The Qualitative Approach Interview in Administration: A Guide for Researchers

Cheron, Cibele; Salvagni, Julice; Colomby, Renato Koch

doi:10.1590/1982-7849rac2022210011.en

Cibele Cheron

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Escola de Humanidades, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Educação, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3501-5248

Julice Salvagni ^** Corresponding Author

Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Escola de Administração, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6334-0649

Renato Koch Colomby

Instituto Federal de Educação Ciência e Tecnologia do Paraná, Colegiado de Administração, Palmas, PR, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5013-6913

* Corresponding Author

Editors-in-chief:

Wesley Mendes-da-Silva (Fundação Getulio Vargas, EAESP, Brazil)

Marcelo de Souza Bispo (Universidade Federal da Paraíba, PPGA, Brazil)

Guest Editors:

Evelyn Lanka (Cranfield School of Management, United Kingdom)

Sanjay Lanka (Fundação Getulio Vargas, EAESP, Brazil)

Ali Rostron (University of Liverpool, United Kingdom)

Pallavi Singh (Sheffield Hallam University, United Kingdom)

Reviewers:

Three reviewers chose not to disclose their identities.

Authorship

Cibele Cheron

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Escola de Humanidades, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Educação

Av. Ipiranga, n. 6681, Jardim Botânico, 90610-001, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

E-mail: iccibele@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3501-5248

Julice Salvagni*

Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Escola de Administração

Rua Washington Luiz, n. 855, Centro Histórico, 90010-460, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

E-mail: julicesalvagni@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6334-0649

Renato Koch Colomby

Instituto Federal de Educação Ciência e Tecnologia do Paraná, Colegiado de Administração

Av. Bento Munhoz da Rocha Neto, s/nº, PRT-280, Trevo da Codapar, 85555-000, Palmas, PR, Brazil

E-mail: renato.colomby@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5013-6913

Conflict of Interests

The authors have stated that there is no conflict of interest.

Authors' Contributions

1^st author: conceptualization (equal); investigation (equal); methodology (equal); writing - original draft (lead); writing - review & editing (equal).

2^nd author: conceptualization (equal); investigation (equal); methodology (equal); writing - original draft (supporting); writing - review & editing (equal).

3^rd author: conceptualization (equal); formal analysis (supporting); methodology (supporting); supervision (supporting); writing - review & editing (equal).

Relevant factor	Description
Proper structuring	Know the subject discussed in the interview well enough to conduct the conversation properly and with qualified guidance.
	Develop methodologically congruent instruments to address the topic in focus.
	Properly use the terminology related to the topic addressed, to be well understood by the participants.
	Allow participants to understand the stages at which the interview will take place.
	Enable participants to respond in their own way and time.
Appropriate development	Be empathetic and sensitive to understand what is expressed by the participants, either verbally or non-verbally.
	Be aware of some interview aspects that may be more meaningful or sensitive to the participants.
	Keep the focus on the topic addressed, bringing the conversation back to it whenever necessary.
	Check the reliability, validity, and consistency of the information produced during the conversation, through questions or strategic interlocutions.
	Be able to recap the participants’ previous statements about the topic addressed or pertinent to the conversation.
	Clarify, with the participants, the senses and meanings they mention during the conversation, taking care not to induce the answers.
Adequate analysis of the information produced	Be aware that the information produced is the result of an intersubjective social interaction, remaining faithful to the senses and meanings attributed by the participants to their manifestations.

