Interviews

The second data collection method used was the interview. Qualitative interviewing, according to Fontana and Frey (2005: 698) is ‘one of the most common and powerful ways in which we try to understand our fellow humans’. This research uses a mix of two interview techniques – semi- structured and a special interview technique called interview to the double (ITTD) (Nicolini, 2009). The semi-structured interviews provide an ideal compromise between the openness of the unstructured interviews and the closed structured interviews, giving the researcher a degree of control of the flow of the interview while allowing the freedom to pursue unexpected avenues.

The semi-structured nature of the interviews provides a degree of flexibility to explore unexpected themes and narratives brought up during the interview. The open nature of interviews also allows the researcher to understand different perspective and interpretations. It is an especially useful tool to ‘understand experiences and reconstruct events in which one did not participate’ (Rubin & Rubin, 2005: 3). Furthermore, it provides

additional insights from the members of the COP of the practices that are taking place at a given time. As Rubin and Rubin (2005: 27) suggest, ‘to interpretive constructionist researchers, how people view an object or event and the meaning that they attribute to it is what is important.’ The researcher has to be sensitive to the fact that an interview is ‘not a neutral tool’ (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005: 643). The researcher’s presence and the nature of the interview must have some impact on the interviewees’ responses.

As mentioned earlier, the interviews were divided into two parts, the first being a semi-structured interview and the other being the ITTD. The interview to the double (ITTD) is used to gain further insight into the ways in which members of the COP engage in their day-to-day routines. According to Nicolini (2009: 3), ITTD is a,

‘…technique which requires interviewees to imagine they have a double who will have to replace them at their job the next day. The informant is then asked to provide the necessary detailed instructions which will ensure that the ploy is not unveiled and the double is not unmasked.’

Nicolini (2009) suggests that the ITTD method is best suited as part of a larger ethnographic study as it allows the researcher to explore the normative and moral dimensions of practice. Used along with a qualitative interview technique, it also allows the researcher to gain a sense of the routines and practices of the individuals. Furthermore, it provides a normative account of practice – ‘the local conventional idea of the “good”’ (Nicolini, 2009: 15). Practice, as Nicolini maintains, ‘always needs to be brought to the fore, it needs to be made visible, articulated, and turned into an epistemic object in order to enter discourse’ (2009: 4). The mix of methods used as a part of my ethnographic study tries to do this.

3.6.2.1 Conducting Interviews at CCTC

In all, 28 interviews were conducted with cadets and officers from different ranks each lasting between 30-120 minutes. All interviews were conducted face-to-face at the training center, usually in an empty conference room. Ten interviews were initially conducted with cadets – two from the first block, six from the second block and two from the third block. These interviews were conducted in semi-structured interview style using an interview guide developed during the pilot run in India and, subsequently, reformulated during phases of data collection to draw out emerging themes. This was helpful for interviewing the prospective officer who shared similar experiences at the training center and as cadets and ratings on board during their vessel assignments. For officers who had different learning and career experiences additional questions were added to the interview guide to draw out their on-board experiences.

The semi-structured interview provided rich information about their experiences and perspectives as insiders in the COP (See appendix B for interview sample). The first question always asked was ‘can you tell me bit about yourself?’ followed by their reasons for joining this career before delving into questions about their work practices and learning as these introductory questions put the interviewees at ease. The interviewees were asked at the beginning or during the interview if they could supplement their answers with accounts, narratives or examples from their experiences. This was not always successful but, sometimes, rich narratives were given. Trust was key to the interview process, and sometimes the interviewees would want me to reiterate that the interview was confidential. Questions of learning were asked beginning with ‘can you tell me a bit about your learning experiences on board/ at the training center?’ This question allowed me to understand the meaning they ascribed to learning and what kind of learning they thought took place. One of the problems discovered

during the initial interviews was my role as an outsider to the COP. During these initial interviews, the interviewees would not give detailed accounts using their language because they thought I would not understand the terms. Hence, efforts were taken to ask a few technical questions to make them understand I would know the terms and words used in their work processes. Usually, however, I took the role of the learner seeking to understand their world, their perspectives, understandings and their way of life.

As far as possible the interviewee’s accounts were uninterrupted apart for verbal or physical acknowledgment that I was following them. Questions or probes were asked for clarification or to redirect the interview question to a new focus. The example below demonstrates the probe:

I: And can you tell me a little bit about the experience that you had? I know that I am asking you to look quite some time back but as a cadet on board the ship, what was that like?

I15-O6: The thing about the cadet is because it is very intimidating for us when you go on the bridge. Moreover, you know, when you go there and ask for something, for help probably from officers.

I: And what was intimidating about it?

Conducting these interviews before moving onto the ITTD style also allowed me to establish at least building blocks of trust making it easier for the interviewee to understand what was required from the process.

During the ITTD I would ask interviewees to imagine that they wanted a period of 24 hours off the work clock. To this, they had created a clone of themselves; they had to give the clone a detailed idea of their daily routine, providing the clone with the information required to successfully take over tasks during the 24 hours so that the ship command and their colleagues on

board would not realize that the clone was not the actual person. This was a particularly successful technique to elicit their daily routines (see sample in Appendix B for details). It was also a good learning experience as an outsider to the COP to understand some of their work practices made explicit.

3.6.2.2 Conducting Interviews at MV Sea-Line

Over the course of the month that I spent on board MV Sea-line, I conducted 14 semi-structured interviews. The interviews lasted between 110-122 minutes; these were recorded in the Supernote app, some notes were taken during the interview, but most of the time was spent listening to the interviewee and engaging with them. As with the interviews at CCTC, care was taken to minimize interruptions during the interviews.

At this stage, the first round of analysis was done, and the interviews at this site were focused on the emergent themes that were found interesting. All members of the established community on board were interviewed, this included officers and ratings from both deck and engine departments as well as two deck cadets. Furthermore, as the practices of seafaring were being observed in-situ, ITTD interviews were not done; rather, the focus of the interviews included questions that were specific to the work practices of the ranks that were observed on site.

Similar to the interviews conducted at CCTC, the interviews began with asking the interviewees to tell me a bit about themselves, this gave the interviewees the chance to become comfortable with the interview process. Usually, this question also elicited the trajectories of the crew members before coming on board. From this starting point, the interviews focused on the work practices of the members as well as their learning processes. This included questions such as ‘Can you tell me about the work you do? Who

do you work with? What do you do?’, ‘Are there any differences between what the standards dictate and what is done on board?’ ‘When would you deviate from the rules and how do you learn to make that judgement?’ These questions were followed by probes or a small deviation from the interview guide if a new line of questioning emerged.

For interviews with the deck cadets, questions also focused on their transition from the training center to the ship. Questions focused on the similarities, and differences in practices they observed between the training center and the ship, and the learning opportunities that they experienced on board. This was done through questions such as ‘do you get the opportunity to go up to the bridge?’, ‘what do you do on the bridge?’, ‘what kind of interactions do you have with the officers and the crew?’, ‘Are there any tasks on board that you did not anticipate doing? If so, what were they and how did they make you feel?’, ‘Do you notice a change in the work you do as you gained more experience?’, ‘How did that make you feel?’, ‘How long before you felt confident in performing a new task?’ The small number of crew on board meant that if there was clarity required on any of the questions, I could ask the members during meal times or on the bridge during watch.