Interviewing

Interviewing: Having looked into the designing of questionnaires, scaling techniques and major aspects in sampling, we now turn to an important aspect of the field survey, namely, interviewing It is one of the most difficult tasks in marketing research and yet it has not received adequate attention. It is difficult because it requires a rare combination of intelligence, initiative and tact on the part of interviewers to enable them to get the desired information from the unknown respondents.

Conditions for a Successful Interview: An interview is a purposeful conversation between the interviewer and the respondent aimed at eliciting certain information from the latter. Though this appears to be a simple task, in reality, it is not so. It is necessary that certain conditions are fulfilled in order to ensure its successful completion. These conditions are explained below.

Availability of Information with the Respondent: First, the respondent must have the information which is sought by the interviewer. It may well be that the respondent had the information but due to the passage of time, he has now forgotten it. Alternately, he might have repressed it due to some emotional stress.

Cognition: Second, the respondent should understand what is required and expected of him. He should be in a position to decide what information he should give, how much he should give and in what manner he should give it. The interviewer should ensure that the respondent understands his role when he is interviewed. Whenever the respondent’s answer to a question is incomplete or irrelevant, the interviewer should again explain it clearly or probe further to get the necessary details.

Motivation: Finally, the respondent should feel motivated to answer questions accurately. He should be cooperative right from the beginning to the end of the interview. At the same time, he should realise the seriousness of the interview and give correct answers.

An interview is in fact an interaction of the interviewer and the respondent. Unless they are cooperative and talk on the same wavelength, the interview cannot be successful. Much responsibility, therefore, falls on the interviewer to remove any distrust and misgiving on the part of the respondent at the beginning of an interview, as also his confusion in answering questions as the interview proceeds.

A number of errors do creep in on account of the interviewers, which are termed as interviewer bias.

The Interviewer’s Task

The interviewer’s task has four aspects: (i) Locating sample members, (ii) Obtaining interviews, (iii) Asking questions, and (iv) Recording the answers. The amount of time spent on these aspects will vary on account of such factors as the nature of the inquiry, the type of sample, the extent of the respondent’s cooperation and length of the questionnaire. The time spent by interviewers on actual interviewing is much less than what is generally imagined. Sudman found that contrary to general expectation, interviewers spend only one-third of their time on actual interviewing and two-thirds on other aspects of their task.

Locating the Respondents: In probability sampling, the interviewer cannot choose his respondents on his own He has to approach only those persons who have been selected in the sample This fixes a responsibility on the interviewer to find the sample members. In area sampling, where maps are used, the interviewer has to concern himself with either listing dwelling or segmenting within selected blocks. This needs great care as a casual handling of the job may have some dwelling unlisted. From these listed dwelling, a sample is chosen and the interviewer has to call on the sample members. Sometimes he may have to call back when the members are not available or unable to spare time on the first call.

Obtaining the Interview: Having located the respondent, the interviewer has to initiate the interview He may have to show his identity and authorisation letter/card of his organization After this, it is necessary to inform the respondent about the purpose of the survey, to impress upon him how his response will be helpful for the survey and to convince him of the need for his cooperation. While he should fully justify to the respondent the reasons for the information sought, he need not be too much apologetic about it. He should also give some idea about what is expected to emerge from such a survey and to whom the results may be of interest. He should refrain from overstating or inflating the importance of the survey.

Initially, when the interview proceeds, the respondent is usually reserved. In such a case, the interviewer should be very patient and courteous while persuading the respondent lest he may be forced to abandon the interview altogether. Such a situation is, no doubt, challenging but if handled carefully, it will give added self-confidence to the interviewer. He should assure the respondent that his answers will be kept confidential and that his identify will not be disclosed. He should also point out that the interview is not a test nor is it intended to educate the respondent. What is important at the beginning is that the interviewer establishes a rapport with the respondent. He ahs to put the respondent at ease so that he does not have any reservations while talking to the interviewer. The more free and frank the respondent is in answering questions, the better will be the interview. The interviewer must be careful not to assume an air of superiority. This is necessary to ensure the respondent does not put off the interviewing.

