Realist Interviews Phenomenological
Interviews Social Constructionist Interviews Po si ti on /Role of rese arc h er
Neutral: The interviewer is an ‘invisible’ agent in the gathering of information from interviewees.
Aware: The interviewer is alert to the impact of their own presuppositions which could influence the
research process.
Involved: The researcher is positioned to pursue and follow links and developments throughout the research process. The direction of the research hinges on the reflexivity of the researcher.
Phen
om
ena
The responses of interviewees mirror the external world.
Phenomena and experiences stand on a one to one relationship with the responses of interviewees.
Awareness that the
context of an interview can influence responses.
The construction of
phenomena is not bound by their physical existence; the relationship between
discourse and context actively construct the material of research. Typi cal Methodol og ic al Appr oac h Structured Interviews to accommodate comparisons. Semi-structured to pursue salient themes and to seek clarity where required.
Semi-structured or un- structured; lending flexibility for interviewees to interpret and explain their experiences in an overt interview context. (Author)
Table 3.2 gives a generalised cross-section of the relationships between research epistemology and within-method research choices. The
91 objective here is not to neatly categorize each epistemological position into the appropriate methodological box, far from it. As King (2004; 12) writes:
“[this] can only provide an outline of some of the main types [of qualitative research interview], highlighting their key methodological features and epistemological assumptions.”
This exercise in general categories enables a degree of situating this piece of research relative to the research methods and perspectives available.
Realist interviews were deemed inappropriate for this research given the lack of depth they were able to produce in the anticipated time-frame for data collection and that the social processes of technology and organization are being investigated. A realist epistemological position would assume that the responses of interviewees all refer to the same phenomena and thus enable direct comparison without any difficulty. For example, if asked “does the introduction of new technology make your job easier?” it is maintained that the constructs ‘new technology’, ‘job’ and ‘easier’ are all equivocal for interviewer, interviewee and everyone concerned with the organization.
92 Phenomenological interviews lend a different perspective on this qualitative method of data collection. The central tenet to this perspective is “…for the researcher to consciously set aside his or her presuppositions about the phenomenon under investigation – a process sometimes referred to as ‘bracketing’. This, of course, means that the researcher must reflect on the presuppositions he or she holds, and remains alert to how they may colour every stage of the research process” (King, 2004; 13). This perspective goes beyond that of the realist interview by making the interviewer ‘visible’ in the research process; it is acknowledged that the data produced from interviews is contingent not only on the responses given, but also the interviewer and ‘artificial’ context of the interview itself. The interviewer is required to be reflexive and conscious of the influence they possess to translate responses according to their own definitions and assumptions. In addition to this, the interviewer must be sensitive to the fact that interviewees are being asked to discuss concepts that are outside of their point of origin.
Social constructionist interviews are predicated on the constructive nature of language, where phenomena are constituted through the process of discourse (King, 2004). The process of conducting an interview within this perspective yields insight not into the direct relationship between interviewee and phenomena as in realist research, but produces a text from which interpretations can be made. Generally,
93 semi- and un-structured interview methods are used for data collection as these afford the greatest flexibility for the researcher to probe themes where more depth or explanation is needed. One of the disadvantages of more unstructured interviews is the sheer quantity of data produced (Dick, 2004) this would need to be accommodated for in the analysis of such data. The typologies presented in table 3.2 above also indicate that it is useful for the researcher to be involved with the subject of study to fully appreciate the nuances and particularities that can only be reached through direct involvement. This makes social constructionist interviews less practical, for pragmatic rather than methodological reasons. In a fixed-term research project it is extremely difficult for the researcher to establish the involvement and embedded status within a case organization. In addition to the constraint of time, the constraint of not being in a position to join an organization and achieve a position where research could be conducted from is also unlikely. For these reasons an approach based on ‘phenomenological interviews’ will be used in this research, as this accommodates empirical investigation of the research questions from a critical realist philosophical position, and contributes towards a multi-method qualitative case study research design.
For this research semi-structured interviews, similar to King’s (2004) outline of ‘phenomenological interviews’, have been selected as an appropriate method for generating the necessary quality of data required. This study is predicated on the collection of rich qualitative
94 data. At the same time the data needs to be directed towards the concepts and themes developed in the theoretical framework. Towards this balance of investigative flexibility and empirical focus, semi- structured interviews provide the necessary avenue to collecting this kind of research data.
The use of an interview guide to specify topics helps to furnish the researcher with a broad structure whilst at the same time provide scope for response on the part of the interviewee (Bryman and Bell, 2003). The authors also point to the in-built flexibility of changing the order of questions and also adding questions as the interview progresses. Themes can be pursued by the interviewer allowing greater probing of events and phenomena than would otherwise be afforded by more structured collection methods.
The use of themes in interviews is designed to prompt relevant data and allow for sufficient flexibility for informants to respond; the themes will be in place as a means of focus not a means of bounding discussion or information. The use of semi-structured interview is appropriate as it affords a good level of flexibility needed in generating in-depth qualitative data. Simultaneously the use of a research guide assists the researcher to gain “a loose pattern of agreement with the interviewee about the context of enquiry” (Spender, 1989; 79).
95 In the case of Hawkwindshire County Council, the interview guide was divided up into three main thematic sections in relation to the technology in question; the informant, the organization and the technology. The division into these three themes is only an analytical distinction which is designed to encourage informants to reflect on themselves, their organization and the technologies they use. The themes provide scope for each informant to explore and detail their experiences in a more focused way than asking even broader questions where responses are likely to become confused where themes are not anchored sufficiently to their experiences.
In the case of Nottingham East Midlands Airport, a similar but simpler interview guide was used. Because the informants interviewed were not all from the same organization (parent or subsidiary firm), greater emphasis needed to be placed upon the choice, development and implementation of the CUSS technology. Table 2 in the appendix section lists the range of informants and the organizations they work for. The themes used in the guide started with the informant, then CUSS kiosk technology and then concluded with examining organizational and inter- organizational facets of implementing the new kiosks.
96
Triangulation
The choice of data collection lends itself to triangulation as multiple data collection methods are employed. The value of triangulation is derived either within-method to verify reliability or between-method to test external validity (Jick, 1979). Triangulation in the context of this research concerns what Jick (ibid; 603) terms “holistic”. As the literature review indicated, the effects of technological change are understood both as events within organizations and as part of their broader institutional arrangements as part of sociotechnical constituencies. To capture this kind of change involves eliciting data which would otherwise be left unobserved through single method research design and within-method triangulation. Through ‘holistic’ triangulation “...elements of the context are illuminated. In this sense, triangulation may be used not only to examine the same phenomenon from multiple perspectives but also to enrich our understanding by allowing for new or deeper dimensions to emerge” (Jick, 1979; 603-4).
By using a combination of observational, interview and documentary data collection methods, the weaknesses of each are partly countered by the comparison of data from the other. For example, the researcher- centric nature of observational accounts is partly countered by interview data as its origins lie outside of the immediate control of the researcher.
97 Equally, data from observation and documentary sources can be employed to substantiate meaning during the interview process.