Unstructured, open, or non-directive interview
Features	- It is a more informal conversation, without a pre-defined question script: the questions are proposed based on the elements that emerged in the conversation.
Use	- When the researcher wants to know more about the investigated topic, without having defined the specific points of the investigation; - Generally used to describe individual cases, to understand cultural specificities for certain groups and to compare different cases; - Study strategy aimed at addressing realities not yet explored by the researcher, or offering an approximate view of the researched problem; - Strategy to deepen unexpected research results; - It is also used with groups of people who shared a specific experience (such as attending the same meeting, witnessing a certain occurrence, experiencing a specific event).
Requirements	- It may requires that the researcher has extensive theoretical knowledge on the research topic, so that, during the conversation, he can formulate the necessary questions, or identify the topics to be deepened; - Requires the researcher to have communication skills to stimulate the interviewee’s speech and inspire greater confidence in him (rapport); - It requires the interviewer to actively listen to the interviewee’s speech, identifying information relevant to the investigation objectives, as well as avoiding deviations in focus that compromise the usefulness of the interview; - It demands greater care from the researcher in ensuring that the senses and meanings that the interviewee attributes to their testimonies are respected in the interpretation and analysis of information; - Requires interview subjects to take the time to engage in a productive conversation.
Advantages	- Greater flexibility for the interviewer to conduct the interview according to the emerging elements; - Increases the relevance and pertinence of the questions built during the meeting and emerging from observations; - The interview can be personalized, corresponding to individuals and circumstances; - Makes the interviewee more comfortable, which can allow for more spontaneous (less calculated) responses; - Greater potential to add knowledge to the researcher.
Disadvantages	- Different information collected from different people with different questions results in less systematization, making it difficult to organize and analyze; - The fulfillment of the research objectives depends more on the spontaneous appearance of important questions and information; - More susceptible to research subjects’ bias; - More time consuming.
Semi-structured, semi-open, or semi-directive interview
Features	- The topics and questions to be addressed are specified in advance, in the form of a script with central questions, based on theories and hypotheses² related to the research problem, complemented by other questions inherent to the momentary circumstances of the interview; - The researcher combines open and closed questions and decides their sequence and convenience during the interview: questions can be modified, included, or deleted.
Use	- When the researcher wishes to delimit the volume of information produced in the interview, thus obtaining a greater focus on the topic, intervening to guarantee the achievement of the research objectives; - When the researcher intends to maximize the understanding about the description of a certain social phenomenon, and asks questions from a phenomenological theoretical framework; - When the researcher intends to establish causalities or explanations for social phenomena, and elaborates questions from a historical-structural (dialectical) theoretical framework.
Requirements	- In addition to the requirements mentioned for the open interview, the interviewer must be attentive to direct, at the time he deems appropriate, the discussion to the relevant topics previously defined, or to bring the conversation back to the proposed focus; - Relative knowledge of the theoretical and empirical universe addressed.
Advantages	- It allows, at the same time, the interviewee freedom of expression and the maintenance of the focus by the interviewer; - It allows access to the unobservable, causing the interviewee to reflect, and access to current representations, even of past events; - Enables unobservable elements to be identified and related to other elements relevant to the research; - It allows evaluating the coherence or incoherence of the information obtained, performing procedures that increase its validity and reliability, such as the triangulation of sources³, for example; - Allows greater systematization of the information produced in relation to the unstructured interview, facilitating its interpretation and analysis; - Allows possible gaps to be anticipated and solved.
Disadvantages	- Topics relevant to an investigation may be inadvertently omitted; - The interviewer’s flexibility to conduct the questioning can result in substantially different responses, thereby reducing their comparability.
Structured, closed, or directive interview⁴
Features	- The exact wording and the sequence of questions are determined in advance; - All respondents receive the same basic questions in the same order.
Use	- When the researcher seeks to know the interviewee’s points of view and circumstances in a comparative perspective, based on specific information, previously defined; - When the researcher wants to interview a larger number of people, whose perspectives and situations will be categorized and compared.
Requirements	- Prior knowledge of the empirical universe, in order to ensure that the topics and questions include the elements necessary to achieve the research objectives; - Clear and understandable wording of the questions for all respondents.
Advantages	- It allows responses to be different due to the elements investigated, the interviewee’s perspectives and circumstances, and not because they answer different questions; - Increases the comparability of responses in relation to the semi-structured interview; - Enables the involvement of a larger number of respondents in the investigation; - Reduces the potential for a posteriori bias in the information built by pre-defining the topics and categories covered by the questions; - Allows the researcher to delegate the interviews conduct to other interviewers simultaneously, reducing the time taken.
Disadvantages	- Increases the potential for skewed information produced by inducing respondents from the topics and categories covered by the questions; - Less flexibility, not allowing exploring unexpected responses from respondents that raise potentially relevant topics for investigation.