Asking the Questions: Having initiated the interview, the interviewer must ask the necessary questions In the case of a structured questionnaire, he has to ask the questions in the same phraseology and sequence as contained in the questionnaire He has to ensure that whatever is asked, is understood by the respondent in the sense in which it is intended He has also to ensure that he understands what the respondent says. He has to be extremely careful not to influence the respondent by his own ideas and prejudices. It has been rightly said that the interviewer’s function is neither that of an educator nor missionary, but that of an impartial observer of public opinion as he finds it. No matter how much he may privately disagree with the attitudes he encounters, it is not his business to enlighten or convert but to listen and understand.

If he directly or indirectly influences the respondent by his ideas and opinions, the answers of the respondent will not reflect his own ideas and opinions. The interviewer should not emphasise a particular word or part of the question as it could be suggestive to the respondent. Particularly when a question has more than one alternative answer, the interviewer should not, by the manner of asking or by the tone in which it is asked, suggest that he prefers one particular alternative to the remaining ones. In short, he must maintain neutrality and objectivity throughout the interview process.

During the course of the interview, in addition to asking questions, the interviewer must satisfy himself that the answers given by the respondent are adequate. The symptoms of inadequate response, as given by Kahn and Cannell are: partial response, non-response, irrelevant response, inaccurate response and the verbalised response problem. While the first four symptoms are self-explanatory, the last one needs some explanation. At times the respondent explains to the interviewer why he is unable to answer the question. He might not have understood the question or he does not posses the information sought, or he thinks that the question is irrelevant or inappropriate. In all such cases the interviewer should gently probe further to get the necessary information. It may be difficult at times to develop supplementary questions on the spur of the moment. This apart, the phrasing of a supplementary questioning a particular manner may introduce an element of interviewer-bias. On the other hand, no single supplementary question will be suitable in all possible situations. It is difficult to lay down any rigid guidelines in this regard. However, one important measure that can be taken is to provide adequate training to interviewers with a set of standard techniques that should be used by them for handling inadequate responses.

Recording the Responses: Recording the responses is the last aspect of the interviewing task Except when mail questionnaires are sent out, or a panel survey is undertaken in which the respondents are requested to keep diary records, the recording of answers is done by the interviewers themselves.

The interviewer has to record the answers honestly, as they are obtained from the respondent. In no case should he add or delete something on his own. In the case of open-ended questions, he is expected to be more careful in recording the answers otherwise he is likely to forget or miss some part. If answers are improperly or partially recorded in the hope that when the interviewer return to his organization, he will write them in full, he may find that he is unable to recollect all the answers. This is likely to pose a serious problem at the time of the editing of the questionnaire or the tabulation of data.

While closing the interview, the interviewer should thank the respondent for this cooperation in the survey and for the time that he has spent in providing the answers. He should close the interview on a friendly note so that in exceptional cases when some crucial additional information is needed, he can approach for respondent again. However, the interviewer should avoid approaching the respondent again as far as possible as this would take more time and enhance the total cost of the survey.

A New Interviewing Technique: At this stage, we may mention that advances in electronic and communication technologies have evolved a new interviewing technique. The traditional questionnaire interview is being replaced by computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI). In CAPI, the interviewer visits the respondent with a laptop computer which has the entire questionnaire loaded on it.

There are several advantages of using CAPI. First, a correct sequence of questions is maintained. Second, it is easy to display colour pictures and visual aids for the better understanding of the respondent. Third, there is no need for any subsequent data entry if the interview is based on a structured questionnaire. Almost immediately after the field work, data can be processed. In view of these advantages, it should be clear that the use of CAPI will considerably cut down the time for the survey-based marketing research. This will provide impetus to marketing research in the country.

Although the cost of using CAPI will be higher than the traditional method of interviewing, the advantages are substantial. One has to carefully weight the cost-benefit before deciding to use the new device.

