Interview questions

The interview questions for this study were defined from the key issues that emerged from the literature review, which was presented in chapter two and three. To maintain a clear overview, the questions were developed around the three research questions and in accordance with a semi-structured approach to interviewing. They consisted of two parts: an interview guide containing open questions seeking to explore survivors’

experience of downsizing survival (see Appendix B) and a form sheet with factual

questions aimed to collect basic demographic information from survivors, such as their age range or their nationality (see Appendix C).

The interview guide itself also consisted of two sections. The first section dealt with a set of introductory questions in order to find out where, when and how many times survivors had experienced organizational downsizing. The second section contained questions on revealing survivors’ actual personal experiences. This section constituted the main body of the interview guide and was further subdivided into four sub-sections (A, B, C and D). Each sub-section thereby consisted of a set of distinctive interview questions, which were developed around the respective research question and could be asked individually in the course of the interview.

The first sub-section (A) contains interview questions which were developed around the first research question devoted to obtaining an understanding of survivors’

reactions in the aftermath of downsizing. In line with the qualitative research approach of this study the first question invited survivors to provide a description of their experience post-downsizing. Depending on the comprehension and content of their story of survival, follow-up questions, which focused for instance on positive or negative experiences or on the influence of these experiences on their reactions could be asked additionally in order to gain more information about a relevant aspect. This allowed the researcher not only to explore survivors’ reactions but also to gain insight about the factors which caused these reactions (Amundson et al., 2004).

The second sub-section (B) comprises interview questions which were designed around the second research question and were concerned with the longitudinal effects of downsizing on survivors. This included questions aimed to find out if and how

survivors’ reactions changed over time in the period post-downsizing. Additional questions were prepared to obtain a deeper understanding of influential factors which may have influenced their feelings in particular ways. Moreover, efforts were made to find out how long it took until survivors perceived a change in their reactions and if previous downsizings had any influence on how they perceived more recent ones. This was crucial for the study, as this could reveal the toxic side-effects of organizational downsizing, which remain in an individual’s head even over some years (Noer, 2009).

Sub-section C consisted of interview questions which were developed around the third research question and aimed at collecting information about management action in the time after downsizing. As the management plays a central role in downsized organizations (e.g. Reinardy, 2010), questions were focused on exploring how the management handled the downsizing and in particular, if survivors received any kind of support from them. Moreover, follow-up questions were aimed at discovering survivors’ expectations in terms of support or improvements, which may have made the situation more comfortable for them.

Questions in sub-section D were asked only to those survivors who were also responsible for managing survivors. Thus, it was sought not only to reveal the criticism they may express with regard to the behaviour of their immediate managers, but also to uncover how they managed survivors themselves. Questions were in particular aimed at discovering their experience in managing survivors and to explore if they had provided survivors with any kind of support. Follow-up questions were designed to find out if those managing survivors perceived their task as challenging and if they received additional advice or help in managing their surviving workforce.

To provide survivors with the opportunity to address topics or themes which were not mentioned in the course of the interview, the interview guide concluded with a last question asking them about anything else they wanted to share with the researcher.

This ensured that additional phenomena which were not addressed or missed in previous literature were explored (King and Horrocks, 2010). Many of the participants used this opportunity to reflect again on their experience and to summarise the positive and the negative things which they had reported in the course of the interview.

Moreover, they mentioned additional expectations and concerns with regard to their employer, but also associated to their personal life and career perspective.

After completing the interview guide, it was discussed with both supervisors in order to receive feedback with regard to the guide’s structure and the appropriateness of the questions (King and Horrocks, 2010). Following a detailed discussion and a few minor modifications, the interview guide was adopted into the form used for the pilot studies.

Due to the bi-lingual composition of the set of participants, the interview questions were prepared in both the English and German language. In both cases, however, they were proof read by native speakers to ensure correct grammar, spelling and meaning of the content.