Conducting Research via Interviews Collecting analyzing interview data

  • Slides: 29
Download presentation
Conducting Research via Interviews • Collecting & analyzing interview data – Sekaran & Saks

Conducting Research via Interviews • Collecting & analyzing interview data – Sekaran & Saks Texts • Example of structured interview – Rudermann et al article

Why conduct interviews • To form OR test hypotheses – To identify samples needed

Why conduct interviews • To form OR test hypotheses – To identify samples needed for hypothesis -testing research • To gather more detailed info – Before vs. after data collection

Issues to consider • • • Interview Participants Methods of interviewing How to increase

Issues to consider • • • Interview Participants Methods of interviewing How to increase interviewee motivation Structure of interviews Avoiding Bias Questioning Techniques

Interview Participants • Opportunity vs. Representative samples – Benefits to generalization • Benefits to

Interview Participants • Opportunity vs. Representative samples – Benefits to generalization • Benefits to having formal/informal group Leaders in org/market research – Source of ‘rich’ data – Adding credibility to study

Interview Methods • Face-Face • Telephone

Interview Methods • Face-Face • Telephone

Interview Methods • Face to face – Direct observation • Non-verbal body cues, work

Interview Methods • Face to face – Direct observation • Non-verbal body cues, work context, response to physical/visual stimuli – Cost • Time, geographic constraints, more personnel, safety

Interview Methods • Telephone – Response rate issues • Relatively higher than face-face interview

Interview Methods • Telephone – Response rate issues • Relatively higher than face-face interview – Completion rate issues – Restricts complexity & length of interview

Interviewee motivation • Interviewees perceptions of the value of research • Providing information about

Interviewee motivation • Interviewees perceptions of the value of research • Providing information about Sponsor • Rapport – Interviewer’s Listening skills & empathy • Topic & format • Setting – Work vs. non-work

Interview Structure • Unstructured • Structured

Interview Structure • Unstructured • Structured

Interview Structure • Unstructured – Uncover preliminary issues to identify variables needing further study

Interview Structure • Unstructured – Uncover preliminary issues to identify variables needing further study – Broad, open questions • Job-level and work type – Monosyllabic answers – Positive vs. negative responses – Non-cooperative interviewees – Supervisory vs. non-supervisory employees Sekaran

Interview Structure • Structured Interviews – Qs focus on relevant factors – Each P

Interview Structure • Structured Interviews – Qs focus on relevant factors – Each P asked same qs • Sometimes deviate from interview protocol to uncover new factors – Use of Visual aids & physical stimuli • Marketing, children, issues that are hard to articulate – Advantages over questionnaire – Terminating data collection Sekaran, Saks

Avoiding Bias • Sources of Interviewer bias – Lack of trust & rapport –

Avoiding Bias • Sources of Interviewer bias – Lack of trust & rapport – Mis-interpretation/distortion responses – Encouraging or discouraging certain types of responses via gestures/facial expressions – Not Listening attentively – Not Paraphrasing answers – Not Repeating/clarifying questions – Not Being tactful Sekaran

Avoiding Bias • Sources of Interviewee Bias – Not revealing true opinions/experiences – Interviewee

Avoiding Bias • Sources of Interviewee Bias – Not revealing true opinions/experiences – Interviewee says what s/he thinks interviewer wants to hear – Not understanding questions – Not liking interviewer – Giving ‘socially desirable’ responses Sekaran

Avoiding Bias • Situational bias – Reasons for non-participation • Unwillingness, inability – Different

Avoiding Bias • Situational bias – Reasons for non-participation • Unwillingness, inability – Different levels of rapport/trust across different participants/interviewers – Physical setting • Degree to which it inhibits honesty Sekaran

Questioning Techniques • Funnel technique – Sequence & Level of specificity of questions –

Questioning Techniques • Funnel technique – Sequence & Level of specificity of questions – Familiarity w/interviewee’s understanding – Contamination of responses – Perceived spontaneity, decreased selfconsciousness, rapport – Probes & follow-up qs Sekaran, Saks

Questioning Techniques • Unbiased questioning – Loaded/leading questions • Clarifying Issues – Re-stating/rephrasing •

Questioning Techniques • Unbiased questioning – Loaded/leading questions • Clarifying Issues – Re-stating/rephrasing • Helping respondent think through issues – Rephrase depending on verbalization ability Sekaran

Questioning Techniques Note Taking • Intrusiveness – Focus on summarizing – Focus on behavior

Questioning Techniques Note Taking • Intrusiveness – Focus on summarizing – Focus on behavior • Effect on self-consciousness • Effect on rapport • Permission for taping – Effects on interviewee inhibition • Take notes (or tape) after interview Saks

Conducting Research via Interviews • Collecting & analyzing interview data – Sekaran & Saks

Conducting Research via Interviews • Collecting & analyzing interview data – Sekaran & Saks Texts • Example of structured interview – Rudermann et al article

Rudermann et al Study • Benefits of non-job roles for managerial women – Hypothesis:

Rudermann et al Study • Benefits of non-job roles for managerial women – Hypothesis: Experiences in personal roles enrich managerial skills • What percentage of women mention this hypothesis in their interviews? • What percentage of all responses to interviews support this hypothesis?

Participants • 74% of women participating in a women -only leadership devel’t prg •

Participants • 74% of women participating in a women -only leadership devel’t prg • Avg. Age=40 (range=26 -57) • 92% White • Avg. Salary =~78 K (SD= ~32 k)

Participants • Rank – Middle =49%, – Upper middle =34% – Exec=17% • •

Participants • Rank – Middle =49%, – Upper middle =34% – Exec=17% • • Figure? 51% had post-graduate education 50% had children under 18 yrs 71% in committed relationships 84% in Fortune 500 corporations

Procedure • Faxed qs to participants a few days before interview • Pilot tested

Procedure • Faxed qs to participants a few days before interview • Pilot tested interview qs on 28 women managers • Tape-recorded and transcribed each interview

Measures • Open-ended questions on – Different types of roles managers held – Challenges

Measures • Open-ended questions on – Different types of roles managers held – Challenges faced in roles • Are there any dimensions/aspects of personal life that enhance your professional life? • Use of follow up qs and probes to obtain details on roles

Data Analysis • Applied grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) • Coding techniques Boyatzis

Data Analysis • Applied grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) • Coding techniques Boyatzis (1998) – Developed initial hypotheses during interviews with pilot and study 1 participants

Interview Coding • • • 2 raters read 30 interviews many times Developed excerpts

Interview Coding • • • 2 raters read 30 interviews many times Developed excerpts of each P’s answer Summarized excerpts Organized summaries & sample quotes Compared & contrasted quotes and summaries for each case to id 13 patterns & themes • Examined remaining interviews for add’l themes

Interview Coding • 13 themes reduced to 6 categories • Reviewed all excerpts to

Interview Coding • 13 themes reduced to 6 categories • Reviewed all excerpts to confirm categorization • Developed codebook explaining 6 themes – 66. 7% to 90. 9% inter-rater agreement on coding of themes • Not good according to Boyatzis, 1998

Results Non-work roles provide… Opportunities to enhance interpersonal skills Psychological benefits Emotional support &

Results Non-work roles provide… Opportunities to enhance interpersonal skills Psychological benefits Emotional support & advice % of Sample Stating 42 % Rater Agreement 90. 2 23 75. 9 19 90. 9

Discussion • Tentative support for hypothesis • Alternative ways of presenting data to support

Discussion • Tentative support for hypothesis • Alternative ways of presenting data to support hypothesis