Interviewing Errors

Although the researcher may have taken sufficient care in the recruitment and training of interviewers before they are deputed for interviewers, there are likely to be certain errors which arise while interviewing

First, errors may arise if the interviewer is unable to establish a proper rapport with the respondent. If the rapport is too weak, the respondent may give answers half-heartedly or give incorrect replies. On the other hand, if the rapport is too strong, it may obsess the respondent on account of excessive influence of the interviewer. This too would not help in obtaining accurate responses. Both these situations have to be avoided and a reasonable rapport between the interviewer and the respondent is to be establishing, as was pointed out earlier.

Errors interviewing may also arise if the interviewer has deliberately or inadvertently not followed the instructions. For example, he might not have explained the background and purpose of the survey to the respondent or he might have done so vaguely, as a result of which the answers received may not be accurate.

Further, if the interviewer gives undue emphasis to a particular word or a part of the question, it might be suggestive to the respondent. This too would be a source of an interviewing error. Interviewing demands much patience on the part of both interviewers and respondents. If the interviewer omits any questions in haste, the answers will not be complete. This will cause an error of omission. Besides, when the response to a question is inconsistent with that of an earlier one, it means that one of the responses is wrong. The interviewer is expected to identify such inconsistencies when he comes across them during the course of the interview itself. He should then further probe or ask an additional question to clarify the situation.

Finally, the interviewer may commit some error in the recording of responses. As was mentioned earlier, he should record answers as given by the respondent without adding or deleting anything. Several studies have been conducted to find out interviewer effects in marketing research. Boyd and Westfall have conducted an extensive research of the literature on interviewer bias. One of their main findings shows that interviewers are a major source of error in marketing field studies and that little is known about the magnitude of such errors under varying conditions. In a subsequent study they observe that despite the need for research in a large number of areas dealing with interviewer bias, extremely limited research has been done in this field. Some more work has been done since then. In the field of social surveys, Sudman and Bradburn analysed the results of a large number of surveys. One of their findings is that the use of self-administered questionnaires reduces not only the amount of interviewer time but also provides a better indication of the respondent’s real feelings those personal interviews, under certain conditions.

In a more recent study, Mckenzie has investigated interviewer effects in marketing research. As the author has put it: “This survey afforded the opportunity to measure interviewer effects on a variety of long or involved questions, where they might be expected to be greatest; emphasis is on effects due does not allow us to go into the technical rather than selective non-response” One of these showed that interviewer differences accounted for more than 10 per cent of the basic random sampling variance. Where a large number of interviews per interviewer are carried out, such differences would be a major source of additional variance. Another conclusion showed that for several questions, there were sizeable interviewer differences. These questions were mostly either of a repetitive type or involved possible difficulty in interpretation. Another conclusion showed that there was a certain relationship between the respondents’ replies and the interviewers’ own answers to the survey questions. All the same, the authors could not find any evidence for casual inference from this relationship. These are some of the conclusions reached in the study.

The sum up, we may say that the best way to reduce interviewer bias or effect still continues to be the improvement of interviewer selection, training, supervision and increasing the respondent’s motivation to cooperate. We shall deal with the first three aspects in the subsequent sections.

Selection of Interview: It has been recognized in all quarters that the success of any enterprise depends largely on the quality of manpower employed. This applies all the more in the case of surveys where the interviewers are to collect data from different respondents. To begin with, we should know what are the major characteristics which an interviewer should possess first, as interviewing is a tiresome job involving strenuous field work for long hours, the interviewer should be in good health Second, he should be an extrovert. Any person who is very reserved will not enjoy meeting respondents and talking with them, and would perhaps fail miserably in canvassing the questionnaire. As such, a person should be sociable and inclined to contact strangers whom he has not met earlier. Third, he should be well-dressed and possess a pleasing personality. Many a time appearance coupled with good manners decides whether the respondent will cooperate with the interviewer or not. Fourth, the knowledge of the local or regional language must be possessed by the interviewer. In a vast country like India where so many different languages are spoken, it becomes necessary to recruit those interviewers who are proficient in the local or regional language. Fifth, an interviewer must be educated and well-qualified to conduct the interview. For example, in the case of a highly technical survey, a person who knows the technicalities of the subject should be appointed. Sixth, as wide discrepancies in the class or status of the interviewer and respondent inhibit certain types of responses, these should be avoided as far as possible. Finally, an interviewer must be capable of communicating with the respondent. The major problem that arises in field investigation is that of a lack of communication. The interviewer should be communicative so that the respondent can easily understand what he wants.