Criterion	Format	Features	Examples (based on supposed leadership research)
Regarding the format of the interviewee’s responses	Questions with the possibility of open answers	The interviewee formulates the answers in his own way, within the subject proposed by the interviewer	- In your opinion, what is leadership?
Regarding the format of the interviewee’s responses	Questions with the possibility of closed answers	The interviewee chooses his answer among the alternatives presented by the interviewer	- Do you consider leader and boss to be synonymous? (a) yes (b) no (c) I don’t know
Regarding the approach to the research topic	Questions that address the topic directly	The question deals with the subject investigated explicitly and objectively	- What are the main skills of a leader in your organization?
Regarding the approach to the research topic	Questions that address the topic indirectly	The question deals with the theme investigated implicitly, more subtly	- How do you perceive the relationship between the organizational climate and the need for employee representation in senior management positions in a company?
Regarding the questions content	Sociodemographic information	The question asks the interviewee to provide characteristics about himself, in order to help the researcher situate him in relation to the other people in a group or society	- What is your age? - What gender do you identify with? - What is your marital status?
	Experience and behavior	The question asks the respondent to report his experience, or to show his behavior or attitude toward a certain element, which can be presented through encouragement	- What is your reaction when you did not identify in one of your company leaders the necessary conditions to be in management position? - If you were invited to a leadership position, but you didn’t feel prepared, what would you do?
	Emotion	The question seeks to understand the interviewee emotional responses to his experiences and reflections; when targeting feelings, these questions differ from those related to the interviewee’s opinions	- How do you feel when you interact with your leader?
	Knowledge or description	The question asks the respondent to state what they know about a specific element; it is different from the questions about the interviewee’s opinion	- You mentioned a successful initiative in the leadership training program, adopted by another company. What is the name of this company? - What is the recommended procedure for retaining talent in your company?
	Sensory information	The question is focused on what the interviewee perceives with the senses of sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste	- You said that you heard a striking phrase from a colleague who later came to occupy a leadership position. What was the phrase?
	Opinion, evaluation, analysis, or interpretation	Questions designed to understand the cognitive and interpretive processes of the interviewees; the question asks the interviewee to express what he thinks, his goals, intentions, desires, and values; these questions usually involve an implication in the interviewee’s rationality	- To what do you attribute the occurrence of turnover among leaders in your company? - In your opinion, how effective are the policies and practices of training, development, and education of existing leaders in organizations? - What do you mean by leadership? - What is your level of agreement with the following statement: “The teams that stand out the most are those with more humanitarian leaders”? (a) disagrees (b) does not disagree or agree (c) agree

Recommendation	Description
Transparency	- Communicate in a very clear and positive way the objective, the probable duration, the nature and content of the interview, taking care not to influence the responses; - Explain the process of conducting the interview; - Explain how the responses will be recorded (notes, audio, video) and how the information will be used, ensuring that the interviewee gives his free and informed consent for this; - During the interview, the interviewer’s bias and values should not be revealed; If necessary, guide the interviewees on topics or questions, or refocus the interview.
Rapport	- Establish the conversation in an empathetic and professional manner; - Give the interviewee the opportunity to ask questions; - Be sensitive to the interviewee’s emotions, avoiding judgments, showing signs of annoyance or impatience; - Ensure that the interviewee is comfortable and willing to talk; - Take into account the interpersonal, interactional, communicative, and emotional aspects of the interview; - Actively listen to the interviewee.
Conversation flow	- Concern about how to maintain the conversation, stimulating the interviewee’s speeches in a careful and conscious way about the possible problems resulting from the asymmetry in the established relationship; - Use, as necessary or convenient, progressively directive strategies: - Make encouragement sounds; - Referring to the interviewee’s statements; - Explore the interviewee’s positions; - Introduce new topics; - Distribute the questions in order to facilitate the interviewee’s answers: More ‘descriptive and immediate’ questions should be asked before ‘how?’ or ‘why?’, more elaborate and reflective; Non-controversial topics should be addressed before more controversial topics.
Difficulties forecast	- Avoid external interruptions (third party intervention, phone calls, etc.); - Minimize distractions (TV on, side conversations, etc.); - Ensure that the interview is convenient at the moment (appropriate place, schedule, and time); - Prevent the interviewee’s or interviewer’s inhibition from making conversation impossible; - Avoid using terms that the interviewee is not familiar with; - If the interview is carried out remotely, or involves self-applied instruments (via online form, email, phone, or other means), ensure that the questions are sufficiently clear and will be well understood by the interviewee; - If the researcher delegates the interview to interviewers, ensure that they receive the necessary information and training; - Ensure that the interviewee can be contacted in the future for clarification or validation of the interview; - Predict and resolve possible reasons that the interviewee may have for not participating in the interview or not answering a certain question.

