essential-guide-to-qualitative-in-organizational-research

26 –––––––––– QUALITATIVE METHODS IN ORGANIZATION STUDIES ––––––––––––––––––We then opened up a discussion regarding the atmosphere in the organization and whysome departments deemed themselves safer than others.The aim was to simulate the empathy and reflective questioning found in relationalinterviews, although extra care needs to be taken in the wording of responses and insupporting the participants’ ideas. In particular it is important to thank the participant forresponding, offer feedback such as summarizing to show you understand, and show explicitsupport for their ideas. At the same time, it is helpful to adapt your language style to that ofthe participant and maintain a friendly tone. Mann and Stewart (2000) found that participantsneeded additional encouragement and positive feedback using e-mail.Timing has also been shown to be important in this form of communication. A speedyresponse indicates a positive attitude (Walther and Tidwell, 1995), suggesting the researchershould check regularly and reply quickly. At the same time a delay from the participant (whichmay be frustrating to the researcher) should not be taken as a bad sign, as they may be busyor, indeed, taking time to reflect.SECURITYComputer viruses are an increasing problem, and some people are unwilling to open e-mailsfrom strangers. We had hoped to reduce this problem, and conform with ethical guidelines,by requesting that the HR department send an introductory e-mail to all staff. Howeverproblems still arose because the central ‘firewall’ (part of the main computer system thatcontrols access to and from other computers, in particular e-mail and internet access) had beenset to high security due to a new virus, and was bouncing even standard e-mails. This isunusual, but must be taken into consideration when discussing access via this method.ETHICS OF E-MAIL RESEARCHE-mails can be intercepted, and if stored on the company mainframe, accessed by certainprivileged staff. Regulations regarding e-mail monitoring at work are confusing and still underreview (Crichard, 2001), but many companies do monitor e-mails, partly for their ownprotection. We were concerned that staff might feel they had to reply, would not reply for fearof ‘eavesdropping’ and/or that they would only say positive things in case these e-mails wereread by others. We took extra care to ensure they knew confidentiality and anonymity wereimportant considerations for us. To help with this we e-mailed the staff from a homecomputer (giving them a personal air, and the knowledge that there was no ‘big brother’ atour end checking the contents).MAINTAINING INTERESTThis is a particularly difficult aspect of electronic interviews. In our case it was not thoughtthrough clearly in advance how we were going to keep people communicating, and as notedabove, many dropped out after the first set of questions. There is very little to stop peoplesimply not replying, or forgetting to reply, except for a reminder e-mail or using other modesof communication. Mann and Stewart (2000) outline some methods for keeping participantsinvolved, but much will depend on the research question and whether it is interesting to theparticipants, as well as the researcher’s skill in involving participants in the research.It may sometimes be useful to supplement the e-mail contact with other methods, tomaintain interest and to aid disclosure. The richest information that we received on an initiale-mail was from a participant with whom we had first spoken on the telephone. It has been