Training of Interviewers: Before the interviewers are sent out for collecting data, it is necessary that they should be given some training. In case the subject of enquiry is of a very general nature, the training need not be very elaborate. The interviewers should be given some guidance aspects should be fully explained and the necessary literature should be given to them so that they can familiarise themselves with the subject. The duration and content of training will vary from survey to survey. Even so, normally, training of 2 to 4 weeks may be considered sufficient. The content of training must be decided carefully.

Initial Training: It may be necessary to provide two types of training – initial training and training for individual studies. Soon after the appointment of the interviewer, initial training may be given which should familiarise him with the relevance of marketing research and the role of interviewers in marketing research studies. General aspects such as locating the respondents, obtaining interviews, asking questions, recording responses and closing interviews, problems of non-response, etc. should be covered fully. The entire training should not be in the form of classroom lectures and discussions. A part of it should be practical – the interviewer should be asked to accompany and observe a supervisor who actually conducts the interview. In the next visit, the interviewer may be asked to initiate and conduct the interview is the presence of the supervisor. Later on, the supervisor should comment on his interview, pointing out specific mistakes committed and suggesting improvements. Finally, the interviewer should be sent out on his own. Each recorded interview should be discussed by the supervisor, indicating its deficiencies. Such training will go a long way in improving the competence of interviewer.

Training for Individual Studies: In addition to initial training, it is necessary that training for individual studies should be given. The purpose of the research study should be explained. If a consulting firm is undertaking research for an outside firm, it is desirable to inform the interviewers as to which is the sponsoring organization and to give them some background information about it. Further, if the study involves any technical aspects, these must be clearly explained to the interviewers.

In case of studies using area sampling, the interviewer is required to exercise great care in locating the sample respondents. Specific instructions must be given to the interviewers so that the job can be done efficiently. It may further improve the quality of interviewing if interviewers are issued written instructions with respect to a particular survey. In case of doubt, they can refer to them and resolve the difficulty on their own. Finally, certain hypothetical problem-situations should be covered in a specific study and explanations given as to how such problems can be handled if they occur at the time of interviewing.

Supervision of Interview: In conducting a survey, it is necessary to organise it on the right lines and to ensure its timely completion. The role of supervisors is important in this respect. A supervisor’s work should include:

• Gathering and training interviewers on the fundamentals of interviewing, including application forms.
• Alerting and briefing interviewers for a particular job.
• Allocating territory, in some cases requiring map work of a fairly detailed nature.
• Carefully studying the first day’s work, and correcting errors.
• Editing all work.
• Validating some of the reports (10 per cent or whatever percentage is required).
• Keeping careful production records.
• Reviewing time sheets.
• Rendering a detailed bill for the work. From this list it is evident that a supervisor’s task involves several functions, which remain the same whether he is a full-time employee of a company or an independent functionary.

To minimise the chances of interviewer cheating, supervisors may visit the places, without any prior intimation, where the interviewer is expected to be present. Such sudden inspection visits by without contacting the respondents. Apart from this, questionnaires filled in by the interviewer unaided by the respondent, are frequently self-disclosures in the sense that they contain rather unusual or inconsistent answers. Supervisors have to cross check such questionnaires very carefully so that they may detect the fraud. Thus, they can compare the data recorded by a particular interviewer with those recorded by other interviewers. If his data are very different from those of others, then two possibilities exist. First, the interviewer may have deliberately entered wrong data or he may not even have visited the respondent. Second, the respondents assigned to him may be different from the rest of the population. In either case, the supervisor has to closely look into the problem. Further, to minimise interviewer cheating, it may be desirable to boost up the interviewer’s morale and offer him a reasonable compensation for his work. If he is poorly paid, then he is unlikely to work hard and may be tempted to cut short interviews. In addition, he may be given an assurance that if his work is found quite satisfactory, he will be sought in the next survey or his services may be retained in the organization.

