversation and support.

177

3.8.2.3 Planning the interviews

Planning the interviews was quite a challenge for the researcher. Above all, this was a consequence of the fact that the interviewees come from different countries or regions, and were very busy with their jobs. Nevertheless, the researcher was able to complete the first series of interviews within three weeks.

The second series of interviews could be carried out as there were fewer interviewees after two weeks.

3.8.2.4 Conduction of the interviews

For the interview itself, the researcher set the following goals to carry out a successful interview:

• Requesting narration

• Sending active listening signals

• Accepting and tolerating the interviewee taking breaks • Citing from other sources (external opinions)

• Asking hypothetical questions Suppose it were ...; what would be different then? • Questions about visions or utopias What if ...; how would you...?

The interview began with an acknowledgement of thanks for the opportunity to interview, the reference to the audio recording, the assurance of anonymity, the idea with a name, the task and position, and the introduction of the topic of work. The expert was also told why his opinion were important and how long the conversation was bound to take. If the expert had no questions before the interview, the interview was conducted after a short small talk with the help of the guideline.

During the interview, the main task of the interviewer was to steer and control the conversational process; this refers to nonverbal reactions of the respondent as well as closely assessing how one’s own reactions were closely followed. Steer and control do not mean that the interviewer makes any prescriptions or assessments regarding the statements of the interviewee. It is important to allow the interviewee to speak freely but he/she should be guided cleverly by questions from the interview guideline, without pushing the interviewee into a corner. The talks ended with a note of thanks, the opportunity for further questions, and further interaction.

178

During the interviews, the researcher had to flexibly react to different people and be able to ‘work’ with them, which, in some situations, was presented as a challenge.

The researcher is going to evaluate the qualitative expert interviews according to the Meuser and Nagel method and as mentioned on page 173 and 174, Meuser and Nagel created six steps to analyse expert interviews. But as shown in the table above the researcher will adapt the method. A detailed description of each step of the applied method follows in the next sections.

3.8.2.5 Transcription

‘The transcription process is obviously paradoxical: with the aspiration to accurately represent the multi-faceted verbal discourse, you create a written text that is a linear, one-dimensional document. Ultimately, producing a transcript is a dilemma oscillating between realistic representation and practically possible presentation or compression (Dresing, Pehl, & Schmieder, 2015, p. 21).’

A transcription can never reflect the full interview situation. Too many different factors occur during the interview. These are, for example, smell, room situation, facial expressions, or gestures. These cannot all be given back and thus the researcher should concentrate on what is essential and important for the interview analysis.

A transcription before analysis was necessary because exploratory, qualitative studies usually produce large amounts of data and transcription along with data reduction. The researcher translated the German interviews into English after transcription. This will not create any problem during the evaluation because the researcher has decided to do a simple description. This type of transcription will be explained below in detail.

a) Transcription rules

The type of transcription and the level of detail will depend on the type of interview; it and might range from a simple literal transcription where every word is transcribed, up to a complex transcription including a lot of details (Brinkmann & Kvale, 2015). It is also more useful to transcribe just as much and as precisely as needed. These saved resources can be better used in the research process (Strauss, 1987).

179

b) Simple transcription

Dresing, Pehl, and Schmieder (2015) elaborate that in simple transcripts, mostly paraverbal and non-verbal elements of the interview are cancelled. The focus is on a good readability and ease of learning, and not to extensive reaction time. In simple transcription priority is given to the contents of the interview.

Simple transcription rules are:

• It will be transcribed literally, and not phonetically or in summary. • Dialects will not be transcribed.

• Word, sentence discontinuations, and stutters will be smoothed. • Agreement signals like ‘mmh’ or ‘aha’ will not be in the transcript. • Pauses or breaks will not be transcribed.

Table: 32 Transcription conventions adapted from Drew (1995, pp.78)

c) Complex transcription

‘A detailed transcript based on a complex set of transcription rules is necessary if the subsequent analysis does not merely focus on the semantic content of a conversation. In such

180

cases, prosodic elements (e.g. intonation, primary and secondary emphasis, volume, speed and pitch) are included. If necessary, a phonetic transcription is added, e.g. in dialect research) and non-verbal phenomena are documented in a more complex way’ (Dresing, Pehl, & Schmieder, 2015, p. 23). A complex and detailed transcription is just for complicated and important issues, and the content of the interview will be described and reproduced almost verbatim. In complex transcriptions pauses and important details from the interview will be honoured by their importance (Silverman, 2008). In Table 32, 33, and 34 different transcription rules are illustrated. Different researchers like Flick (2009), Drew (1995), Kuckartz, Dresing, Rädiker, & Stefer (2008), Kvale (2007), or institutions have different rules for the complex transcription method.

