Geoforum Volume 24 Issue 3 1993 Michael J. Healey; Michael B. Rawlinson -- Interviewing Business...

Geoforum. Vol. 24, No. 3. pp. 339-355, 1993 oolfF7185/93 $h.00+0.00

Printed in Great Britain 0 1993 Pergamon Press Lid

Interviewing Business Owners and Managers: a Review of Methods and

Techniques

MICHAEL J. HEALEY,* Coventry, U.K., and MICHAEL B. RAWLINSON,? Cardiff, U.K.

Abstract: Interviews with business owners and managers are a prime source of information for economic geographers, yet very little has been written about this technique. Although the issues involved in business surveys are not unique, several points about research methods are highlighted when undertaking business interviews, including the link between interview techniques and research design, identifying respondents and obtaining access, preparing for interviews and obtaining accurate answers, and ways of conducting and recording interviews. This paper draws upon both published sources and a survey of the interview methods used by Anglo-American economic geographers in order to review the methods and techniques of interviewing. This paper concludes by arguing that there is no one best way of interviewing business owners and managers. Methods vary for different situations, depending on a range of factors, including the research design, the kind and amount of information required, the resources available, and the size, organizational structure, sector and location of the businesses to be approached. There is an urgent need for a greater priority to be given to experimenting with different survey methods and reporting the results.

Business Interviews and Geographical Research

Business organizations have been an important focus

for geographical research for a long time. In the late

1950s and 1960s a combination of dissatisfaction with

the treatment of the firm as a black box in neoclassi-

cal location theory and the increasing concentration

of economic power in large businesses led to the

emergence of the behavioural approach and an analy-

sis of the geography of enterprise (KRUMME, 1969;

McNEE, 1960). To begin with most attention was

given to large industrial enterprises [e.g. WATTS

*Division of Geography, School of Natural and Environ- mental Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry CV15FB, U.K. tCardiff Business School, University of Wales College of Cardiff, Cardiff CFl 3EU, U.K.

(1980)]. Although later interest continued in the role

of multiplant and multinational organizations in

influencing spatial patterns of human activity [e.g.

HEALEY and WATTS (1987) and TAYLOR and

THRIFT (1982)], attention also widened to include

small enterprises [e.g. KEEBLE and WEVER (1986)

and MASON (1989)] and the relationships between

small and large businesses [e.g. TAYLOR and

THRIFT- (1983) and RAWLINSON (1991)].

Furthermore, interest spread from a concern with

enterprises primarily involved in manufacturing to

those engaged in other sectors, such as producer

services [e.g. THRIFT et al. (1988)], distribution [e.g. McKINNON (1985)], and agriculture [e.g.

ILBERY (1987)].

Interviews with owners and managers are a prime

source of information on the activities of businesses,

339

340 Geoforum/Volume 24 Number 3/1993

whether the purpose is to understand the spatial

behaviour of the organizations themselves or as a

means of analysing the economic geography of a

particular sector or area. It needs to be recognized,

however, that interviews with business owners and

managers will provide the research worker with

material from only one particular viewpoint and it

will often be desirable to obtain other viewpoints,

such as those of the unions and various government

bodies. Where conflicting evidence emerges aca-

demic detachment will be required in assessing and

interpreting the information collected. This paper is

concerned only with reviewing different methods of

interviewing business owners and managers,

although many of the points made here may be of

relevance to gathering information from representa-

tives of a wide range of organizations, and several

issues overlap with those discussed in social surveys.

Business interviews range from asking the same list of

questions in an identical form to all respondents to

discussions of a series of topics in which the questions

asked vary from respondent to respondent, depend-

ing on the answers previously given and the nature of

the interaction process in the interview. The choice of

standardized or non-standardized interviews is linked

to the research design and theoretical framework

adopted. However, the relationship is not exact and

many combine different methods of interviewing as

appropriate within the same research design. Inter-

views may take place over the telephone or, more

frequently, face-to-face.

Many books have been written on survey research

methods [e.g. DIXON and LEACH (1978),

GARDNER (1978) and HOINVILLE et al. (1978)]

and the methodology of qualitative research [e.g.

EYLES and SMITH (1988) and SILVERMAN

(1985)]. Some focus specifically on interviewing [e.g.

BRIGGS (1988) and GORDEN (1975)], but most

are concerned with social surveys rather than investigations of businesses. Although the general advice in

these texts is relevant to the economic geographer.

for the most part the books lack examples of business

interviews and discussion of the specific problems

involved. Some useful hints arc contained in the

literature on elite interviewing [e.g. DEXTER (1970)

and MOYSER and WAGSTAFFE (1987)], but, with

the exception of KINCAID and BRIGHT (1957a. b),

little involves economic elites. Discussions of the

process of undertaking research in organizations also

contain helpful insights [e.g. BRYMAN (1988,

1989)]. More general discussions of surveying

businesses are contained in the industrial market

research literature [e.g. HAGUE (1987a), HART

(1987), JOBBER and BLEASDALE (1987),

MACFARLANE-SMITH (1972), RAWNSLEY

(1978) and WILSON (1968)], but most of this work is,

not surprisingly, concerned with market assessment

and industrial buying, and not all of this experience

may be directly transferable to undertaking other

types of business survey. With a few exceptions

(BACHTLER. 1984; HEALEY, 1983. 199la;

MCDOWELL, 1992; SCHOENBERGER. 1991.

1992), discussions by economic geographers of inter-

viewing business managers are restricted to the

methodology sections of research theses and mono-

graphs, and brief comments on business surveys in a

few text books [e.g. ILBERY (1985a)). This paper

attempts to bring together previously scattered com-

ments on interviewing business owners and managers

with a coherent framework.

Relatively few issues of research method are unique

to studies of businesses (BULMER, 1988). Several

issues are, however. sharply highlighted in business

surveys. Business organizations arc bounded insti-

tutions to which the research worker has to seek,

negotiate and gain access. Once entry has been

secured a workable relationship needs to be estab-

lished with the representative(s) of the business in

which to gather information by interview. Various

ethical issues, concerned with explaining adequately

the purpose of the investigation, the confidentiality of

the responses, and the rights of respondents to com-

ment on what is written about them, also arise in

business surveys.

The aim of this paper is to discuss these and other

issues by reviewing the literature on interviewing

business owners and managers, and illustrating the points raised with examples of the methods used by

economic geographers. It builds on an earlier broader

survey of methods of obtaining information from

businesses by one of the authors (HEALEY, 199la).

To supplement the limited number of published

examples, 20 colleagues in the U.K., North America

and Australasia were invited to give us illustrations of

their experiences of interviewing business owners and

managers. These contacts provided many useful

GeoforumNolume 24 Number 3/1993

examples and emphasised the need to illuminate the

way interviews are undertaken so as to highlight

successful practices and to improve the standard of

interviewing. The debate on the nature of the links

between the methods used on the ground and the

underlying philosophy or epistemological base is well

developed elsewhere (MASSEY and MEEGAN,

1985 ; MCDOWELL, 1992; SAYER, 1992;

SCHOENBERGER, 1992). In this paper the empha-

sis is on interviewing as a method or technique of

gathering information once it has been chosen by a

research worker. Discussion of how the data, once

collected, is analysed, though important, is outside

the remit of this paper. This review of successful

practices should be useful as a guide to research

workers unfamiliar with undertaking interviews of

business owners and managers, and should also help

experienced researchers to reflect on the strengths

and weaknesses of a widely used technique. It is

important to appreciate the problems and potentials

of interviewing if the findings of research using the

method are to be understood fully. Although this

paper is illustrated primarily by the experiences of

economic geographers, many of the points made

should be helpful to other social scientists planning to

interview business owners and managers.

Following a brief discussion of the situations when

interviews are necessary, the relationship between

interview techniques and research design is dis-

cussed. Methods of identifying respondents and

obtaining interviews are then examined. This is fol-

lowed by sections, first, on preparing for interviews

and obtaining accurate answers and, second, on

conducting and recording interviews. This paper con-

cludes by arguing that there is an urgent need for a

greater priority to be given to experimenting with

different survey methods and reporting the results.

When to Interview

Obtaining information direct from business owners

and managers is a time-consuming and labour-

intensive method of collecting information, and it is therefore usually sensible first to examine other

sources. Much general information exists, at least

about large businesses and the industries in which

firms operate (although the quality of the former is

sometimes debatable), and this should be examined

before interviews are undertaken. For example, R.

341

Le Heron (personal communication, 1991) empha-

sizes that, in two recent projects, one on the restruc-

turing of farm businesses in New Zealand and the

other on the internationalization of large Australian

and New Zealand companies in the 198Os, as much

effort went into establishing the context of state

policy and investment conditions as into interview-

ing. Interviews are thus rarely used as the only source

of information and are employed to complement

other data sources, such as company accounts and

aggregate industry statistics.

In many situations, however, the information and

insights that economic geographers are seeking may

only be obtained direct from people in the businesses

being examined. A number of options remain for

obtaining the information; namely, a self-

administered questionnaire, a telephone interview,

or a face-to-face interview. Self-administered ques-

tionnaires are most appropriate where there are a few

simple factual questions, many of which may be

answered by the respondents ticking the relevant

boxes. HAGUE (1987a) suggests that postal ques-

tionnaires are most suitable for surveying businesses

run by one key decision maker. One of the advan-

tages of the technique is that it ensures consistency in

the questions asked and avoids variability between

interviewers. The written questionnaire also means

that respondents can answer the questions at their

own pace, which allows for potentially more con-

sidered replies. However, in the absence of a skilled

interviewer, there is no control over the order in

which the questions are completed, some questions

may be missed by the respondent and there is no

opportunity to probe vague answers (DE CHERNA-

TONY, 1988; SWAIN, 1978).

Interviews are generally essential when there are a

large number of questions, or the subject of the

survey involves an investigation into the reasons for

decisions or the perception of the owner or manager.

The main advantages of an interview are that the

interviewer not only has more control over who

answers the questions than can be achieved with a

postal survey, but can also clarify any ambiguous

questions, probe answers that are too brief, and

query discrepancies in the replies. Standardized

interviews are often used as an alternative to self-

administered questionnaires sent through the post

[e.g. HEALEY (1984)], because, though more

expensive in terms of time and cost, they usually

342

achieve a higher response rate, One review of 43 local

and regional surveys of economic activity in the U.K.

found that, although response rates varied widely,

the average response rate for postal surveys was 51%.

while for face-to-face interview surveys it was 75%

(HEALEY, 1991a).

Telephone interviewing is growing in popularity in

economic research. It is a relatively cheap method,

especially if restricted to a local area, and in many

cases an immediate answer to the survey questions

can be obtained. However, it is harder to build up a

trusting relationship over the telephone than it is in a

face-to-face interview, and it is also easier for the

respondent to terminate the interview (WILSON,

1968). Telephone interviewing is sometimes used to

increase the overall response rate in postal surveys

[e.g. ELIAS and HEALEY (1991) and MAR-

SHALL (1983)]. Although telephone interviews

have been used successfully for up to half an hour

[e.g. NORTH et al. (1983)], they would seem most

suitable for obtaining answers to a small number of

simple questions where it is reasonable to suppose

that the person being spoken to knows the answers

without having to consult any records. HAGUE

(1987a) suggests that there is a limit of about 10 min

for the length of time that a respondents attention

can be held on the telephone for a structured inter-

view.

In many instances an interview-survey of businesses is

the only way to obtain the answers to the questions

that researchers pose. For example, FOTHERGILL

and GUY (1990, p. 44), in examining the closure of

factories state that: The interview-based approach

means that we can find out directly about the reasons

for managers decisions rather than merely infer

causation from statistics. In our view, this is by far the

most fruitful and illuminating way to understand

branch closures. Direct quotations from interviews

can give useful insights into the way businesses re-

spond to various situations and can provide anecdotes

to illustrate other material [e.g. MARKUSEN

(1991)].

Interview Techniques and Research Design

Standardized und non-standardized interviews

The reliability and usefulness of research findings and

their interpretation are closely linked with the nature

Geoforum/Volume 24 Number 3/1993

and quality of the survey methods used and often

reflect the underlying research design adopted. Inter-

view techniques may be categorized into standard-

ized and non-standardized. The main characteristics

of these two types of interview are summarized in

Table 1. With standardized interviews, each business

owner or manager in the survey is asked an identical

set of questions in a fixed order. They are most

suitable for collecting information, which is largely

factual or non-emotive, from businesses with several

features in common. They are particularly appropri-

ate when the aim is to quantify the relative import-

ance of different responses to questions about a set of

well-defined topics. In contrast, a non-standardized

interview is much less structured and the questions

asked and the phrasing of the questions vary from

interview to interview. At its most informal the non-

standardized interview can be a non-directive convcr-

sation. but in economic geography interviews of this

kind are almost exclusively focused or guided to cover

a predetermined set of topics. Non-standardized

interviews are most helpful when exploring new

topics, sensitive or emotive issues, and when the

businesses are highly variable in their characteristics.

They are particularly suitable for detailed examin-

ation of topics and when the nature of the experience

of respondents is likely to vary widely, such as when

examining the sometimes conflicting logic that can

underlie corporate decisions (SCHOENBERGER,

1991), or where the issues are ill-defined, ill-

understood or conceptually complex (HEDGES and

RITCHIE. 1987). Examples of standardized inter-

view schedules and non-standardized interview topics

used in economic geography are reproduced in

HEALEY (19Yla).

The predominant type of interview used depends in

part on the research design adopted. Standardized

interviews arc most common in extensive research

projects concerned to identify general patterns and

outcomes. Such projects are typically associated with surveys of representative samples or populations and

quantitative analyses in which taxonomic (i.e. classi-

ficatory) groups, such as rural areas or closures, arc

used [e.g. FOTHERGILL and GUDGIN (1982) and

STAFFORD and WATTS (199(l)]. Extensive research is the dominant research design used in positi-

vist approaches to social enquiry. In contrast, non-

standardized interviews are more associated with intensive research designs in which the main ques-

Interview schedule Identical questions in a fixed order


Table 1. Outline of the main characteristics of standardized and non-standardized interviews*

343

Characteristics Standardized Non-standardized

Research design

Theoretical approach

Usually extensive and quantitative, examines taxonomic groups

Commonly used in positivist approaches

Usually intensive and qualitative, examines causally related groups

Commonly used in realist and phenomenological approaches

Sample Representative or whole population Selected to cover a range of issues and phenomena of interest. May be chosen as research progresses

List of topics. Flexible, form and wording of questions vary with knowledge of respondents and interviewer, and direction of the interview

Interview style Minimization of interviewer-related error Interactive, following issues raised in the interview

Questions

Suitability

Factual and pre-coded questions common Nearly all questions open-ended

For summarizing answers for sample, In-depth studies investigating causally related comparing responses to the same questions, mechanisms, exploring new research areas generalizing, testing hypotheses, inferring seeking explanation and understanding causality

Interviewer skills Ability to interview non-directively and consistently

Thorough understanding of research topic, ability to converse intelligently and with sympathetic understanding

*Based in part on ideas drawn from Fig. 13 in SAYER (1992) and Table 6.1 in SAYER and MORGAN (1985). Summaries of this kind tend to emphasize the differences between the two types of interview (see the text for a more balanced review).

tions involve how the observed behaviour of a busi-

ness is related to its own history and circumstances, or

how some causal processes work out in particular

cases. Intensive research typically uses mainly quali-

tative forms of analysis. It is the dominant research

design associated with realist and phenomenological

approaches in the social sciences. Intensive research

commonly examines groups whose members are

causally related (i.e. are connected in a relationship)

to one another, such as firms which are related

vertically through linkages [e.g. RAWLINSON

(1991)] or horizontally through competition (i.e.

operate in the same market sector). The businesses

selected may not be typical and may be selected one

by one as the research proceeds and as an understand-

ing of the membership of a causal group is being

developed. Often businesses are chosen to en- compass the variability in the situations they face

[e.g. CREWE (1989)]. A small number of cases

examined in detail is common practice. The stress

placed on identifying the context in which businesses

operate in case study research means that sometimes

lengthy interviews are required. R. Hayter (personal

communication, 1991), refers to interviews with four

large Japanese companies undertaken by a doctoral

student extending in one case to between 16 and 18 hr

in total.

Although associated with particular research designs,

standardized and non-standardized interviews are

not exclusive to extensive and intensive research

designs, respectively. For example, non-standardized

interviews may be used in the early stages of design-

ing a standardized interview schedule. Moreover, the

boundary between standardized and non- standardized interviews is indistinct (BURTON and

CHERRY, 1970). In some interviews a list of the

required information is given to the interviewer and it

is left to her or him to collect the data from the

respondents. In such a semi-standardized interview, information on the same topics is obtained from each

business owner or manager, but the way in which the

questions are phrased and their sequence is left to the

interviewer. This technique gives the interviewer the

flexibility to tailor the interview to fit the particular

circumstances faced by the respondent while ensuring

344

that comparable information is collected which may

later be quantified [e.g. FOTHERGILL and GUY

(1990)]. A mixture of interview styles is often used in

the same investigation. Thus, one section of an inter-

view may ask a common set of factual questions of all

respondents, while in another section a semi-

structured qualitative approach may be used to ex-

plore an aspect of the behaviour of the business [e.g.

RAWLINSON (1990)].

One of the aims of standardized interviews is to

minimise interviewer-related errors (FOWLER and

MANGIONE, 1990). This applies particularly where

several interviewers are involved in the same project,

though consistency of approach by a single inter-

viewer is also important. The desirability of trying to

create socially sterile conditions in the interview situ-

ation is, however, a normative ideal. It implies that

the meaning of a given question is apparent to all

respondents and the language used is interpreted by

all of them in the way intended by the researcher

(BRIGGS, 1986). Moreover, the interview involves

an interpersonal encounter and it is unrealistic, as

BRENNER (1978, p. 138) argues, to try to make the

interviewer act without acting. as if the interviewer

could ever not influence the situation of action in the

interview by means of his own performance.

With non-standardized interviewing the interaction

between interviewer and interviewee is emphasized

rather than minimized (HEALEY, 1991a). Sayer

(personal communication, 1986) suggests that, as

non-standardized interviewing is a social process,

which involves both the interviewer and the inter-

viewee, it is important to give the interviewee an

active role and try to be as flexible as possible regard- ing the form and order of questions so as to accommo-

date for this. This view is confirmed by DEXTER

(1970, p. 5) who states that the investigator is will-

ing, and often eager to let the interviewee teach him what the problem, the question, the situation, is,

within the limits of the research topic. It is important

that the interviewer should also be actively involved

in the process and the interview format should

capitalise on the strengths of open-endedness. . . In

particular, it should allow for discussion and

dialogue+ven debate over controversial points

(SCHOENBERGER, 1991, p. 187). With this

method, the research worker is able to refer to and

Geoforum/Volume 24 Number 3/1993

build upon knowledge gained beforehand about the

specific characteristics of the business, instead of

having to affect ignorance . in order to ensure

uniformity or controlled conditions and avoid what

might be taken as observer-induced bias (SAYER,

1984, p. 223).

In non-standardized interviews the questions posed

vary from one interview to the next, dependent on

how the interview develops, the knowledge of the

respondent and the level of understanding of the

interviewer at the time of the interview. Consc-

quently a different form of analysis is required for

quantitative and qualitative information [c.g. SIL-

VERMAN (1985)]. This is not the place for a dis-

cussion of techniques of analysing the data collected

in interviews, although it is. of course, important that

the research worker decides how he or she is going to

analyse the information before it is collected. Many

research workers think that it is inappropriate, for

example, to attempt to reduce qualitative data using a

mechanical quantitative style of analysis. As GOR-

DEN (1975, p. 61) notes, with respect to material

collected in non-standardized interviews. there is no

way that the information can be statistically summar-

ized to reflect the aggregate response of the group or

to compare one individuals response with

anothers. SCHOENBERGER (1992, p. 198) de-

velops this argument a stage further when she notes

that with in-depth interviews although statistical

generalizations cannot be made, the method does

permit analytical generalizations relevant to theoreti-

cal positions. This does not, however, mean that

statistical information cannot be obtained in non-

standardized interviews, as long as some similar ques-

tions are asked of all respondents. MILNE ( 199 1 ), for instance, employed an unstructured discussion tech-

nique in his examination of small firms in the U.K. hi-

fi industry, yet, because he asked a set of similar

questions to his sample, he was able to produce nine

tables which help to give an in-depth understanding

of recent competitive pressures and reorganization in

this sector.

Validity and reliability

The difficulty of generalizing about the responses to

non-standardized interviews raises the debate about

the validity and reliability of the findings of intensive

qualitative research. Much has been written on this

GeoforumNolume 24 Number 30993

important issue [e.g. EYLES (1988), KIRK and

MILLER (1986), SAYER (1992) and SYKES (1990,

1991)]. Space permits room for only a few obser-

vations. The first point is that discussion is often

confused by the different ways in which the concepts

are used. Here validity is taken to refer to the mean-

ing and meaningfulness of the data, whereas re-

liability is taken to refer to the consistency of the

results.

Validity may be assessed in terms of both the infer-

ences which may be made from the findings and the

kind and accuracy of the information obtained from

individual sample units (SYKES, 1991). Some re-

search workers emphasize the theoretical inferences

which may be made from qualitative research. For

example, CREWE (1989) argues that the goal of

intensive research is to expand and promote theoreti-

cal inferences, not to enumerate frequencies. This

view is also used to justify case studies (MITCHELL,

1983), which like experiments, are generalizable to

theoretical propositions and not to populations or

universes (YIN, 1984, p. 21). Others suggest that

qualitative findings may be used to extrapolate be-

yond the data and to make modest speculations

about the likely applicability of the findings to other

situations under similar, but not identical conditions.

Extrapolations are logical, thoughtful and problem-

oriented rather than purely empirical, statistical and

probabilistic (QUINN PATTON, 1986) [cited by

SYKES (1991, p. 7)]. The second meaning of validity

refers to the goodness of the data. Here the

strengths of qualitative research are clearest. As

SYKES (1991, p. 8) notes: The main reason for the

potential superiority of qualitative approaches for

obtaining information is that the flexible and respon-

sive interaction which is possible between interviewer

and respondent(s) allows meanings to be probed,

topics to be covered from a variety of angles and

questions made clear to respondents.

Even if qualitative research is accepted as capable of

producing valid results, there may still be doubts

about whether they are reliable. These doubts are often expressed in terms of a question along the lines:

would the same study carried out by two different

research workers using the same techniques produce

the same findings? The difficulty of assessing the

reliability of qualitative research revolves around the

nature of the research process it uses. EYLES (1988,

345

p. 11) summarizes the problem well when he observes

that: Interpretative geography does not stand out-

side its subject-matter: it is part of the investigation

and of the discourse itself. SYKES (1991, p. 4)

similarly argues that qualitative research is not a

linear process, it rather proceeds in a series of

iterations with modifications of understanding occur-

ring throughout the interviewing stage as well as

during the formal analysis and writing up stages. She

goes on to suggest that given the problems of assess-

ing reliability it is important that the entire process of

the research is made clear and the logic of the process

of discovery is communicated. It is questionable,

however, whether reliability and validity are entirely

compatible goals (BRIGGS, 1986). SCHOEN-

BERGER (1991, p. 11) suggests that the standard-

ized interview is undoubtedly more reliable than the

non-standardized interview. But the latter, when

carefully administered, may offer greater accuracy

and validity because it allows a more comprehensive

and detailed elucidation of the interplay among strat-

egy, history, and circumstances. By contrast, the

standardized survey instrument must necessarily

standardize and simplify a complex reality.

Research workers need to be familiar with the

strengths and weaknesses of both standardized and

non-standardized interview techniques, and to know

in what circumstances each is most appropriate.

There are many examples where the design of stan-

dardized interview schedules is inappropriate, be-

cause insufficient thought is given beforehand as to

why the information is being collected and the use to

which it is to be put. Consequently, although some

standardized surveys are technically very efficient,

the findings may be of limited value (BLOOM, 1988).

On the other hand, the findings from some non-

standardized interviews may be vague and anecdotal

because of lack of prior preparation and/or insuf-

ficient skill in obtaining information during the inter-

view. Despite the debate about the validity and

reliability of qualitative research, it is apparent that,

as economic geographers become more concerned

with examining processes, relationships and inter-

actions, rather than simply identifying patterns and

outcomes, intensive research methods and non- standardized interview techniques are becoming

more frequently used [e.g. COOKE and WELLS

(1990), D. Gibbs (personal communication, 1991) and Le Heron (personal communication, 1991)].

346

Identifying Respondents and Obtaining Inter-

views

Whichever interviewing technique is used potential

respondents have to be identified first. Talking to

informed individuals and examining the business

press are particularly useful when seeking case

studies and when trying to maximise the range of

experiences among the businesses chosen. These

sources are also useful in updating the directory

listings commonly used for constructing sampling

frames (HEALEY, 1991a). Identifying the best per-

son in a large company to approach for an interview

can itself be a major problem, especially in a general

survey. In a specific study, for example of purchasing

linkages, the section of the firm to approach can be

much clearer. For many enquiries the most suitable

person to contact may be someone at the head office

or divisional office rather than at a branch. Some-

times the range of information required may make it

desirable to interview more than one individual from

a respondent company. Generally, when one good

senior contact has been made it is easier to make

others within the same organization. Introductions to

managers in other tirms in the same industry may also

be generated as a survey progresses. For example, in

a study analysing buyer-supplier relationships in the

motor industry. many of the names of buyers were

obtained from the supplying firm respondents

(WELLS and RAWLINSON, 1992).

Identifying the business owner or manager can be

problematic in some situations. For example. the

concept of business owners and managers is anath-

ema in the case of worker co-operatives (LOWE,

1989). In farming also. the hierarchy of power and

management may be less visible and definitive than in

most other industries and it may not be immediately

clear where the locus of decision making lies between

farm managers, agents and land owners. Where

father and son(s) are working in parallel it may be necessary to talk to several farmers (G. Clark,

personal communication, 199 1).

The best strategy for obtaining an interview seems to

vary with the size of business and the nature of the

investigation. A short interview at a small firm can

often be obtained by simply knocking on the door

[e.g. HEALEY (1984)]. Similar tactics are also often used in studies of farmers [e.g. ILBERY (3985b)],

Geoforum/Volume 24 Number 30993

although Clark (personal communication, 1991)

suggests that it is now more important than ever to

arrange interviews in advance. Prior permission to

interview usually needs to be obtained when under-

taking surveys in private spaces, such as a managed

shopping centre. For example, LOWE (1991) found

that centre management at Merry Hill Centre, Dud-

ley placed restrictions on the amount and type of

questions she was allowed to ask. A prior appoint-

ment is particularly important for large businesses. A

request for an interview may be made either by letter

or telephone. The latter often obtains an immediate

reply, but may not achieve a higher response (FOR-

SYTHE, 1977). Telephoning and fishing for a

named person who can best handle the enquiry bc-

fore posting an introductory letter can work well (F.

Peck, personal communication, 1991), as can obtain-

ing an introduction by an appropriate intermediary

(G. Linge. personal communication, 1991). Another

possibility, when needing to contact people with

broad overviews of their companies, is to write to the

chief executives or managing directors requesting an

interview with them or the person they think most

appropriate [e.g. CREWE (1989)]. It can be helpful

to enclose with the letter a short outline of the nature

and purpose of the research project, and how the

findings may be useful to the respondent (HEALEY.

1979). A letter from the sponsor of the survey (where

relevant) or another influential party may also be

helpful in persuading business managers and owners

to participate in the research.

It is often useful to follow up an introductory letter

with a telephone call a few days later [e.g. ELIAS and

HEALEY (1991) and WATTS (1991)]. It is more

difficult for owners and managers to refuse an inter-

view when speaking to the researcher over the tcle-

phone. It also provides an opportunity for the

researcher to deal with any queries that may exist (D.

North, personal communication. 1991). Polite per-

sistence is important in obtaining an interview. A

series of rejections can be dispiriting for the research

worker; however, it is almost always worth querying an initial refusal to see what is the reason. For

example, a company may consider itself to be too small to be of importance to the researcher

(HEALEY, 1979).

Given the number of requests that busy executives

receive, any opening in the correspondence request-


ing assistance that gives them an excuse for refusal

may be exploited. Although it is important to outline

clearly the kind of information being asked for, refu-

sal to cooperate is likely if the amount and level of

detail of information requested is unreasonable.

KINCAID and BRIGHT (1957a) advise against mul-

tiple requests in the same letter. They report that,

when they asked not only for an interview but also for

any literature pertinent to the study, several com-

panies refused cooperation on the ground that since

they had no pertinent literature there would be no

point in conducting an interview. The evidence is

equivocal, as few researchers are prepared to risk

marring their success by deliberately sending out

shoddy work, but a well-designed and presented

letter, typed on headed notepaper, which is person-

ally addressed with a handwritten signature, would

seem to be a sensible way of trying to persuade the

owners and managers of businesses to cooperate.

Other examples of strategies for obtaining interviews

are given in HEALEY (1991a).

Preparation for Interviews and Obtaining Accu-

rate Answers

Before contacting potential respondents consider-

able effort needs to be put into preparing and plan-

ning interviews so that the information collected is

useful in meeting the aims of the research. The nature

of the responses obtained in standardized surveys

depends on the quality of the interview schedule

design and the way the questions are phrased. In non-

standardized surveys the quality of the answers is

affected as much by the ability of the interviewer to

engage the respondents in relevant discourse as by

the phrasing of the questions. It is especially import-

ant in non-standardized interviews that the inter-

viewer has a thorough understanding of the research

subject so as to be able to make sense of the interview

and to know when clarification or further probing is

necessary. A pilot survey is essential to test a stan-

dardized interview schedule and is highly desirable

for developing the skills and knowledge of the re-

searcher undertaking a non-standardized interview.

The way in which questions are phrased can have a

critical effect on the responses given. Even appar-

ently simple questions, such as How many people are

employed in this establishment? are open to differ-

347

ent interpretations. Should, for instance, part-timers,

sales staff and drivers be included? Questions about

issues facing a business may also be problematic. For

example, there is no unambiguous definition of skill

shortages for employer-based research (MEAGER,

1986). One employer may include all unfilled

vacancies, while another may only refer to vacancies

which cause loss of output. These examples point to

the desirability of probing the answers given to many

questions in order to clarify what respondents mean.

Obtaining accurate answers to questions on values,

motives and perceptions is even more difficult.

DEAN and WHYTE (1958, p. 38) suggest that there

is no point in asking whether the informant is telling

the truth. Instead the researcher should ask What do

the informants statements reveal about his feelings

and perceptions and what inferences can be made

from them about the actual environment or events he

has experienced? On the other hand, MARSH

(1979, p. 304) warns that: We must not confuse an

impossible attempt to achieve absolute truth

through unbiased questions, with the aim of being

objective in our quest for truth, through trying to be

as rigorous as possible in the way we draw conclusions

from observations we make about the world, what

people say and how they behave.

The answers given to questions about motives, values

and perceptions are influenced by a variety of factors.

For example, in a study of the goals and values of

farmers, GASSON (1973) notes the danger of relying

on verbal indicators of values in that the answers

given are influenced by the relationship established

with the interviewer and who else is present at the

interview. At the technical level open questions tend

to elicit fewer responses than closed questions (BEL-

SON and DUNCAN, 1962; HEALEY, 1991a).

WATTS (1991), for example, found that business

rates were mentioned as a reason affecting the choice

of plant to close only when business executives were

presented with a list of possible factors. There is also

some evidence that the internal corporate context in

which location decisions are made is more empha-

sized by respondents in in-depth analyses using open-

ended and non-standardized interview techniques

than in short analyses using standardized interview

techniques (STAFFORD, 1974). To use pre-coded

responses for attitudinal and motivational questions,

a knowledge of the range of probable responses is

necessary. They would therefore seem suitable only

348

when a topic has already been well researched.

Alternatively an open version of the questions may be

used at the pilot stage before designing pre-coded

responses for the full survey.

GeoforumNolume 24 Number 3/l 993

successes may become exaggerated and the failures

minimized. The material gleaned from interviews

needs, of course, to be interpreted in the context of

the conditions apparent at the time the interviews

took place (MASSEY and MEEGAN, 1985). This is

well illustrated by Le Heron (personal communi-

cation, 1991). He argues that in New Zealand there

have been two distinctive recent eras. In the era

before deregulation in the mid-1980s the key words in

the business community included exporting, diver-

sification, and market development; since deregu-

lation the key words have changed to phrases such as

cost reduction, international competitiveness, and

back to basics. He suggests that if similar questions

had been put a decade earlier the interviews would

have veered off in entirely different directions.

Respondents, in attempting to be helpful, may give

answers which they think will please the questioner,

or they may try to justify their actions (the problem of

post-facto rationalization). Moreover, the interviewer cannot safely assume that the particular words

used in a question are in fact the stimulus to which the

interviewee responds (DEXTER, 1970). A related

problem in asking about reasons for locational choice

is the need to distinguish the reasons for the choice of

region and settlement from those influencing site

choice. Considerable confusions arises in many sur-

veys where the scale element is not made clear in the

phrasing of the questions and/or the interpretation of

the results [e.g. DTI (1973) and MORIARTY

(1983)]. This is because different factors tend to be

important at different scales. For example, market

accessibility, where significant, tends to distinguish

one region from another, while the availability of

industrial land may make one part of a region more

attractive than another. Separate questions may be

asked to identify the scale element [e.g. SCHMEN-

NER (1982)] or different scales may be identified at

the analysis stage [e.g. STAFFORD (1974)]. Further

difficulties arise when questions are asked about

events which occurred several years previously. or

when the person answering the question had not

taken part in the decision. There is also the problem

of inferring the motives of a company from the

responses given by a single representative of an

organization.

These problems, concerning questions about

motives, values and perceptions can be reduced to

some extent by asking only questions that it is reason-

able to expect respondents to be able to answer, by

careful interview design, and by exploring the topic in

detail. Much of value may be learnt where such

surveys are carefully executed. However. the results

should be interpreted cautiously and are, perhaps,

best taken as simply the views of a group of managers

representing their businesses (HEALEY, 1991a). North (personal communication. 1991) also advises

that interview data are treated with some scepticism,

because for some owners/managers the interview

provides an opportunity for an ego trip so that the

Several research workers counsel against accepting

the view of one interviewee. For instance. at the

conclusion of each interview STAFFORD (1974)

made a subjective attempt to corroborate the testi-

mony of the respondent through a brief discussion

with another senior manager involved in the location

decision. SAYER and MORGAN (1985) recom-

mend interviewing both sides of industry in order to

learn about their different interests, perceptions and

responses, so as to reveal the structural positions of

capital and labour. FOTHERGILL and GUY (1990,

p. 106) also emphasize the dangers of accepting only

one viewpoint in their study of the reasons for clos-

urcs. They state that: Where management blamed

the local trade union WC therefore did not take their

view as the gospel truth. But equally, where the union

blamed the management we did not necessarily

accept their view either. Perceptions may also vary

between establishment and higher-level managers. In

managing reductions in the workforce and the intro-

duction of new technology EDWARDS and MAR-

GINSON (1988), for example, found that the local

managers perceived less involvement from above

than their higher-level counterparts.

As much, if not more. skill and thought is needed in

undertaking the non-standardized interviews used in

intensive research as is required in constructing the

standardized surveys used in extensive research. Not

only does the interviewer need a thorough under-

standing of the research topic, but he or she should

also have a sound knowledge of the industrial sector

of the business and background information on the


business itself, particularly where it is a large concern. Where the interviewer is well informed about the firm and the business it is engaged in, the respondent is likely to be more open and more detailed (SCHOEN- BERGER, 1991). A well-informed interviewer has a basis for assessing the accuracy of some of the information offered. This may be illustrated by the experience of two researchers undertaking a study of strategic alliances (COOKE and WELLS, 1990). In one interview they were given the impression that all the joint ventures the company was involved in were going smoothly. However, when one of the researchers mentioned that he knew of one which had run into problems, the respondent opened up and a frank discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of joint ventures followed. The knowledge level required by the interviewer to carry out non- standardized interviews means that they should be undertaken by the principal researchers and should not be delegated to a team of interviewers.

Unfortunately, the quality of the information about businesses available to research workers is limited. Much published information tends towards either superficiality, as in company reports, or towards self- congratulatory rhetoric, as with glossy promotional publications (CREWE, 1989, p. 70). However, when combined with other sources, such as local and national newspaper reports, trade journals and in- house company journals and newsletters, a useful overview can be built up (HEALEY, 1991b). For example, in a study of the introduction of new technology among motor vehicle assemblers, reported in RAWLINSON (1990), a helpful source of information was The Engineer, because it featured many of the developments along with photographs and explanations suitable for non-engineers to understand.

Before a survey, it is useful to discuss the proposed interview topics with a few individuals familiar with the sectors being studied, because there are important differences in the terminologies used in different industries. Formulating questions in the respondents own language is preferable to assuming that the respondent can be taught to think within the researchers frame of reference (SCHOEN- BERGER, 1991, p. 187). It can also be very useful to talk to industry experts and trade associations after completion of the interviews to check the validity and

349

interpretation of the findings [e.g. MARSHALL (1989)].

Conducting and Recording Interviews

The most important factors contributing to a successful interview are trust and rapport (MOYSER and WAGSTAFFE, 1985). DEXTER (1970, p. 25) recommends that sympathetic understanding is the attitude most likely to promote such an atmosphere and hence yield the best response. The social skills of the interviewer are thus a key factor. The wider social science literature also suggests that interviewer characteristics, such as age, race and sex, may also influence the attitude of the respondents and the kind of answers they give [see also discussion in McDOW- ELL (1992) and S~HOENBERGER (1992)j. These characteristics are not malleable and thought may need to be given where appropriate to the compo- sition of the research team in relation to the compo- sition of the interviewees. This could, for example, be an issue when interviewing ethnic-minority business owners and managers [e.g. HEALEY et al. (1992)]. Power relationships can be important when interviewing top management. particularly in very large organizations. Interviewees may act in a patronizing manner to junior research workers. This problem may be reduced if interviewers can show a sound knowledge and understanding of the topic under discussion and that of the company being investi- gated. In most geographical research investigations it is appropriate to emphasize that no commercial secrets are being sought. H. Stafford (personal communication, 1991) recommends starting interviews by telling the respondents that no confidential information is being sought and that they should feel free to ignore any questions they wish. This, he suggests, allows the respondents to feel that they control the interview and as a result they are more relaxed and usually more forthcoming.

Starting an interview on the right note is important. After explaining who you are, the sponsorship for the study, and to the necessary degree what the project is about, DEXTER (1970, p. 55) recommends begin- ning with comments or questions where the key words are quite vague or ambiguous, so the interviewer can interpret them in his own terms and out of his own experience. Le Heron (personal communi-

350

cation, 1991) and STAFFORD (1974) also recom-

mend commencing an interview with an open ques-

tion before the other content can influence the

response. For example, in his study of the restructur-

ing of farm businesses in New Zealand, Le Heron

began by asking about the history of the farm business

so as to obtain a working knowledge of the respon-

dents circumstances. Dexter advises that a question

which sharply defines a particular area for discussion

is far more likely than a general question to result in

omission of some vital data of which the interviewer

would not have thought.

Some research workers [e.g. HAGUE (1987b)]

favour using pre-coded responses because they save

respondents having to think of possible replies and

avoid having to make difficult coding judgements at

the analysis stage. Other investigators choose to use

open questions so as not to restrict the range of

responses. MOYSER and WAGSTAFFE (1985, p.

18) express surprise at the extent to which some elite

ligures will try to fit themselves and their views into

boxes for the sake of social scientific methods.

However. many elite interviewees prefer to give their

own interpretations rather than be forced to choose

between categories of responses which often do not

seem to give an adequate summary of the situation as

they perceive it. SCHOENBERGER (1991, p. 183)

makes a similar point when she notes that: The

respondent may also be frustrated by questions or by

a range of possible answers . that do not apply

precisely to his or her own experience. Respon-

dents are likely to feel less frustrated if they are able

to explain exactly what they mean in their own terms

rather than trying to fit themselves into the terms of

reference proposed by the researcher.

Asking questions about sensitive issues can be a

problem. For example, in farming these may include

land tenure. pollution, livestock movements off the

farm, family contributions to the farm, other jobs off

the farm, and other sources of income such as invest-

ments (Clark, personal communication, 1991). It is

usually best to leave sensitive questions until near the

end of an interview, because this allows a greater time

for the respondent to build up trust and confidence in

the researchers. In a six-country study of the automo-

tive industry, which dealt with many commercially

sensitive issues, such as future corporate strategies,

the researchers noticed that the first part of the

Geoforum/Volume 24 Number 3/l 993

interviews were used by the respondents to assess the

interviewers and how much they could safely be told

(WELLS and RAWLINSON, 1992). Once this early

period of probing by the respondents had taken place

and they were satisfied that they had confidence in the

researchers the interviews were more relaxed and the

respondents were more prepared to answer the sensi-

tive questions. This view is supported by Peck (per-

sonal communication, 1991) who has found that once

a degree of rapport is established many managers are

prepared to be surprisingly open about potentially

sensitive issues, such as attitudes to unions, labour

relations, closures and redundancies. He has found

that managers appear to be prepared to say quite a lot

of things which might be considered self-critical, or at

least critical of the methods used by their firms.

To maintain the flow of the interview and to obtain

useful insights into business behaviour, SCHOEN-

BERGER (1991) recommends building problems

into the interview for the respondents to solve. This

may involve asking interviewees to explain. where

appropriate, why their accounts vary from that pre-

dicted by a particular theory or why the behaviour of

their firms differs from that of other firms in the same

industry. This tactic provides a useful check on the

consistency of the views expressed earlier in the

interview by the respondents. Another strategy,

advocated by Schoenberger, is for the researcher to

summarize her or his interpretation of what the re-

spondent has said about particular topics that have

already been discussed and invite the interviewee to

evaluate its adequacy or appropriateness. This tactic

also helps to avoid the researcher inadvertently mis-

interpreting the interview to produce a given answer.

In a standardized interview a useful check on the

completeness of the information provided is to end

the interview with an open-ended discussion. This

technique was used in a case study of defencc-based

industries in Chicago where the researchers closed

each interview by eliciting from their informants their views on why Chicago has not fared better as a centre

for defence production and research (MARKUSEN

and McCURDY, 1989).

In many interview situations the interviewer needs to

be flexible as to where and when interviews take place

and be prepared for frequent interruptions as the respondent continues to run the business. This is

particularly true for small businesses where inter-


views may take place on the shop floor. Clark

(personal communication, 1991) recommends that

the interviewer is suitably dressed for the likely loca-

tion of the interview so that he or she blends in.

Sensible attire for the farm is clearly different from

that for the head office of a large corporation. Inap-

propriate clothes may have a quite disproportionately

negative effect (BULMER, 1988). Some problems

are, however, insurmountable as, for example, when

Clark turned up at a farm seeking an interview only to

find that it was run by Trappist monks whose vow of

silence made the quest rather difficult!

Obtaining an accurate record of an interview is an

important skill. There is a wide variety of ways of

taking notes. However, one thing all research

workers are agreed on is the importance of writing up

the notes as soon as possible after the completion of

the interview. Some researchers favour interviewing

in pairs as a way of eliminating interviewer bias and

providing a check on what is said during the interview

[e.g. KINCAID and BRIGHT (1957b) and NORTH

et al. (1983)]. I n one study of the competitive performance of small firms one interviewer used a sched-

ule to structure the interviews, while a second

engaged the respondents at appropriate points in a

more discursive dialogue about their knowledge

base, competitive strategy and flexibility (HORNE et al., 1987).

An alternative to taking notes is to tape-record the

interviews. This is common practice in North Amer-

ica [e.g. GORDEN (1975) and STAFFORD (1974,

1985)] and has been used successfully in Britain [e.g.

CREWE (1989) and PRATT (1989)]. It provides an

accurate record of the interview and enables the

finished report to be enlivened with extended direct

quotes. However, in one study of subcontracting,

whereas the managers of large manufacturing com-

panies raised no objection to having their interviews

recorded, an attempt to tape-record interviews with

the owners of small precision engineering companies

had to be abandoned after the first eight owners

declined (RAWLINSON, 1990). The acceptability of

taping an interview may, however, depend on the

approach the interviewer takes. GORDEN (1975)

advises explaining why it is used rather than asking for permission. By taping interviews it enables the inter-

viewer to concentrate on the phrasing and order of

questions rather than on note taking. On the other

351

hand, the act of taping may inhibit the responses and

transcribing and analysing the interviews can take a

considerable time. Several commentators [e.g.

BULMER (1988)] h ave noted that some of the most

interesting insights are obtained when the tape

recorder is turned off.

A number of ethical issues can arise in the way

interviews are conducted and the use that is made of

the information. Apart from some comments on

confidentiality these are hardly touched upon in the

geographical literature on business interviews.

BULMERs (1988, p. 156) advice on undertaking

research in organizations would, however, seem

applicable to many of the situations faced in business

surveys:

The researcher gaining entry to a setting has the responsibility to explain fairly and openly to the organization being studied what is the purpose of the enquiry. There is also a responsibility to show members of the organization draft material in order to allow the correction of factual inaccuracies. There is the further obligation in any material that is published to safeguard the organization from revelations that could be harmful to its commercial activities or its reputation. The commonest device for achieving this end is the use of anonymity in naming the organization and possibly not too closely identifying the locality in which it is situated. On the other hand, the researcher should retain to themselves (sic) the right to publish material gathered in the course of the study.

A promise of confidentiality is reassuring to respon-

dents and is likely to make them more cooperative

and open. However, it is not always possible to hide

the identity of the businesses being examined, par-

ticularly when examining industries or local econ-

omies dominated by a few large enterprises. Where

confidentiality has been promised, the problem be-

comes one of how to guarantee it. This may require a

degree of judicious vagueness. Some detail may have

to be suppressed in order not to provide a set of clues

that, taken together, would lead someone else to be

able to identify the firm. Similarly, if direct quo-

tations from interviews are to be used in the final

report these should be non-attributable, unless per-

mission has been given from the respondent.

Conclusion

Interviewing business owners and managers is an

important method of obtaining information in econ-

352

omit geography. However, surprisingly little has

been written about this method. Although the issues

involved in business surveys are not unique, several

points about research methods concerning interviews

are highlighted when undertaking business inter-

views, including the link between interview tech-

niques and research design, identifying respondents

and obtaining access, preparing for interviews and

obtaining accurate answers, and ways of conducting

and recording interviews. This paper has drawn upon

both published sources and a survey of Anglo-

American economic geographers in an attempt to

identify some of the successful methods of interview-

ing. Three general conclusions arise from this review

of interview methods and techniques.

First, the cut backs in official surveys in some

countries, such as the United Kingdom, have

increased the need for research workers to collect

their own data, yet the associated anti-bureaucratic/

form-filling climate of cutting the red tape can make

this task more difficult (HEALEY, 1991~). Done

properly business surveys take considerable time and

effort and should only be contemplated after all other

sources of information have been exhausted. It is also

desirable to examine the interviewing process from

the point of view of the respondents. To encourage

their continued cooperation in survey work it is im-

portant to maintain good relations with the business

community, not least because of the value of resur-

veying the same businesses at a later date [e.g. MUN-

TON et al. (1988) and NORTH et al. (1983)]. Too

often research workers neglect to send a short thank

you letter following an interview or forget to send

interviewees the promised summary of the results of

their projects. Surveys which attempt, within the

limits of the research topic, to make the experience as

interesting and stimulating as possible for the partici-

pants are also likely to make business owners and

managers more favourably disposed to participate in

future surveys (HEALEY, 1991a). This may be easier with the increased use of qualitative non-

standardized interviews which give a more active role

to respondents. There is, however, a danger of over-

saturation, particularly of large businesses, if too

many surveys are attempted. Consequently, there is a

case for making the data from surveys more widely

available. In Britain the ESRC Data Archive acts as a

repository for surveys, though relatively few econ-

omic geography business surveys have so far been

Geoforum/Volume 24 Number 30993

deposited there. Collaboration in the collection,

analysis and dissemination of information is another

possibility, particularly where there is overlap in

business surveys (FOLEY, 1990).

Second, there is no one best way of interviewing

business owners and managers. Methods vary for

different situations, depending on a range of factors,

including the research design, the kind and amount of

information required, the resources available, and

the size, organizational structure, sector and location

of the business to be approached. Although the

philosophy of the research worker may provide a

guide to the methods used and different interview

methods have associated characteristics (as illus-

trated in Table l), the reality of undertaking research

shows that the fit between theory and method is not

nearly so neat as is sometimes supposed. As BRY-

MAN (1984, p. 89) notes: there is no necessary 1: 1

relationship between methodology and technique.

Different philosophical assumptions do not simply

imply different approaches but also imply the differ-

ent usage of similar approaches. The link between

methods and philosophical approach needs further

investigation.

Last, the lack of clear accessible guidance in the

literature means that most researchers have little

choice in designing their surveys than to rely on a

combination of common sense and previous experi-

ence. Little progress will be made with improving the

quality of information obtained from interviewing

business owners and managers until research workers

are prepared to experiment with different methods to

try to increase response rates, hasten replies. obtain

clearer answers, improve the flow of interviews and

so on. Equally it is important that researchers and

journal editors give greater priority to reporting these

findings so that a reasonable map may be produced to

guide economic geographers through what is cur-

rently still largely terra incognita.

