Qualitative (Elite) Interviews

Interviews, as a research technique in economic development research, have a long history (see Rubin, 1988; Reese 1992) but have become more common in recent years (Leibovitz, 2003; Nelles, 2005; Gordon, 2007; Bramwell & Wolfe, 2008; Lewis & Donald, 2010 Arku, 2012a, 2012b). In keeping with recent practices, and in view of the limited research and nature of the topic under investigation, the present research study uses qualitative interviews as a method of data gathering. This is in view of the ability of qualitative interviews to align the research objectives with research goals. To ensure that interviews adequately align objectives with goals, elite interviews, as an aspect of qualitative interviews, were used.

The elite interview is one of the several ways qualitative interviews can be carried out, and, for this research in particular, the elite interview technique has been employed because of its uniqueness and ability to help achieve the goals of this study. The choice of elite interviews rather than other conventional interviews was a result of the ability of elite interviews to provide both quality and quantity responses (Clark, 1998). In addition to offering an opportunity to examine scenarios from different

dimensions, elite interviews are very efficient for generating very incisive data (Harvey, 2010).

Furthermore, despite criticisms, such as the small sample size and skewed power relations towards the participants (Richards, 1996; Harvey, 2010), the elite interview technique was chosen over the other modes of qualitative interview for this research as a result of several other frequently cited advantages. For instance, Richards (1996)

interpret documents on such areas as economic development because the elite interview can provide information beyond that which has been documented; (2) the effectiveness of elite interviews in interpreting personalities of elites, which helps in explaining the outcomes of events; (3) the ability of elite interviews to make available information that is not readily accessible by the general public through interactions with elites; and (4) the opportunities for networking and increasing the sample size, and the ability to promote understanding of research areas. Thus, elite interviews can be argued to increase understanding of the field of economic development, particularly since the 1990s when the impact of the global economic changes were strongly felt among various

municipalities. Overall, elite interviews increase understanding of the theoretical positions of the elite (Richards, 1996).

The definition of the term elite has often been met with controversy, leading many

scholars, including Smith (2006), to question the essence of defining the term elite. This

is because the term elite contextually varies within space and time (Harvey, 2010).

Richards (1996, p. 199) describes elites as “a group of individuals who hold, or have held, a privileged position in society and, as such, as far as a political scientist is concerned, are likely to have had more influence on political outcomes than general members of the public.” For this research, however, elite is operationally defined as officials with extensive knowledge and experience who occupy upper-level positions within departments of economic development. Against this backdrop, all those interviewed were either directors, deputy directors, or senior-most persons within the economic development departments of selected municipalities (see Table 3.1). These people fall into the category of what Richards (1996) Harvey (2010) called elites because

they hold privileged positions and tend to have influence on many social issues, particularly economic decisions and outcomes, as demonstrated in Table 3.1 below.

Indeed, a key consideration for choosing this group of participants for this research was their positions, knowledge, and experiences. As a result, all participants in the in-depth interviews have a long professional experience within the field of economic development, ranging from 2 years to about 30 years of experience (Table 3.1). The consideration of longevity was especially important because this research primarily focuses on the long-term views of the various participants about the evolution of economic development.

Table 3.1 Characteristics of Practitioners involved in the Research Interviewee

Code

Position Gender Years of

Experience

PLED, 1 Manager Male 10yrs

PLED, 2 Director Female About 21Yrs

PLED, 3 Economic Development Officer

Female About 15 years

PLED, 4 General Manager Male About 11 years

PLED, 5 Consultant Male 20Yrs

PLED, 6 Executive Director Male 17 years

PLED, 7 Director Female About 15 years

PLED, 8 Manager Male 2 years

PRED, 9 Coordinator of Economic Development

Female About 11 years

PLED, 10 General Manager Male 13 years

PLED, 11 Director Male 12 years

PLED, 12 Business Development Officer

Male 12Yrs

PLED, 13 Acting Director Male 15 years

PLED, 14 Director Male About 8 years

PLED, 15 Economic Development Officer

Female 12 years

PLED, 16 Director Female 20 years

PLED, 17 Director of Business Retention and Expansion

Female 4years PRED, 1 Business Development

Officer

Female 14 years PRED, 2 Manager/Consultant Female 20 years PRED, 3 Director of Economic

Strategy and Tourism

Male 30 years

Note: PLED = Practitioners of Local Economic Development; PRED = Practitioner of Regional economic Development

Also, unlike the conventional interviews, which are typically a downward dialogue, elite interviews involve an ‘upward’ dialogue and frequently take place between the researcher and a group of individuals who hold or previously held a privileged position in the municipality (Richards, 1996). As a result of the privileged positions held by elites, elites tend to be concerned with issues around them and are likely to wield more influence on deliberations and decisions than ordinary members of the municipality (Richards, 1996). In view of the influence wielded by the elites,

collaboration between the researcher and the research subjects (Smith, 2006) forms a hallmark of this study to ensure that quality data are gathered to reflect the objectives of the present research.

The elites are often very busy as a result of their work schedules, and gaining access to them could be a challenge (Harvey, 2010; Richards, 1996). Additionally, the asymmetrical power relations (Baxter & Eyles, 1997) between the researcher and the participants could also pose challenges to elite interviews. In light of these challenges and because elites hold crucial insights into organizations, Harvey (2010) argued that elite interviews need not only be flexible with the category of questions posed to participants but also be very transparent with the disclosure of the research purpose to participants. As well, elite interviews need to maintain very high standards of professionalism in order to achieve the objectives of research. To ensure that the elite interviews adequately align objectives with goals, the flexibility, transparency, and high standards of professionalism suggested by Harvey (2010), the following actions were taken.

To start with, the initial contacts by telephone calls and emails made it very easy for participants to choose preferred dates and times for interviews. Participants were again contacted a day or two prior to interviews to ensure that the agreed schedules were still convenient; otherwise, alternative arrangements were made for the interviews. All interviews were carried out as originally scheduled except for one interview for which the scheduled time had to be changed to an alternative date for that participant to attend to a pressing municipal issue. Additionally, the initial contacts clearly spelled out the

objectives. Throughout, interviews were also carried out in a very professional manner in order to elicit participants’ views about economic development approaches.

With an epistemology that is embedded in examining the perceptions of economic development practitioners, the qualitative interview essentially involved a dialogue. This dialogue was accompanied by grand tours, floating prompts, category questions, and probes that served as guidelines for conducting interviews (Gallagher, 1995). The dialogues and guidelines were used with the view of identifying emerging themes and patterns and, more importantly, establishing the rationale for those emerging patterns and trends. The key to identifying emerging themes and patterns was the category of

questions posed to respondents (Gallagher, 1995). The questions posed to local officials were directed at soliciting very informed opinions about the key themes and approaches to economic development since the 1990s.