There are distinct differences regarding the extent and the manner of the rules. This, however, is always the same in various complex rules—i.e., the pauses, important words, and emphases are displayed. Dresing, Pehl, & Schmieder (2015) illustrated the differences between simple and complex transcription in a short example.

181

Table: 34 Comparison: Simple and complex transcription (Dresing, Pehl, & Schmieder, 2015)

It remains that the effort for complex transcription is much higher than for simple transcription. This is another reason why the researcher has chosen the approach of simple transcription.

3.8.2.6 Paraphrasing

As described in Section 3.8.2.6 paraphrasing is concerned with three different levels: 1. Confirms or clarifies expressed thoughts, feelings, emotion, and content.

182 2. Summarize and organise.

3. Shifting the conceptual focus of the thinking by surfacing assumptions, beliefs, core values, and mental models.

Meuser and Nagel (2009) argued that these phase and levels are important in the process of analysing interviews. Mayring (2011) and Ullrich (2006) hold the opinion that paraphrasing might be omitted in exploratory interviews with experts. Exploratory interviews are used where it is necessary that the interviewee should live out its individuality and urged not in a certain direction. Such interviews are conducted mostly among individuals or a small group of people, often among experts to determine a topic (Beutelmeyer, 2015). This was the case in this research.

3.8.2.7 Coding / Headlining

This step serves to create the basis for the thematic comparison. The transcripts are read, and interesting text passages are instantly highlighted in colour and provided with headings for the research topic. Meuser & Nagel (2009) argued that the researcher should be closely geared to the interview text, which means the terminology of the interviewees should be taken. This is important only for individual experts interviews. For this research study, the researcher conducted 14 expert interviews for the general topic customer segmentation, 5 expert interviews to evaluate the availble customer segmentation software, and 4 expert interviews to proof the validity of the research findings. Ullrich (2006) argued that headings should be generalized if the researcher conducts several interviews.

The number of expert interviews arose according to the old rule from one of the pioneering qualitative researchers, Harry Wolcott. This rule implies that one continues doing interviews and asking questionsas long as one are getting different answers. Wolcott confirmed this rule in a research paper in 2012 (Baker, Edwards, & Doidge, 2012).

The headings were coded and derived from the researcher’s research questions, research objectives, and frequently used interview topics. Each heading was related with a specific colour, which is to be used in the analysis of the interviews.

The context or the intelligibility of individual citations can be lost through. Therefore, the introductory phrases or questions were performed with some quotes.

183

Owing to the number and length of the expert interviews, the researcher made the decision not to document the transcripts with the coding in the main part of the thesis. The transcripts are in the appendix.

3.8.2.8 Thematic comparison and numerical analysis of headings

In thematic comparison all colour-coded text passages from the transcripts are grouped according to their headings. The material is sifted from the interviews again according to the headings and not to the Interviewees. Similar quotes are grouped and so subheadings can be formed (Ullrich, 2006). Quotations from the interviews can also be assigned to two or more headings.

In the data analysis section the researcher did the analysis or commentary of the tables. The analysis tables are in the appendix and show the compared passages, as explained on page 174 as fourth step of the Meuser and Nagel interview analysis method. The thematic comparison is followed by a numerical analysis of the headings. These analyses are also based on MS Excel, analysis and commentaries of the interviews are given in the data analysis section.

3.8.2.9 Narrative analysis

Narrative analyses in this study deal with the analysis of texts, which are present as documented as written results from interviews. The method was additionally selected to gain further insights from the interviews. Narrative interview analyzes have also disadvantages, the main disadvantage is that the individual interviews are often difficult to compare. Some Interviewees have experience with conducting interviews and some do not have experience, this can complicate the evaluation of the interviews. Furthermore, it is problematic that human memory is a subjective construct. The interviewer cannot be sure that he will be told the complete story because the interviewee does not remember it. This may lead to a validity problem. But the advantages of the analysis form predominate, from the researcher perspective. Main advantage is that the information obtained is more likely to be more valid and meaningful than in standardized interviews. Furthermore, the information is more comprehensive because it is not limited by predetermined answers (Strübing, 2013).

184