ATLAS PhD seminar 2015

Developing research work in Tourism, Leisure or Risk

Lisbon, Portugal

20 October, 2015

Abstract book

ATLAS 2015

ATLAS Seminar, 20th October 2015 42

Interviewing city event planners: Methodological

strategies for collecting data from elites

Vladimir Antchak

Key words: elite interviewing, interview strategies, fieldwork, event management,

PhD research

Introduction

This paper explores the author’s experience of conducting semi-structured face-to-

face interviews with the city event planners in New Zealand. It draws upon the

author’ PhD research on the design and development of the portfolios of major

events in urban event destinations. Due to the specificity of the city events planning

job and limited numbers of hard-to-reach respondents possessing the necessary

information, the researcher adopted some recommendations for elite interviewing.

The paper reflects upon a set of utilised strategies, including 1) gaining access, 2)

preparation for interviews, 3) interview facilitating technics and 4) post-interview

follow-up.

The experience of the researcher supports the main ‘postulates’ of elite interviewing

emphasised in the existing literature. The paper concludes that the success of the

elite interview hinges on the interplay among different critical factors. This includes

a well-developed access strategy, intensive preparation, ability to control and

manipulate the course of the interview and building reliable post-interview

relationships with the respondents. The discussed insight might be used as a

successful case by qualitative researchers, in particular, post-graduate students

while designing their data collection strategies.

Setting the scene

My PhD thesis is titled “The development of a strategic approach to major events:

Exploring the event portfolio design in New Zealand”. It explores the way in which

ATLAS 2015

ATLAS Seminar, 20th October 2015 43

applied city event strategies and policies shape the design of a portfolio of major

events in large and medium urban areas by New Zealand standards. The data

collection, including semi-structured interviews and documentary analysis was

conducted in three cities, Auckland, Wellington and Dunedin. I adopted a purposeful

approach to the selection of interviewees (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003). Only those

participants “who best fit the purposes of the research” (Harding, 2013) were

interviewed. The objectives of the research were focused primarily on the official

city vision on major events and event portfolio design. Due to this specific focus, I

collected and analysed only the perspectives of those directly involved in decision-

making with regard to planning and management of major events. In particular, I

conducted interviews with the city event managers, event advisers, policy planners

and other relevant senior managers from city councils and relevant Councils

Controlled Organisations (CCO) in Auckland, Wellington and Dunedin. The views of

other important stakeholders, such as local residents, event organisers, community

leaders and professional associations were not targeted in this study. The key

rationale for this choice was that city event managers were more likely to be well

informed and prepared to comment on public documents, current event strategies

and event-related initiatives.

As a result of such deliberate delimitation, the pool of would-be interviewees was

significantly narrowed. In particular, this was relevant to Dunedin and Wellington,

where city events’ teams consisted of only few event managers. Such research

situation called for a ‘less is more’ approach (McCracken, 1988) when it is more

beneficial to work intensively with few people who possess required experience and

expertise than to interview many managers with partial knowledge. I applied semi-

structured face-to-face type of interviews (Brinkmann, 2014; Minichiello, 1995). The

face-to-face communication provided both sides with an opportunity to naturally

share knowledge and construct meanings within a shared environment. In total, I

interviewed thirteen respondents. Some respondents were interviewed twice in

order to get more insights and clarify some emerged issues. Overall, I recorded

sixteen interviews. This number met the requirements for the achievement of

saturation in qualitative research (Guest, Bunce, & Johnson, 2006; McCracken,

1988).

ATLAS 2015

ATLAS Seminar, 20th October 2015 44

Because of a quite ‘high’ level of the respondents’ decision-making status within

their organisations, as well as some access barriers (e.g., names and contacts were

not in the open access), I applied recommendations and guidelines for elite

interviewing (e.g., Darbi & Hall, 2014; Harvey, 2011; Mikecz, 2012; Ostrander,

1993; Stephens, 2007). In this research I understood elites as individuals who were

“either key decision-makers and\or had a major influence” (Mikecz, 2012, p. 485)

with regard to major event planning and management in the cities under study. The

process of interviewing of my participants entailed the following stages: 1) gaining

access, 2) pre-interview preparation, 3) interview facilitating technics 4) post-

interview follow-up. The following sub-sections will discuss these stages in detail.

Gaining Access

As literature suggests, gaining access to elites might be very difficult and time-

consuming because of barriers established to divide elites from non-elites (Welch,

Marschan-Piekkari, Penttinen, & Tahvanainen, 2002). While negotiating face-to-

face interviews, I applied a two-phase strategy. During the first stage, I identified

some potential participants for the research through scanning of the websites of the

relevant public organisations. Very often I was able to find either only names without

any contact details, or just general phone number\e-mail of the responsible

department.