Acknowledgements-We gratefully acknowledge the help given to us by colleagues who told us about some of their experiences of interviewing business owners and managers. many of which have been incorporated into this paper. Thanks are due to Gordon Clark, Louise Crewe, David Gibbs, Roger Hayter, Rob Imrie, Richard Le Heron, Gordon Linge, Anna Markusen, Michelle Lowe, Kevin Morgan, David North, Frank Peck, Andy Pratt, John Rees, Allen Scott, Howard Stafford, Doug Watts and Peter Wells. Erica Schoenberger helpfully provided us with a pre-

G~~forum~olum~ 24 Number 311993

publication copy of her paper on interviewing. Andy Pratt kind$ commented on a draft of this paper. Respo~s~biIity for what is expressed &es with the authors alone,

References

BACHTLER, J. (1984f Wherefore ant thou, questionnaire?, Frontier (the magazine of the ~epa~meot of Geography, University of ~i~in8ham~, 3, 105-113.

BELSON, W. and DUNCAN, J. A. (1982) A comparisan of the check-list and the open r~sponse/questi~~~og systems, Appl. Statist., 11, 120-132.

BLOOM, N. (1988) The limitations of unqualitative research, frad. Mark~f~ng Dig. ) 13,49--S&

BRENNER, M. (1978) Inte~i~wing: the social phenom- enobgy of a research instrument, In: The Social Can- texts of Method, pp. 122-139, M. Brenner, P. Marsh and M. Brenner (Eds), Croom Helm, London.

BRIGGS, C. L. (X988) Learning How to Ask: a Sclcio- linguistic Appraisur of the Role of the Interview in Social Science Research. Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge.

BRYMAN, A. (1984) The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: a question of method or epistemology?, Br. J. Social., 35,75-92.

LAYMAN, A. (1988) Doing Research in ~rganizat~~~~s~ Routledge, London.

BRYMAN, A. (1989) Research retards and ~rgan~zat~o~ Studies. Unwin Hyman, London,

BULMER, M. (1988) Some reflections upon research in organizations, In: L?oing Research in Organizations, pp. 151-161, A. Bryman (Ed.). Rout~~~ge, London.

BURTON, T. L. and CHERRY, G. E. (1970) Social Re~~earc~ Techniques for Pianners. George Allen &z Unwin, London.

COOKE, P. and WELLS, P. (1990) Strategic A~~~an~es in XT: Learning by Interaction. Regional Industrial Re- search Report 4, University College Wales, Cardiff.

CREWE, L. (1989) Industrial restrwet~ring in West York- shire: some emp&ical and theoretical developments with particular reference to the textiles-clothing-retail distribution system, ~npub~~sh~d Ph.D thesis, University of Leeds.

DEAN, J. P. and WI-IYTE, W. F. (1958) How do you know if the informant is telling the truth?, Hum. Org., 17,34- 38.

DE ~HERNATONY, L. (1988) iZ&zttirzg the Most from Postal Research. Occasional Paper No. 3, Industrial Marketing Research Association, Lichfield.

DEXTER, IL. A. (4970) E&e and Specialized ~nter~?~ew~ng. Northwestern University Press. Evanston, IL.

DIXON, C. .I. and LEACH, B. (1978) Questionnaires and ~~~terviews in ~e~gruphica~ R~.~e~rc~, Concepts and Techniques in Modern Geography 18. Geo Abstracts, Norwich.

DTI (DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY) (1973) Memorandum on the inquiry into location attitudes and experience, In: Regional ~e~efo~~e~~ &cerl- tives, Session 1933-74, Minutes of Evideme (from July 1973), Appe?zdi~es and Index, pp. X5-668. Expenditure Committee (Trade and Industry Sub-committee), HMSO, London.

EDWARDS, P. K. and ~~G~NSGN~ P, (19%) Differ-

353

ences In perception between establishment and higher level managers, In: Beyond the Wtlrkplace: Managing ~nd~tr~a~ Related in the Marts-esta~l~hment Enter- prise, pp. 227-257, P. Marginson (Ed.). Basif Blackwell, Oxford.

ELIAS, P. and HEALEY, M. J. (1991) Pe0~~eund Work in Coventry: a Survey of ~~~~~ayers. Coventry City Coun- cil, Coventry.

EYLES, J. (1988) Interpreting the geographical world: qualitative approaches in geographical research, In: Q~~itat~ve Methods in Human Geugraphy, pp. I-16 .I. EyJes and D. M. Smith (Eds). Polity Press, Cam- bridge.

EYLES, J. and SMITH, D. M. (Eds) (1988) Qualitative Methods irz Human Geography. Polity Press, Cam- bridge.

FOLEY, P. (1990) Growth in the folk&on of labour market ~nformation~ Reg. Stud., 24,367-371.

FORSYTHE, J, B. (1377) Obtaining cooperation in a survey uf business executives, J. Marke?~~~~ lies., 14, 370-373.

FOTHERGILL, S. and GUDGTN, G, (1982) Unequal Growth: Urban and Regional ~~n~~~~~e~~ Change in the UK Heinemann Educational I London.

FOTHERCILL, S. and GUY, N. (1990) Retreatfrom the Regions: Corporate Change and the Closure of Factories, Regional Policy and envelopment Series 1. Jessica Kingsley and Regional Studies Association, London.

FOWLER, F. J. and MANGIONE, T. W. (1990) S&zz- dardized Survey ~nte~~ew~ng: ~~~njrniz~g fnterview- related Error, Applied Social Research Methods Series 18, Sage, London.

GARDNER, G. (1978) So&al Surveys for Social Planners. Open University, Milton Keynes.

GASSON, R. (1973) Goals and values of farmers, 1. ugric. Econ., 24521-532.

GORDEN, R. L. (1975) ~~~e~~~e~~~~~ Strategy, ~e~h~~~4aes and Tactics. Dorsey Press, Homewood~ IL.

GUDGIN, G. (1978) hdustriaf Locafion Processes and Regional Employment Growth. Saxon House, Farn- borough.

HAGUE, P. (1987a) The I~d~triu~ Market Research Handbook. Kogan Page, London.

HAGUE, P. (X987b) Good and bad in questionnaire design, Ind. Marketing Dig., 12, lfiI--f7#.

HART, S. (3987) The use of the survey in industrial market research, J. Marketing Mgt, 3(l), 25-38.

HEALEY, M. J. (1979) Changes in the location of production in muIt~-plant enterprises, with particular reference to the United Kingdom textile and clothing industries, 1%7-72, Unpublished Ph.D thesis, Univer- sity of Sheffield.

HEALEY, M. J. (1983) The changing data base: an overview, In: Urban and Regional Industrial Research: the Cha~g~~~ UK Data Base, pp. l-29, M. J. Healey (Ed.). Geo Books, Norwich.

HEALEY, M. J. (1984) The Covenfry Region ~nd~tria~ Esta~~~s~ment databank 1: A Guide to Sources, Methods and renditions ~sedfor the City ~fcaven~ry. Industriaf Location Working Paper 2, Department of Geography, Coventry Polytechnic.

HEALEY 1 M. J. (1991a) Outlining information from businesses, In: Economic Activity and Land Use: the Chang ing information Base for tocai and Regional: Studies, pp_ 193-251, M. .I. Heaky (Ed.). Longman, Harfow,

354 Geoforum/Volume 24 Number 3/1993

MARSH. C. (1979) Problems with surveys: method or epistemology?, Sociology, 13,293-305.

MARSHALL, J. N. (1983) Business-service activities in British Provincial conurbations, Envir. Plann. A. 15, 1343-1359.

MARSHALL, J. N. (198Y) Corporate reorganization and the geography of services: evidence from the motor vehicle aftermarket in the West Midlands region of the UK, Reg. Stud.. 23, 139-150.

MASON. C. M. (1989) Explaining recent trends in new firm formation in the UK: some evidence from South Hampshire, Reg. Stud., 23. 331-346.

MASSEY, D. and MEEGAN, R. (Eds) (1985) Politics and Method: Contrusting Studies in lndustriul Geography. Methuen, London.

MCDOWELL, L. (1992) Valid games? A response to Erica Schoenberger. Prof. Geogr., 44,212-215.

McKINNON. A. C. (1985) Physical Distribution $ystem.s. Routledge. London.

