Following the response indicating their willingness to participate in the study,
appointments were made with each of the participants to allow adequate time for a discussion either in person or by telephone. The interview questions that were developed to address the research initiative followed a thorough review of the literature and the available documents that are part of this review, the nature of which helped to shape and influence the questions that were a part of the interview discussion. Questions were tested in a mock interview with an academic researcher who agreed to assist in testing the effectiveness of the script and the probes, making certain the time requirement for the interview did not exceed what had been asked of participants in the initial email.
Participants were asked both structured and open-ended questions following the format that was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of North Carolina (IRB). The questions were primarily designed to facilitate an open dialogue and encourage the participant to reflect on his or her own experiences and how these experiences affected his or her work. It was anticipated that the questions would provide the researcher with an overview of organizational practices (both successful and unsuccessful), effective strategies for negotiating partnerships and information regarding perceived barriers, pitfalls and problematic issues. Appendix B contains the general script for the questions that were asked of interviewees.
A total of 57 semi-structured interviews were conducted with informants reflecting a diversity of knowledge, backgrounds and perspectives across academic and industry groups.
Interviews were conducted by telephone and in person between September 2, 2012 and January 29, 2014 and ranged from 32 to 71minutes, with an average of 43 minutes.
At the beginning of the session, participants were read the consent form and asked to give verbal consent prior to the beginning of the interview. Participants were informed that their responses to the interview questions would remain confidential unless they provided their written consent to have comments directly attributed to them. They were also informed that if they had specific concerns about a topic and they did not grant permission for
attribution of statements, then the confidentiality of the data would be maintained by the removal of any identifiable information from the interview records. All informants gave permission to digitally record the interview session.
Participants were informed of the additional privacy procedures which were implemented:
1. The researcher was the only person who had access to information that associates the individual participants and the interview information.
2. All participants were asked for permission before information in the final research report was attributed to them.
3. All interview records were stored electronically and in password protected files on the researcher’s personal laptop computer.
4. Participants were audio recorded only after providing consent at the beginning of the interview session. Participants also were informed that these audio recordings were to be transcribed and that the digital files were to be destroyed upon transcription.
5. Interview notes were digitally recorded for the purpose of inscription and analysis. Detailed interview notes were taken by the investigator. At the conclusion of each interview, notes were transcribed and compared to the audiotape recording for verification.
6. Any transcriptions or other hard copies of information from the interviews that could be linked to individual responses were kept in a locked desk drawer in the
researcher’s office, which was also kept locked.
Interview questions were primarily open-ended and were developed with an approach to social constructionism in mind, which holds that meaning is created not by individual cognitive processes but as part of a social exchange. The questions were designed to understand the experiences from the point of view of those who live them and participants’ responses are a reflection of their social context within a specific community (Crotty, 1998, 52).
All of the interview sessions were conducted by the researcher. During the interview session, the researcher wrote informal memorandums which were later used to validate the audio recordings of the interviews. In order to address concerns of reliability, sessions were digitally recorded using two separate recording devices. To assure a high level of accuracy, interviews were recorded verbatim. After the interviews sessions were completed, audio recordings were transcribed, printed and checked for accuracy by the researcher. Each informant was assigned an alphanumeric code in ensure confidentiality and to ensure that specific comments could not be linked to the data (See Appendix D). The printed interview and interview notes were put in a notebook, which was kept in a locked desk drawer in the researcher’s office. After the recordings were transcribed, they were erased from both
recording devices. Any potentially identifying information was redacted from the printed transcripts.
All of the informants were receptive to the interview and candidly answered all of the questions addressed to them. They were equally willing to share in a discussion of the issues addressed in this research project and to share their ideas about their personal experiences and their ideas for potential improvement in the development of strategic partnerships. The data that were collected during these interviews contained both depth and richness.
Although the experiences and backgrounds of the informants were diverse, similar themes were recognized and theoretical saturation (Glasser and Strauss, 1967, 112) was achieved through the process of conducting the interviews, which enabled the interviewer to note the prevalence of dominant themes and concepts.
At the conclusion of the interview session, participants were advised that they may be asked for follow-up information or clarification after the initial interview was completed.