After that, I followed the recommendation of the Auckland University of

Technology’s Ethic Committee (AUTEC) and sent a letter for permission to conduct

the research on general e-mails of the organisations. Some of the e-mails were

addressed to the so-called ultra-elites, most highly placed managers (Mikecz,

2012). In 1-2 weeks, I received positive responses from the majority of the

organisations in the name of the top-ranked managers. Moreover, some of them

also agreed to be interviewed and expressed their interest in the results of the

study. I agreed to share my findings, and should it be necessary to make a

presentation of the research. In the literature such a decision meets the

requirements of the reciprocity tactic of elite access (Shenton & Hayter, 2004). All

the collaborating organisations provided me with a list of potential interviewees. This

widened my previously prepared list. In Dunedin and Wellington city councils,

ATLAS 2015

ATLAS Seminar, 20th October 2015 45

contact persons were appointed to facilitate my communication with the participants

and manage the schedule of the interviews.

During the second stage, I contacted the participants directly, referring to the

received official permission. Following the advice to gain the trust of the elite

participants at the earliest stage (e.g., Harvey, 2011), I provided the potential

interviewees with the following information: personal presentation, nature and scope

of my research, duration of the interview, questions I want to ask and ethical

considerations. When necessary, I made a phone call in the following few weeks to

discuss the possibility of an interview (Stephens, 2007). However, generally, the

majority of the participants positively responded in 1-3 weeks, suggesting suitable

time, dates and sometimes the names of other colleagues who might be interested

in the topic of the research.

Overall, the applied approach that included official request for permission to conduct

a research within the organisation, provision of the potential respondents with the

‘full picture’ of the research and my readiness to share and present the results of

the study determined a relatively easy and successful access to the research field.

Pre-interview preparation

My experience confirms and supports the existing argument in favour of the

necessity of the pre-interview thorough preparation (Mikecz, 2012; Welch et al.,

2002). A semi-structured interview guide was developed after my extensive review

of the literature and relevant city documents. Such pre-interview work allowed me to

include some specific questions to get a ‘behind-the-scene’ understanding of some

of the city initiatives. The key topics I was interested in always remained the same,

including ‘the nature of the event portfolio in the city’, ‘key criteria for event

selection, ‘portfolio development and management’. However, taking into

consideration different contexts (three cities with distinctive objectives, city capacity

and funding opportunities) as well as my new ideas that arose after the analysis of

first interviews, some new questions were added to the guide.

Darbi and Hall (2014) highlight the value of a thorough appreciation of the

backgrounds of the interviewees. Prior to the interview, I scrutinised the profiles of

my respondents in a business-oriented social networking service LinkedIn, read

ATLAS 2015

ATLAS Seminar, 20th October 2015 46

available online interviews and presentations with these people. I used the obtained

information to make references to the participants’ past experience and completed

projects in order to build a well-disposed atmosphere.

Mikecz (2012) advises to exhibit knowledgeability of the current situation in the

industry while interviewing elites. The demonstration of the in-depth knowledge of

the current event-related initiatives, mass-media reaction and emerged issues

helped me to establish trust and esteem. My elite interviewees appreciated my

ability to argue and produce reasons within the city context.

Overall, the intensive preparation for an interview with elites proves itself as a

critical success factor. It demonstrates the researcher’s knowledgeability and

commitment. It also facilitates gaining the respondents’ trust and sympathy.

Interview facilitating technics

During the interviews, I used the following strategies to facilitate the process and

develop rapport and trust:

Controlling the environment (Stephens, 2007). All but one of the interviews

were organised in the respondents’ working space (meeting rooms booked in

advance) with the minimum level of noise and interruptions. The doors to the

meeting rooms were always kept closed. The majority of the respondents set

their mobile phones in a mute mode, although, that was not my request. The

interiors, familiar to the respondents made the atmosphere more relaxed and

work-oriented. One interview, on the contrary, was organised in a neutral

space, in a café. Although, the obtained information was very valuable, the

high level of noise and periodic interruptions made it very difficult to

communicate with the participant, and lately to transcribe the record (Mikecz,

2012).

Observing respondents’ body language and emotions, which is essential

when discerning discomfort, confusion or interest and openness of the

interviewee (Bryman, 2012). For example, during the course of one of the

interviews, I noticed that the participant felt some discomfort answering a

ATLAS 2015

ATLAS Seminar, 20th October 2015 47

question regarding interurban competition. This observation allowed me to

take control of the situation by switching off the recorder and paraphrasing

the question. The interviewee was ready to share with me some useful

insider information but only ‘off-the-record’.

Appropriate dressing. As Mikecz (2012) observed, appropriate dressing

helps the elite interviewer to ‘blend in’ more” (p. 488). Although, New Zealand

society is relatively tolerant to the personal public appearance, I wore a shirt

and a causal jacket for my interviews.

