Interviews

Interviews were the main source for the data collected during the research. The interviews served as an important means for examining participant interpretation in the cases being studied (Bake & Edwards, 2012; Curato, 2012; Kvale, 1994; McCoyd & Kerson, 2006). They took the form of semi-structured interviews, which suited the exploratory nature of the research (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). As argued by Neuman (2006), semi-structured interviews can facilitate the emergence of constructs from participants’ experience with less intervention by the researcher. They are also more flexible, with the researcher having more opportunities for follow-up questions compared with other methods (Silverman, 2010). In addition, as noted by Yin (2003), semi-structured interviews are able to provide sufficient structure and direction to the interview process without reducing the advantages of open and flowing discussion.

The interviews involved a broad range of local elites exercising a major influence on intergovernmental financial allocation and expenditures. The decision was made to focus on this particular group of interviewees—who are regarded as influential, prominent and well-informed—in order to obtain rich and valid data sources. With their expertise and knowledge in areas relevant to the research, and because of the positions they hold in social, political, financial or administrative realms, the interviewees provided rich and valuable information.

An interview protocol (refer to Appendix 2) was prepared prior to the interviews, as suggested by Cresswell (1998) and Yin (2003). The protocol aimed to provide guidelines for both researcher and participants regarding questions asked related to

68

the issues being studied. The interviews were recorded with a tape recorder after obtaining consent from all participants. The interviews, which as indicated above provided the primary data collected for the research, lasted for between 45 minutes and one hour.

The interviews were conducted in Indonesian and recorded using digital voice recorder. This equipment proved very effective in capturing all parts of the interview and was very helpful in the interview storage process. The reason for conducting the interviews in Indonesian was due to participants’ limited understanding of English and using the Indonesian language encouraged participants to express their opinions freely.

The in-depth interviews involved 36 participants—six more than the planned 30 participants. This decision was taken when it became clear that more information was needed. The participants were selected using purposive sampling, based on their position and expertise. They were drawn from senior officials, public figures, leaders of organisations and politicians.

The interviews were conducted in different locations depending on the participants’ preferences. Most of the formal interviews took place at government offices, while informal interviews took place in the participants’ houses or restaurants as determined by the respondents. Informal interviews were intended to gain more contextual information that was not revealed in formal interviews. Informal interviews brought me and the participants into closer personal contact, which encouraged the development of greater trust and confidence—critical preconditions for eliciting the kind of information needed for the research. This helped me obtain greater insight into how patronage politics was ‘played out’ by the local elites. The list of participants and interview dates are presented in Table 3.2 below:

69

Table 3.2 The List of Participants

No. Name Initial Positions Date of

Interview

1. Jufri Yasin JYN Head of Family Planning Agency May 2011

2. Mukmin Faisyal MFL Chairman of regional parliament (DPRD) May 2011 3. Zain Taufiq ZTQ Chairman of the faction of PAN party May 2011 4. Hadi Mulyadi HMI Vice-Chairman of regional parliament May 2011

5. Ali Fitri Noor AFN Head of Bappeda Samarinda May 2011

6. Carolus Tuah CTH Director of ‘POKJA 30’ May 2011

7. Rusman Yakub RYB Chairman of Commission II May 2011

8. Dahri Yasin DYN Chairman of Commission I May 2011

9. Zainal Haq ZHQ Chairman of the faction of PKS party May 2011 10. Darlis Pattalongi DPL Chairman of Commission III May 2011

11. Yunus Nusi YNI Chairman of KNPI May 2011

12. Alimuddin ALI Head of local customary (KKSS) May 2011 13. Rusmadi RUS Head of Bappeda of East Kalimantan May 2011 14. Salman SAL Head Division of Infrastructure of

Bappeda

May 2011

15. Sukisno KIS Vice Rector IV of Mulawarman University May 2011 16. Aji Sofyan AJI Academic of Mulawarman University May 2011

17. Aswin ASW Governor Assistant IV June 2011

18. Faturrahman FRM Governor Assistant I June 2011

19. M. Sabani SYA Governor Assistant II June 2011

20. Zamruddin Hazid JHD Rector of Mulawarman University June 2011 21. Irwan Rosyadi MIR Journalist of SCTV Samarinda June 2011 22. Irianto Lambrie ILE Provincial Secretary (Chairman of

Executive Budget Committee)

June 2011

23. Toto TTO Head of Bappeda Kutai Kartanegara June 2011

24. Musyahrin MUS Head of Education Department June 2011

25. Ismail ISM Chairman of faction PDK party June 2011

26. Nusyirwan Ismail NUS Vice-Mayor of Samarinda June 2011

27. Soeratman SUR Chairman of Muhammadiyah June 2011

28. Rosyid ROS Chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) June 2011 29. Awang Faroek

Ishak AFI

Governor of East Kalimantan June 2011

30. Marten Apuy MAY Vice-Chairman of regional parliament June 2011

31. Wibowo BWO

Commissioner of PT. Sagabofa Catur Manunggal and member of East Kalimantan Parliament

June 2011

32. Tri Murti Rahayu TRI Head of Division of Apparatus and governance, Bappeda

June 2011

33. Pinsen PIN Vice head of mining department June 2011

34. Hamdani HMD Secretary of Gepak Kaltim June 2011

35. Hazairin Adha HAZ Head of local revenue June 2011

70

Within the body of the thesis, the individuals listed above are not named as the source of information. Interviewee statements are often quoted verbatim, but the person providing the information is not identified. Instead, anonymous codes are used according to the sphere of activity of the interviewee: government, political, social, ethnic, religious or business.

Each interview was reviewed before commencing the next interview to develop an early understanding and early coding of the phenomena. During this stage, a number of notes were made on the transcripts and documents, as well as personal researcher journal notes. The results of interviews were then transcribed in written form and shown to the participants to verify the accuracy of the transcript of interview. Finally, the primary tapes were erased as stated in the case protocol, but with the interviews transferred to my computer. The informal interviews conducted to gain further valuable insights (Galliers & Huang, 2012) followed Turner’s suggestion of a ‘spontaneous generation of questions in a natural interaction’ (Turner, 2010). These were carried out at convenient times, for example, during lunch times, coffee breaks, follow-up telephone interviews, and email communication.