Apart from these measures, two methods may be used to ascertain and control cheating. The first is the re-interview method which implies that a sample of respondents covered by each interviewer may be interviewed again. This method is helpful not only in checking whether the interviewer has followed sampling instructions but also whether the respondent was really interviewed and whether the information collected in the first interview was accurate. The main limitation of this method is that it is expensive. Besides, it is time-consuming.

The second method is the post-card check. Instead of holding re-interviews of selected respondents, a post-card is sent to them to find out whether the interview was held. The method is unable to check the quality of interviews though it will reveal if they were not held. No doubt, this method is much cheaper. This advantage is offset to a certain extent on account of the failure of the respondents to send back the post-cards. This method too is time-consuming. Further, sometimes these cards are likely to reach persons other than the respondents and when these are sent back, the supervisor may receive inaccurate information.

Perhaps the more important job of a supervisor is to evaluate the interview itself rather than to ascertain whether it was conducted or not. One way is to conduct a re-interview, but the method is both time-consuming and expensive as was mentioned earlier. Another method is to evaluate the filled-in questionnaire. The supervisor should read through the questionnaire carefully to detect inconsistencies and inaccuracies. Sometimes one may not be able to detect these shortcomings. However, certain checks can be used. For instance, the supervisor may select a few important questions where the interviewer was particularly required to follow instructions, the non-compliance of which would be reflected in the responses. A check of this type may be helpful in evaluating the quality of the interviewer’s work, though it is not complete by itself. Again, such a check may sometimes reveal that the instructions themselves were deficient.

Another method is to use free response questions in which the interviewer verbatim records the answers given by the respondent. A close perusal of such answers helps the supervisor to find out whether the interviewer has adhered to the instructions given. The method is subjective but it can be helpful in evaluating the quality of the interviewer’s work as revealed by selected parts of filled-in questionnaires.

There are other methods for evaluating the interviewer’s performance. One method is by assigning comparable interviewing tasks to interviewers and then comparing their performance relative to each other. Another method is that of direct observation, though it may not be possible always for the supervisor to accompany every interviewer. In addition, it is very expensive, though, at the time of initial training, the method can be followed. Yet another method is to invite comments from the interviewers on the work done by them, problems encountered in the field and measures taken by them to collect information. The supervisor may be able to identify interviewers having grater initiative, intelligence and who are hardworking.

Qualitative Research: So far the discussion was confined to formal interviewing involving direct questioning to get the necessary information from the respondents. However, there are certain problems or situations when direct questioning of respondents does not help the interviewer. Respondents are either unwilling to give the information sought or unable to provide it. In such cases, other techniques, which are generally referred to as qualitative research, are used. Qualitative research is mainly useful in understanding the consumer behaviour and attitudes. It probes rather than counts. As such it is impressionistic rather than conclusive. It comprises three major techniques – depth interviews, focus group interviews and projective techniques. A brief discussion of these techniques is given as follows.

Depth Interview: So far we have discussed the direct and structured interview. When an interview is held without the aid of a structured questionnaire, the interviewer has freedom in conducting it in the manner he desires. Such interviews are not subject to a well-defined and rigid procedure and are known as informal interviews. They are more appropriate in case of ‘sensitive’ issues which may require more probing.

Largely as a result of the influence of clinical interviewing and anthropological field work, a varied assortment of interviews has been developed in which neither the exact questions the interviewer asks nor the responses the subject is permitted to make are predetermined. Such interviews take various forms and go under various names – the ‘focused’ interview, the ‘clinical’ interview, the ‘depth’ interview, the ‘non-directive’ interview, etc.

When a researcher is interested in in-depth investigation of perceptions, attitudes or motivations of the respondents, a formal or structured interview will not be suitable. For this purpose, an unstructured interview, which is more flexible, is used. On account of this flexibility, such interviews enable the interviewer to bring out “the affective and value-laden aspects” of the respondent’s answers. Such interviews are helpful in understanding the beliefs, feelings and attitudes of respondents in their personal and social contexts.

In depth interviewing, a procedure similar to that used by a psychiatrist, is followed. A person trained in the techniques of probing conducts such an interview. He does not have a formal questionnaire with him. He asks such questions as are appropriate and in an order developed during the interview. He keenly observes and records subtle reactions of the respondents.