Telling my life story and achievements (Stephens, 2007). Due to the fact, that

I had an extensive experience in event management, event planning and

event production in Russia, I secured a kind of a ‘clanship’ status. This

helped me to break down a possible ‘insider-outsider’ barrier and facilitated

the discussion (Shenton & Hayter, 2004). Sometimes the respondents

appealed to my experience of event organisation and asked to compare for

example, New Zealand and Russian contexts.

All the above-mentioned techniques proved to be very useful. They provided me

with an opportunity to fully control and manipulate the course and content of the

interview, as well as to establish trustfulness and reliability.

Post-interview follow-up

Post-interview communication with elite respondents can be very beneficial for the

research and provide the researcher with additional information and feedback

(Mikecz, 2012; Welch et al., 2002). I found it very useful at the end of the interview

to ask my respondents for an opportunity to contact them again, should any

additional questions appear. All the interviewees expressed their willingness to help.

On various occasions, I e-mailed my participants, asking them to clarify some

emerged issues or requesting for some corporate documents (e.g., minutes of

meetings, event programmes, and annual reports).

ATLAS 2015

ATLAS Seminar, 20th October 2015 48

Some respondents asked me to send them the transcripts of interviews to check for

accuracy (Welch et al., 2002). I found it fruitful to use these opportunities for

scheduling another short meeting with them in order to share and discuss some of

my preliminary analytical findings. For example, working on the case of Wellington,

a concept of ‘critical mass’(Getz, 2013) emerged from the data. I e-mailed to the

interviewees and asked them for a chance to present the concept and get their

feedback. The second meeting was scheduled. The results of the second circle of

interviews provided me with a very useful data that guided my theorisation.

Following each interview I sent a ‘thank you’ e-mail to my participants

acknowledging their cooperation and contribution to the research project (Maxwell,

2012). Overall, I noticed a high level of enthusiasm of my interviewees to be

involved in the research. That was expressed in their prompt responses to my

requests, consent to be interviewed again and willingness to be informed about the

final results of the research.

Conclusion.

My experience of conducting interviews with the event planners in three cities in

New Zealand supported and confirmed the practicability and usefulness of the key

techniques of the elite interviewing described in the literature. The key insight that

emerged from this paper is that a researcher and a post-graduate student in

particular, should be thoroughly prepared for the meeting with their participants,

taking into account all possible scenarios and potential issues. Although some

barriers might emerge while gaining access to the elite interviewers, a thoughtful

and well-planned strategy, including letters for permission, provision of detailed

information and building of trustworthiness at the earlier stages of the

communication will increase the willingness of the potential respondents to be

involved in the research project.

An intensive pre-interview preparation plays a critical role in the success of the

interviewer – respondent communication. It enhances the researcher’s

knowledgeability and self-confidence, as well as builds reliability and reciprocity. A

clear understanding of how to behave during the course of the interview, how to

control the environment and make yourself reliable will maximise the positive results

ATLAS 2015

ATLAS Seminar, 20th October 2015 49

of interviewing. Well-designed post-interview relationships with the respondents

provide the researcher with an array of additional opportunities to increase the level

and value of the insights, to check the feasibility of the proposed concepts and to

get a thoughtful feedback.

References

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (4 ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Brinkmann, S. (2014). Unstructured and semisrtuctured interviewing. In P. Leavy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 277-299). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4 ed.). New York. NY: Oxford University Press.

Darbi, W. P. K., & Hall, C. M. (2014). Elite interviews: Critical practice and tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(9), 832-848. doi:10.1080/13683500.2014.887663

Getz, D. (2013). Event tourism: Concepts, international case studies, and research. New York, NY: Cognizant Communication Corporation.

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough?: An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. doi:10.1177/1525822X05279903

Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. London, England: Sage Publication.

Harvey, W. S. (2011). Strategies for conducting elite interviews. Qualitative Research, 11(4), 431-441. doi:10.1177/1468794111404329

Maxwell, J. A. (2012). A realist approach for qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

McCracken, G. D. (1988). The long interview. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Mikecz, R. (2012). Interviewing Elites: Addressing methodological issues. Qualitative

Inquiry, 18(6), 482-493. Minichiello, V. (1995). In-depth interviewing: Principles, techniques, analysis (2 ed.).

Melbourne, Australia: Longman. Ostrander, S. A. (1993). "Surely you're not in this just to be helpful": Access, rapport,

and interviews in three studies of elites. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 22(1), 7-27. doi:10.1177/089124193022001002

Shenton, A. K., & Hayter, S. (2004). Strategies for gaining access to organisations and informants in qualitative studies. Education for Information, 22(3/4), 223-231.

Stephens, N. (2007). Collecting data from elites and ultra elites: Telephone and face-to-face interviews with macroeconomists. Qualitative Research, 7(2), 203-216. doi:10.1177/1468794107076020

Welch, C., Marschan-Piekkari, R., Penttinen, H., & Tahvanainen, M. (2002). Corporate elites as informants in qualitative international business research. International Business Review, 11(5), 611-628. doi:10.1016/S0969-5931(02)00039-2