Semi-Structured In-Depth Interviews (Stage Two)

The second stage of data collection took place during the researcher’s participation in the Hajj. Namely, he joined the Hajj as a pilgrim/researcher in August-September 2016.

It should be noted that he had undertaken the Hajj on twice previously; hence the principal purpose on this occasion was to undertake the empirical research for this thesis.

Initially, the researcher intended to interview both domestic and international pilgrims.

However, during stage two, not only it was found that domestic Saudi pilgrims were unwilling to discuss the Hajj, but also certain barriers existed:

i. A language barrier;

ii. Domestic pilgrims did not wish to speak about the Hajj owing to religious sensitivities;

iii. For political reasons, talking about the Hajj could be potentially dangerous;

iv. They did not wish to talk about Saudi government’s role in the commodification of Hajj

143

Nevertheless, some Saudi domestic pilgrims did agree to be interviewed but withdrew as soon as serious / contentious issues arose. For example, a Professor from Madinah University was approached for interview but the moment the discussion turned to serious issues the respondent became silent and made a sign with his hand to say ‘it is better to zip the lips’.

It should also be noted that the domestic market accounts for just 30% of the Hajj, the remaining 70% of pilgrims comprising non-Saudis (Statista, 2017). Hence, the

exclusion of the domestic pilgrims, though potentially losing a potentially interesting perspective, would have limited impacts on the overall outcomes of the research.

At this stage, the principal data collection method was semi-structured in-depth interviews; as Saunders (2003) argues, semi-structured interviews provide the

researcher with flexibility in the interview process, allowing the sequence of questions to be varied and emergent issues to be followed and discussed. The use of semi-structured interviews is particularly appropriate in context such as this study, where the researcher has a list of questions and themes to be covered; semi-structured

interviews permit these questions and themes to be varied from interview to interview or from participant to participant. That is, the researcher has an option to change, ignore or alter the sequence of the questions during interviews to reflect the

background and role of particular participants. Conversely, extra questions might be required to pursue themes that emerged in the interview (Saunders, 2003: 246-247).

In essence, semi-structured interviews are used in qualitative research not to only identify and understand the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ but also out emphasis on answering the question ‘why’.

In the case of this study, semi-structured interviews were deemed the most appropriate method given both the flexibility they provided in the context of recruiting and

interviewing participants in the Hajj and, more generally, for proving ‘new insight’

(Robson, 2002: 59) within what is essentially an exploratory study. They were employed in order to explore critically the extent to which the contemporary commodification of the holy destination and ritual of the Hajj is transforming the pilgrim’s experience from one mainly spiritual to one more touristic, considering not only if and to what extent but, importantly, why.

The interviews were all undertaken on a one-to-one, face-to-face basis. In order to effectively elicit respondents’ phenomenological understanding of their experiences of the Hajj (and to access a broad spectrum of pilgrims) it was necessary for interviews to

144

be undertaken during the Hajj itself. This, in turn, necessitated travel to different places in Saudi Arabia (Mecca, Madinah and Jeddah) and to different religious areas of Hajj (Mecca, the Fields of Arafat, Muzdelifa, Mina, Miqat, and Bridges of Devils,

Slaughterhouse) to interview a number of participants. This presented sometimes a number of challenges, not least the high temperatures which, on occasion, reached 47C to 49C.

The semi-structured interviews facilitated the construction an image of each

respondent and their background and the development of a deeper understanding of their thought processes. Five pilot interviews were initially undertaken in order to identify any potential difficulties with the flow or interpretation of questions and themes although, with the semi-structured approach, each conversation is unique and, hence, it is difficult to pre-assess or preordain the flow and exact content of the conversation.

Equally, some participants were members of the researcher’s Hajj group and so there already existed was some degree of familiarity and awareness of the themes. In these cases, it was possible for the interview to more quickly onto core themes relevant to the research and for the conversation to be more subtlety directed.

More generally, interviews commenced with broad questions exploring the significance of the Hajj to the respondents and whether they had previously undertaken it. If so, the opportunity existed to explore comparisons between the current and past experiences of the event and any changes that had occurred. The conversation was then typically directed towards the respondents’ current experiences of Hajj, broadly seeking to identify and explore their understanding and behaviours in relation to the

commodification of the Hajj. As the conversation developed, respondents were also encouraged to reveal more about the emotional and spiritual feelings associated with Mecca and Hajj. This progression, from general conversation to more specific dialogue, eased the interviewee into the exchange and diminished any feelings of nervousness.

Moreover, as already noted, in semi-structured interviews the investigator cannot

‘slavishly follow a schedule’ (Bryman & Bell, 2002:477), something that became evident as the interviews proceeded; it was necessary to maintain a structure but with

adequate elasticity (Legard, Keegan & Ward, 2003) to develop a relationship with respondents as a basis for them discussing and revealing their ‘true’ feelings and experiences (Weinberg, 2002).

During the Hajj, a total of seventy interviews were conducted; of these, fifty-eight were selected for analysis, the remaining twelve being discarded because of either technical problems with the recorder, too much background noise in the background, or

145

interviewees having to leave during the interview having been summoned by their group leaders or families.

The selection of participants was undertaken through personal connections, and random and snowballing sampling strategies, as follows:

 Some participants were recruited from the researcher’s Hajj group.

 Through the Hajj group members’ social connections.

 Following up the researcher’s Hajj tour guide and agent social contacts.

 Visiting the University of Madinah and the Umm al-Qura University of Mecca;

staff and students at both universities recommend pilgrims they knew.

 Visiting Grand Mosques and their libraries.

 Visiting the tents of pilgrims from different countries (both developed and developing countries) in the field of Mina, Arafat and Muzdalifah.

 Through personal contacts working in the Mecca and Madinah in the hospitality and tourism sector.

 Randomly approaching pilgrims on the road, in the Grand Mosques after and before prayers.

 Visiting Mecca and Madinah museums.

 Visiting hotels, from guest house to five-star establishment.

 Attending religious lectures.

Among fifty-eight respondents, two were hoteliers from Mecca and Madinah, one was working for Saudi Railway and one was working in Saudi Telecom sector. A further three were the Hajj tour operators from both developing and developed countries and performing Hajj as pilgrims. The remaining fifty-one respondents were pilgrims of different ethnicity, gender; age and nationality (see Table 5.1).

146 Table 5.1: Interview respondents: details

Respondent (R)

Gender Male/

Female

Approx. Age Nationality Occupation Previous Number of

All fifty-eight interviews were recorded with the consent of respondents with a digital voice recorder, used as unobtrusively as possible. Most interviews lasted up to fifty minutes and, as recommended by Taylor and Bogdan (1998). However, the shortest

147

interview was thirty-five minutes and the longest interview was one hour and twenty minutes. Interviews were transcribed by the investigator as soon after the interview as possible to confirm that the finesses of discussion and gradations of speech were fresh in my notice and facts were not be forgotten (Legard, Keegan & Ward, 2003).

Transcription was a time-consuming process, each interview typically taking eight to twelve hours to transcribe. All interviews were transcribed word for word with no linguistic or syntax alterations. Transcriptions, with any summaries or notes, were then examined in conjunction with the statistics collected throughout additional interviews to detect themes, subjects and classifications.