Interview Process

An interview process is developed to ensure consistency and to clarify the theoretical assumptions that the interview instrument is based on, in order to enhance the

meaning and reality of the research (Kvale 1996). The protocol for interviews follows a staged process: thematising, designing, interviewing, transcribing, analysing, verifying, and reporting, an appropriate process for this study (Kvale 1996).

Thematising: An extensive literature review, as well as discussions with experts involved or informed about the family business, provides a knowledge base for the development of the interview questions and protocol. The analysis of the literature provided in Chapter 2 serves as the basis for the search for new knowledge. This interview design was selected based on the exploratory nature of this investigation.

Designing: This case study approach intended to have four to five interviews per firm. The actual number of interviews and the distribution of those interviews among the founder, successor, and key observer/senior employee depended on what new knowledge was gained from the initial interviews. Follow-up or additional interviews provided additional information, clarification and verification of the information collected in the initial interviews. The ethical issues related to informed consent, confidentiality, and consequences were identified through an ethical review process. A structured interview guide encouraged participants to disclose information and perceptions generously in an unconstrained environment (Cooper & Schindler 2003).

Interviewing: After an introduction and providing an overview of the project and process, the interviewees were given the opportunity to pose clarifying questions to the researcher. The preliminary questions focused on the details of the company history, the profile of the interviewee, and their role in the firm, and served to build an historical context for the company and to set a stage for the direction and context

of the interview (Cooper & Schindler 2003). Probing questions produced additional details (Davis 2005) and motivated communication (Zikmund 2003). Participants were given the opportunity to ask questions of clarification or elaboration, on the process and the questions. In some cases, the availability of the interviewees was limited, particularly in the case of some founders who, as retirees, spend a significant portion of the year outside the region at winter residences or travelling. This was also the situation with some key informants. In these cases, interviews to collect historical firm information and participants’ recollections were combined in one session, with successive interviews. The interview protocol used is included as Appendix E.

Transcribing: Three methods of recording were used to document the interviews. Each interview was recorded using a digital recording device, notes were taken during the interview, and the interviewer supplemented these sources by recalling the interview during the data analysis process. The recorded interviews were transcribed using a combination of speech-to-text software and a trusted professional’s review, proofreading and supplementing the transcriptions. The same format was used for each transcription: interview questions were documented and the responses were reported verbatim. Each transcript was reviewed by the researcher and compared with the researcher’s recall of the interview. If discrepancies were noted, the

transcript was reviewed an additional time, using the digital recording and interview notes. Each interviewee was given the opportunity to review the transcript for accuracy and completeness. This review provided assurance of content validity.

Analysing: Condensation, categorisation, narrative, interpretation, and an ad hoc analytical approach brought meaning to the interviews. Throughout the data

collection phase, the large amounts of transcribed text were re-phrased or condensed. These re-phrased or condensed data were further coded into categories. Where context, clarification, or theoretical explanation was needed, the researcher provided narrative structuring or interpretive meaning. In addition, the analysis used an ad hoc approach to generate meaning and patterns between interviews from separate cases.

Section 3.5: Data Analysis details the interview analysis procedures used in this study and Appendix F provides an example of the coding.

Verifying: The interview findings were verified in three ways: generalisability, validity, and reliability. The interviewees were not selected at random, so it was not reasonable to try to statistically generalise the interview findings to a larger

population. Alternatively, analytic generalisation or reasoned judgment is used by a researcher to gauge the extent to which one interview applies to other comparative interviews. Validity, the degree to which the interviews actually investigate the intended reality, is addressed throughout the staged interview process. It enhances the accuracy of each single-case study and increases the construct validity of the research (Yin 2003b). The issue of reliability or consistency of the research findings is addressed continuously through the interviewing, transcribing, and analysing stages of the interview process.

Reporting: Every interview transcription was entered into the case-study database and formed the basis for each individual case-study development and for the cross- case analysis. Since all participants provided consent, both before commencing the interviews and were given the opportunity for transcript reviews, case studies acknowledge the interviewees as informants, not solely participants (Yin 2003a), disclosure of the informants is the option that is most desirable.

3.4

OtherSourcesofInformation

For each case study, more than one strategy was employed (Yin 2003b). While in- depth interviews are the primary source for gathering single-case information, other sources of evidence, from internal records, company publications, company websites, news articles, and personal observations provide more substance and verification of data to the case studies. In addition to information from the founder and successor, details were collected from a key observer in each firm. This additional information supplemented the range of content to reflect attitudes, history, behaviours,

recollections, and observations in each case study (Yin 2003b). This additional information also allowed the researcher to verify or confirm the information used in each firm’s case study. Data source triangulation confirms similar meanings under different circumstances (Stake 1995). Yin (2003b) states that using many different sources of information is a major strength of case study data collection. Before gathering data, the researcher tested this case study approach with a pilot firm. The author attempted to draw from all three sources, the open ended nature of the interview structure resulted in some participants bringing up particular observations or experiences that were not commented on by other participants in the same case. A review of the transcripts shows that some of the data that did have two or three sources was elicited by the interviewer asking the participant “Do you recall….? Can you talk about that (time or experience)?”.