McNEE, R. B. (1960) Towards a more humanistic economic geography, Tijdschr. econ. sot. Geogr., 51. 201- 206.

MEAGER, N. (1986) Skill shortages again and the UK economy, Ind. Relat. .I., 17. 236248.

MILNE, S. (1991) Small firms, industrial reorganization, and space: the case of the UK high-fidelity audio sector, Envir. Plann. A, 23, 833-852.

MITCHELL, J. C. (1983) Case and situational analysis, Social. Rev., 31. 187-21 I,

MORIARTY, B. M. (1983) Hierarchies of cities and the spatial filtering of industrial development, Pup. reg. Sci. Ass., 53, 59-82.

MOYSER, G. and WAGSTAFFE, M. (1985) The Method- ology of Elite Interviewing. Report to the Economic and Social Research Council, Grant H00250003, London.

MOYSER, G. and WAGSTAFFE, M. (Eds) (1987) Research Methods for Elite Studies. Allen & Unwin, London.

MUNTON, R., WHATMORE, S. and MARSDEN, T. (1988) Reconsidering urban-fringe agriculture: a longi- tudinal analysis of capital restructuring on farms in the Metropolitan Green Belt, Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. New Ser., 13, 324-336.

NORTH, D. J., LEIGH, R. and GOUGH, J. (1983) Monitoring industrial change at the local level: some comments on methods and data sources. In: Urban and Regional Industrial Research: the Changing UK Dutu Base, pp. 111-129, M. J. Healey (Ed.). Geo Books. Norwich.

PRATT, A. (1989) Towards an explanation of the form and location of industrial estates in Cornwall 1984: a critical realist approach, Unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of Exeter.

QUINN PATTON, M. (1986) Utilization-focused Evalu- ation. Sage, London.

RAWLINSON, M. B. (1990) Subcontracting relationship between small engineering firms and large motor vehicle firms in the Coventry area, Unpublished Ph.D thesis. Coventry Polytechnic.

RAWLINSON, M. B. (1991) Subcontracting in the motor industry: a case study in Coventry, In: Restructuring the Global Automotive Industry, pp. 215-230. C. Law (Ed.). Routledge, London.

HEALEY, M. J. (Ed.) (1991b) Economic Activity and Land Use: the Changing Information Base for Local and Regional Studies. Longman, Harlow.

HEALEY. M. J. (1991~) Improving the local and regional economy information base, Reg. Stud., 25, 363-369.

HEALEY, M. J., NOON, D., BERKELEY, N.. DUN- HAM, P. and HASLUCK. C. (1992) Industrial Strate- gies, Economic Development and Job Patterns in Leicesters Retail Sector. Leicester City Council, Leices- ter.

HEALEY. M. J. and WATTS, H. D. (1987) The multiplant enterprise, In: Industrial Change in the United Kingdom, pp. 149-166, W. F. Lever (Ed.). Longman. Harlow.

HEDGES, B. and RITCHIE, J. (1987) Research and Policy: the Choice of Appropriate Research Methods, SCPR, London.

HOINVILLE, G., JEWELL, R. and ASSOCIATES (1978) Survey Research Practice. Heinemann Edu- cational Books, London.

HORNE, M. R., LLOYD, P. E.. PAY, J. L. and ROE, P. (1987) Structuring Knowledge of the Small Firm: a Framework for Informing Local Authority Intervention within the Private Sector. Working Paper Series 20, School of Geography, North West Industry Research Unit, University of Manchester.

ILBERY, B. W. (1985a) Agricultural Geography. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

ILBERY, B. W. (1985b) Factors affecting the structure of horticulture in the Vale of Evesham: a behavioural approach, /. rur. Stud., 1, 121-133.

ILBERY. B. W. (1987) The development of farm diversifi- cation in the UK: evidence from Birminghams urban fringe, Jl r. agric. Sot., 148,21-35.

JOBBER, D. and BLEASDALE, M. J. R. (1987) Inter- viewing in industrial marketing research: the state-of- the-art, e. Rev. Marketing, 12(2), 7-11.

KEEBLE, D. and WEVER, E. (Ed.) (1986) New Firms and Regional Development in Europe. Croom Helm, London.

KINCAID, H. W. and BRIGHT, M. (1957a) Interviewing the business elite, Am. J. Social., 63, 304-311.

KINCAID, H. V. and BRIGHT, M. (1957b) The tandem interviews: a trial of the two-interviews team, Publ. Opinion Q., 21, 304-312.

KIRK, J. and MILLER, M. (1986) Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. Sage. London.

KRUMME, G. (1969) Towards a geography of enterprise. Econ. Geogr., 45,30-40.

LOWE. M. (1989) Worker co-operatives-panacea or radical enterprise?. Envir. Plann. D Sot. Space, 7. 31- 49.

LOWE, M. (1991) Trading places: retailing and local economic development at Merry Hill. West Midlands, E. Midld Geogr., 14(June), 31-48.

MACFARLANE-SMITH, J. (1972) Interviewing in Mar- ket and Social Research. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.

MARKUSEN, A. (1991) The Rise of the Gunbelt. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

MARKUSEN, A. and McCURDY, K (1989) Chicagos defense based high technology: a case study of the seedbeds of innovation hypothesis, Econ. Dev. Q. 3, 15-31.


RAWNSLEY, A. (Ed.) (1978) Manual of Industrial Mar- keting Research. John Wiley, Chichester.

SAYER, A. (1984) Method in Social Science. Hutchinson, London.

SAYER, A. and MORGAN, K. (1985) A modern industry in a declining region: links between method, theory and policy, In: Politics and Method: Contrasting Studies in Industrial Geography, pp. 144-168, D. Massey and R. Meegan (Eds). Methuen, London.

SCHMENNER, R. W. (1982) Making Business Location Decisions. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

SCHOENBERGER, E. (1991) The corporate interview as a research method in economic geography, Prof. Geogr., 43, 18G189.

SCHOENBERGER, E. (1992) Self-criticism and self- awareness in research: a reply to Linda McDowell, Prof. Geogr., 44,215-218.

SILVERMAN, D. (1985) Qualitative Methodology and Sociology. Gower, Aldershot.

STAFFORD, H. A. (1974) The anatomy of the location decision: content analysis of case studies, In: Spatial Perspectives on Industrial Organization and Decision- making, pp. 169-187, F. E. I. Hamilton (Ed.). John Wiley, London.

STAFFORD, H. A. (1985) Environmental protection and industrial location, Ann. Ass. Am. Geogr., 75,227-240.

STAFFORD, H. A. and WATTS, H. D. (1990) Aban- doned products, abandoned places: plant closures by multi-product multi-locational firms in urban areas, Tijdschr. econ. sot. Geogr., 10,206-227.

SWAIN, W. (1978) The postal questionnaire, In: Manualof

355

Industrial Marketing Research, pp. 33-42, A. Rawnsley (Ed.). John Wiley, Chichester.

SYKES, W. (1990) Validity and reliability in qualitative market research: a review of the literature, J. MarketRes. Sot., 32,289-328.

SYKES, W. (1991) Taking stock: issues from the literature on validity and reliability in qualitative research, J. Market Res. Sot., 33, 3-12.

TAYLOR, M. J. and THRIFT, N. J. (Eds) (1982) The Geography of Multinationals. Croom Helm, London.

TAYLOR, M. J. and THRIFT, N. J. (1983) Business organization, segmentation and location, Reg. Stud., 17, 445465.

THRIFT, N., DANIELS, P. and LEYSHON, A. (1988) Growth and Location of Professional Producer Service Firms in Britain. Final Report to Economic and Social Research Council, Grant D00232194, London.

WATTS, H. D. (1980) The Large Industrial Enterprise. Croom Helm, London.

WATTS, H. D. (1991) Plant closures, multi-locational firms and the urban economy: Sheffield, UK, Envir. Plann. A, 23,37-58.

WELLS, P. and RAWLINSON, M. (1992) Technology procurement practices, and structural change in the automotive presswork sector, In: Sheet Metal, pp. 9% 112, B. Shirvani and D. Briggs (Eds). IOP, Bristol.

WILSON, A. (1968) The Assessment of Industrial Markets. Hutchinson, London.

YIN, R. K. (1984) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Applied Social Research Methods Series 5. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.

Date post:	26-Nov-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	rodrigo-toniol
View:	55 times
Download:	2 times

Geoforum Volume 24 Issue 3 1993 Michael J. Healey; Michael B. Rawlinson -- Interviewing Business...

Documents