The qualitative interview in IS research: Examining the craft
Introduction
The qualitative interview is used in qualitative research of all kinds, whether positivist, interpretive or critical. It is used in case studies, in action research, in grounded theory studies, and in ethnographies (Hesse-Biber and Levy, 2006, Klein and Myers, 1999, Myers, 1997, Myers, 1999, Northcutt and McCoy, 2004). Rubin and Rubin (2005) say that qualitative interviews are like night goggles, “permitting us to see that which is not ordinarily on view and examine that which is looked at but seldom seen” (Rubin & Rubin, 2005, p. vii). The qualitative interview is the most common and one of the most important data gathering tools in qualitative research.
What we find rather surprising, however, is the fact that the qualitative interview is treated as unproblematic in the IS research literature and in many PhD programs. The qualitative interview is essentially taken for granted and seen as a relatively straightforward means of gathering data. Most IS research articles that report on the use of interviews simply state how many interviews were conducted, who conducted them, and who the interviewees were. It is an unexamined craft.
We suggest that the qualitative interview is not as straightforward as it appears at first sight. The qualitative interview is an excellent means of gathering data, but it fraught with difficulties. These difficulties, problems and pitfalls are often ignored in the final write-up of the research.
For example, the interview is a very artificial situation – it usually involves a researcher talking to someone who is a complete stranger. The researcher is essentially asking the interviewee to answer (or to create an answer), often under time pressure. The researcher is also intrusive – the interviewer intrudes upon the social setting and potentially interferes with peoples’ behaviour. It is also possible for interviews to “go wrong” (Hermanns, 2004). Although there has been some discussion of the difficulties and problems of the qualitative interview in the social science literature (e.g. Kvale, 1987, Kvale, 1996, Mason, 2002, Rubin and Rubin, 2005, Silverman, 2000), there has been very little discussion of these in the IS research literature.
The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to discuss the features, potential problems and pitfalls of the qualitative interview in IS research, and to suggest how these difficulties and problems might be addressed. We propose a model of the qualitative interview where the interview is seen as a drama. The dramaturgical model has been suggested by Hermanns (2004) and others and builds on Goffman’s seminal work on social life more generally (Goffman, 1959, Goffman, 1961). From this model we also derive a set of guidelines for those wishing to use the qualitative interview in their research. We evaluate a set of articles selected from four of the premier research journals in information systems in the light of our proposed guidelines.
The paper is organised as follows. In Section 2 we review the state of the art in qualitative interviewing. Here we explore the major features, problems and pitfalls of the qualitative interview and provide an overview of current interview practices in IS research. In Section 3 we propose a dramaturgical model of the qualitative interview. In Section 4 we provide recommendations for the conduct of the qualitative interview. In Section 5 we revisit current interview practices in IS research in the light of the recommendations. Section 6 evaluates the usefulness of dramaturgical model. The final section is the conclusion.
Section snippets
Types of qualitative interviews
There are various types of qualitative interviews (Fontana & Frey, 2000). Some of these are as follows:
- (a)
Structured interview. In a structured interview there is a complete script that is prepared beforehand. There is no room for improvisation. These types of interviews are often used in surveys where the interviews are not necessarily conducted by the researcher.
- (b)
Unstructured or semi-structured interview. In an unstructured or semi-structured interview there is an incomplete script. The
The dramaturgical model
Erving Goffman developed a general theory of face-to-face interaction, a theory that can be used to interpret any social exchange. This theory uses the metaphor of the theatre to explore social life (Goffman, 1959, Goffman, 1961, Manning, 1992). Social interactions are seen as a drama where there are actors (individuals and groups) who perform on a stage (a variety of settings and social situations) using a script (norms, rituals, expectations of how one should behave). During the performance,
Recommendations for qualitative interviewing
Using the dramaturgical model of the qualitative interview explained in Section 3, we derive seven guidelines for qualitative interviewing. These guidelines are depicted graphically in Fig. 1. The model presupposes that the interview is a drama, and therefore interviewers should prepare themselves with that in mind. In other words, they should aim for an excellent performance.
Our suggested guidelines for the researcher/interviewer are as follows:
- 1.
Situating the researcher as actor. Assuming that
Re-visiting the interview in IS research
Earlier we noted that there was a general lack of reporting in the four major IS research journals that we examined and where details were reported there was a large variety of reporting practices. In this part of the paper we take the same articles from the four journals but this time we benchmark them according to the seven guidelines that we identified above. Our findings are presented in Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, which shows many boxes where we had to use the “Not reported”
Evaluating the dramaturgical model
We believe that the dramaturgical model may help qualitative IS researchers to address some of the potential problems and pitfalls of the qualitative interview in IS research. The model focuses the mind on the aim of the qualitative interview, which is fuller disclosure and to discover “their world in their own words.” The guidelines encourage openness and improvisation. They should help to ensure that researchers do not close down the conversation prematurely.
However, we acknowledge that there
Conclusion
The qualitative interview is a powerful research tool. It is an excellent means of gathering data, and has been used extensively in IS research. Until now, however, the qualitative interview has been a largely unexamined craft. In our review of current practices in IS research, we found a general lack of reporting about the interview process and considerable variety in those that did report. We find this surprising, given that we chose four of the best journals in the field. The interview
References (44)
- et al.
Panoptic empowerment and reflective conformity in enterprise systems-enabled organizations
Information and Organization
(2005) - et al.
Participation in groupware-mediated communities of practice: a sociopolitical analysis of knowledge working
Information and Organization
(2001) - et al.
Some political and cultural issues in the globalization of software development: case experience from Britain and India
Information and Organization
(2001) - et al.
Embedded knowledge and offshore software development
Information and Organization
(2004) Organizational hierarchy adaptation and information technology
Information and Organization
(2002)- et al.
Work outcomes and job design for contract versus permanent information systems professionals on software development teams
MIS Quarterly
(2001) - et al.
Understanding user responses to information technology: a coping model of user adaptation
MIS Quarterly
(2005) - et al.
Getting in, getting on, getting out, and getting back
- et al.
Portfolios of control in outsourced software development projects
Information Systems Research
(2003) - et al.
Mechanisms for producing a working knowledge: enacting, orchestrating and organizing
Information and Organization
(2003)