The questions which centre around the product or problem involved is largely indirect The technique of depth interview has certain advantages. First, it is able to discover hidden motivations which really determine consumer behaviour. Through data obtained in depth interviewing, the interviewer may discover the strength of a new appeal. As a result of such a finding, an altogether different approach to marketing problems can be made. Second, depth interviewing may lead to the development of a motivational pattern with respect to a particular brand or other action under investigation. Finally, it provides a strong stimulus to the insight of the interviewer. It has been noticed that the major contribution in marketing research has been made by the ‘clinical insight’ of the researchers using this technique rather than by those conducting structured interviews.

As against the foregoing strengths of the depth interviewing, it has certain weaknesses or limitations. First, it does not provide a systematic structure for interpretation of the information obtained. Second, the information obtained is non-quantifiable and is based on human judgment. There is thus too much of subjectivity. This means that different results will be obtained by different people even though the situation is the same. Finally, it needs far more vigilance and training on the part of the interviewer, since depth interviews are normally conducted by untrained and incompetent interviewers. This may give rise to several inaccuracies in the information obtained.

Advantages of Depth Interviews

• Attitudes and emotions of the test persons can be explored in detail and close to reality and without laying down fixed response alternatives
• Motivations and resistance towards certain markets, products, services or marketing measures can be determined
• Very complex research subjects or new questions for which there is currently no information at hand, can be worked on
• Mutual trust between the interviewer and the test person develops which enables them to talk about difficult questions or about so called “taboo themes”
• What questions are depth interviews suitable for?
• Depth interviews are used by psychonomics for various questions.
• Market segmentation and typologising
• Purchasing motivation analysis and usage congruencies
• Market potential and product innovations
• Image and brand positioning
• Customer satisfaction and customer loyalty
• Customer relationship management

Focus-Group Interviewing Concept: In the focus group interviewing method, the interviewer collects a small number of representative consumers for discussion on a particular subject. The optimal size of a focus group is usually taken to be about eight people. Any number less than this is insufficient for the focus group. On the other hand, if the number is say, 10 or 12, it is regarded as too large. The larger the size of the group, the longer people has to wait for their turn.

Generally, the group selected is a relatively homogeneous one so that a meaningful discussion can take place. One the other hand it may be preferable to form a varied group so that diverse views on a particular topic are expressed. This will depend largely on the nature of the research problem.

Groups are formed in a number of ways. Sometimes telephone screening is used. Field workers may scout around in the neighborhood for persons conforming to their requirements. Certain organizations, especially in the advanced Western countries, may have names and address of respondents conforming to certain characteristics, in their records.

Who Uses Focus Groups?

• Political pollsters use focus groups to ask potential voters about their views of political candidates or issues
• Organizational researchers use focus groups to learn how employees and managers feel about the issues confronting them in the workplace.
• Marketing firms use focus groups to determine how customers respond to new products.
• Public agencies find focus groups an important tool in improving customer service.
• Survey designers use focus groups to pretest their ideas and to interpret the quantitative information obtained from interviewing.

Why use Focus Groups and not Other Methods?: The main purpose of focus group research is to draw upon respondents’ attitudes, feelings, beliefs, experiences and reactions in a way in which would not be feasible using other methods, for example observation, one-to-one interviewing, or questionnaire surveys. These attitudes, feelings and beliefs may be partially independent of a group or its social setting, but are more likely to be revealed via the social gathering and the interaction which being in a focus group entails. Compared to individual interviews, which aim to obtain individual attitudes, beliefs and feelings, focus groups elicit a multiplicity of views and emotional processes within a group context. The individual interview is easier for the researcher to control than a focus group in which participants may take the initiative. Compared to observation, a focus group enables the researcher to gain a larger amount of information in a shorter period of time. Observational methods tend to depend on waiting for things to happen, whereas the researcher follows an interview guide in a focus group. In this sense focus groups are not natural but organised events. Focus groups are particularly useful when there are power differences between the participants and decision-makers or professionals, when the everyday use of language and culture of particular groups is of interest, and when one wants to explore the degree of consensus on a given topic.