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

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ELECTRONIC INTERVIEWS–––––––––– 29and there may be other issues with the communication medium as yet unknown. Adisadvantage of electronic interviews from this perspective would be the (possibly) reducedpotential to check and clarify ‘true’ meanings with the respondent.From a more social constructionist perspective, the interviewer and the interviewee maybe perceived as involved in the joint construction of a version of ‘reality’. There is a shift awayfrom the ‘masculine’ paradigm of ‘subjects’ and ‘objects’ to developing a closer relationshipbetween interviewer and respondent (Oakley, 1981). The power dynamics between researcherand interviewee are highlighted. From this perspective, a potential benefit of electronicinterviews may be the reduced cues to status differences enabled by computer-mediatedcommunication. On the other hand, the interaction between the interviewer and respondentis considered key to the research process. If we use ourselves as research instruments to try toachieve empathy with and an understanding of the other, and the respondents’ reactions tothe researcher are fundamental to their definition of the situation and their (joint)construction, then might the disembodied nature of electronic communication be too greata disadvantage? The evidence for a build-up of intimacy or richness of information exchangedbetween researcher and respondent is mixed (see Mann and Stewart (2000) for a review). Toconsider the reasons for this we need to assess the nature of electronic forms ofcommunication.The nature of electronic communicationThere are a number of ways in which the use of electronic communication may have a bearingupon the interview process. We have already highlighted that the nature of the interaction maychange: we are no longer face to face and a range of additional signals that enable us to developa relationship may have been lost. These differences could be said to be epistemological, inthat they may impact upon the nature of knowledge, and certainly upon how we acquire it,or ontological, in terms of influencing the subject matter or ‘reality’ that we are trying toaccess. We will consider what may be changed due to the use of this medium in three areas:• social cues;• power and democracy; and,• temporality.SOCIAL CUESSome theories suggest that the absence or reduction of social cues inherent in electronic mediameans that e-mails and intranets are unsuitable for certain forms of communication,particularly ambiguous or relationship building forms (Schmitz and Fulk, 1991). Gorden(1980) outlines four types of non-verbal signals that are generated in face-to-face interactions.Although these cues are clearly missing from electronic forms of communication, some aspectsof these are explicitly included in e-mail texts, either by use of emoticons or by stating mood,posture (sigh), and so on. The issue of media richness is controversial (Mann and Stewart,2000; Walther et al., 2001). There is evidence that socio-emotional content can be found ine-mail messages, and that equivocal tasks can be handled by e-mail due to the ongoing natureof communication and time for reflection inherent in the medium. Walther (1996) argues thatuncertainty reduction and self-disclosure, important elements of relationship building, merelytake longer using e-mail. However, there is evidence of a form of ‘swift trust’ and