Possible difficulties	Care that the researcher must take
Loss of information	Record the information properly; Know how to distinguish which information is relevant to the research objectives, and which is not.
Distortions	Admitting that all forms of information transcription, analysis, and dissemination imply some degree of distortion, to be added to the bias already mentioned; Pay attention to the senses and meanings attributed by the interviewees to their own statements; Pay attention to the consistency between the concepts operationalized in the interview, the information produced, and the researcher’s considerations when interpreting, analyzing, and disseminating the results; Avoid generalizing the search results beyond the reasonable extrapolation allowed by the information produced.
Reduction of the complexity of the information produced	Take into account that the information is accessible through verbal and non-verbal language; Give importance to the interviewee’s specificities (for example, factors related to the interviewee’s identity or conditions); Take into account the information produced in the context of the interview (who said what, for whom, when, where, and how); Take into account the different possibilities indicated by the theoretical framework and their suitability for the research objectives; Know the methodology, to choose and use it as a technique of interpretation and analysis; Write research products in a clear, concise, and objective way, in order to be understood by the public (general and/or specific).

Analysis strategy	Description
Narrative research	Study of the subjects’ lives, from which the researcher requests narratives about their individual trajectories, which are recounted or re-established by the researcher in the chronology.
Thematic analysis	Grouping of data by theme and evaluation of all cases.
Grounded theory	Inductive process of identifying analytical categories as they ‘emerge’ from the data.
Coding cycles	Cyclic, non-linear analytical process, in steps: (a) data coding; (b) construction and/or articulation of categories.
Interpretive phenomenological analysis	Analysis that seeks to understand how people experience and describe their world, and how they build meanings.
Framework	Deductive form that aims to connect qualitative and quantitative approaches. Evolution of matrix-based methods.
Content analysis	Systematic analysis of texts, through a system of categories developed from the material and guided by theory.

[1] * Corresponding Author

Research subjects	What does the researcher seek with the use of the interview? (Examples of possibilities)
Aspects of human and social behavior	Understanding knowledge, values, beliefs, or decision-making processes of stakeholders.
Social and organizational contexts	Explore the contextual experience, actions, and relationships within the interview process, instead of just describing behaviors or classifying the subjects. Understand the scenario of the relationships between the components and members of specific organizations or groups from the point of view of the interviewee. Understand specific interactions that involve more than one group.
Specific cases, singular or in a comparative perspective	Understand a trajectory, an event, a specific or emblematic process for the research problem. Develop a biography, a life history report, or a historical study. Understand the perceptions of specific individuals.
Changes and transformations	Reflect on the conditions in which the educational context can be transformed or reformed. Check the congruence of a given theory in a changing scenario. Suggest solutions for problems in the administrative field. Check changes or transformations in a given organizational context, based on actions or interventions.

Brazil

Brazil

The Qualitative Approach Interview in Administration: A Guide for Researchers

A Entrevista de Abordagem Qualitativa em Administração: Um Guia para Pesquisadores

ABSTRACT

Context:

Objective:

Method:

Results:

Conclusion: