Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

Lawley unitec clean interviewing

Slides of Clean Interviewing workshop given at UNITEC, Aukland, 3 Feb 2017.
Workshop description
James Lawley will show how the wording of interview questions can unintentionally and unknowingly bias answers, how ‘leading’ questions cast doubt on the authenticity of the data collected, and how you can avoid this by asking ‘clean’ questions.
The aim of this workshop is to learn and integrate the principles of Clean Interviewing, and to develop your ability to design and frame clean questions during practice interviews. You will learn how to interview using Clean Language so your interviewees are given maximum opportunity to provide reliable information, ‘uncontaminated’ by an interviewer’s framing, presuppositions and metaphors.
You will also learn a new process for validating the ‘cleanness’ of an interview thereby increasing the robustness of your methodology.

  • Loggen Sie sich ein, um Kommentare anzuzeigen.

Lawley unitec clean interviewing

  1. 1. presented by James Lawley Clean Interviewing: Keeping your stuff out and gathering their stuff in 1 assisted by Penny Tompkins and Amanda Moore
  2. 2. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Overview Background Why we need ‘clean’ research ‘Clean’ interviewing Cleanness-rating protocol Practice activities 2
  3. 3. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 3 A gentle genie has escaped from the lamp. His name is David Grove and his magic is ‘clean language’. Ernest L. Rossi
  4. 4. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 4 David Grove (1952 - 2008) “Clean Language is simple because people are complex enough.” First book about Clean Language 1989.
  5. 5. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 5 Methodology Corner Eliciting Metaphor through Clean Language: An Innovation in Qualitative Research Paul Tosey, James Lawley1 and Rupert Meese2 Surrey Business School, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH, UK, 1 The Developing Company, PO Box 349, Lisburn BT28 1WZ, UK, and 2 Clean Change Company Ltd, 18 Byfield Road, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 7AF, UK Corresponding author email: P.Tosey@surrey.ac.uk This paper shows how an innovative method of questioning called Clean Language can enhance the authenticity and rigour of interview-based qualitative research. We investi- gate the specific potential of Clean Language as a method for eliciting naturally occur- ring metaphors in order to provide in-depth understanding of a person’s symbolic world; despite substantial interest in metaphors in the field of organizational and management research there is a lack of explicit, systematic methods for eliciting naturally occurring metaphors. We also demonstrate how Clean Language can improve qualitative research more widely by addressing the propensity for researchers inadvertently to introduce extraneous metaphors into an interviewee’s account at both data collection and inter- pretation stages. Data are presented from a collaborative academic–practitioner project in which Clean Language was used as a method of interviewing to elicit the metaphors of six mid-career managers, relating to the way they experienced work–life balance. The first contribution of this paper is to demonstrate the potential of Clean Language for eliciting naturally occurring metaphors in order to provide in-depth understanding of a person’s symbolic world. The second contribution is to show how Clean Language can enhance the rigour and authenticity of interview-based qualitative research more widely. Introduction There has been considerable interest in metaphor in the organization and management literature (e.g. Cassell and Lee, 2012; Cornelissen, 2006; Cornelissen and Kafouros, 2008; Cornelissen et al., 2008; Grant and Oswick, 1996; Hatch and Yanow, 2008; Marshak, 1993; Morgan, 1986; Oswick and Jones, 2006; Oswick and Montgomery, 1999; Oswick, Keenoy and Grant, 2002). However, according to Cassell and Lee (2012, p. 248), ‘most research focuses on the deductive application of metaphors, rather than on inductive explorations of metaphorical language-in-use’. Of those that do pursue induc- tive explorations, Cassell and Lee (2012, p. 254) distinguish between those that use ‘already pro- duced language’ and those that purposefully elicit metaphors. The former type often emphasizes the function of metaphor as a rhetorical device (Amernic, Craig and Tourish, 2007; Pablo and Hardy, 2009; Tourish and Hargie, 2012), and We wish to acknowledge Wendy Sullivan and Margaret Meyer (Clean Change Company) who were members of the project team that collaborated on the work–life balance study and co-authored the project report. Sarah Nixon (Liverpool John Moores University) was academic advisor to the project. The project was made possible by pump-priming funding from the Faculty of Management and Law, University of Surrey, and was a partnership with the Clean Change Company (http://www .cleanchange.co.uk/cleanlanguage/). A previous version of this paper was awarded the Alan Moon prize for best paper presented at the 12th International HRD Confer- ence, University of Gloucestershire, 25–27 May 2011. bs_bs_banner British Journal of Management, Vol. ••, ••–•• (2014) DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.12042 © 2014 British Academy of Management. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA, 02148, USA. 2014 first article about Clean Language as a research methodology in a 4* peer-reviewed journal.
  6. 6. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Why we need a ‘clean’ approach to research 6
  7. 7. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The need for a clean approach - 1 7 Lack of information about what happens in research interviews: e.g. “A one-hour semi-structured interview was conducted.” Executive coaching can enhance transformational leadership. Tom Cerni, Guy J. Curtis & Susan H. Colmar. International Coaching Psychology Review. Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010 “One-to-one interviews took place … A range of open questions were used to facilitate discussion around key areas.” Developmental coaching: Business benefit – fact or fad?. Elouise Leonard-Cross. International Coaching Psychology Review. Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010
  8. 8. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The need for a clean approach - 2 8 Potential Interviewee bias Consistency effect - tendency to answer in ways that are consistent with the questions Acquiescence bias - tendency not to challenge an assumption implicit in a question Friendliness effect - tendency to answer how an interviewee thinks the researcher wants them to answer. Philip Podsakoff and others (2003).
  9. 9. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The need for a clean approach - 3 9 Potential Interviewer bias Priming - The exposure to a stimulus influences a later response. “Unconscious priming effects can affect word choice long after the words have been consciously forgotten” (Tulving et al., 1982). Leading through: • Metaphor • Presupposition / Framing
  10. 10. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The need for a clean approach - 4 10 Metaphor 1. A single metaphor can biased how people reason. 2. Metaphors systematically influence how people propose solving problems. 3. No one cites metaphor as an influencing factor when asked how they arrived at their conclusion. Thibodeau PH, Boroditsky L (2011) Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning. Freely available at: www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0016782
  11. 11. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 What is a metaphor? “The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another.” Lakoff and Johnson (1981) 11
  12. 12. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 How often do we use metaphor? Studies show we often use up to 6 metaphors a minute or 1 metaphor in every 25 words. Tosey, P., Sullivan, W. and Meyer, M. (2013) `Clean Sources: Six Metaphors a Minute?’, University of Surrey 12
  13. 13. Caitlin Walker & James Lawley, BPS SGCP Conference, 2015 Why are metaphors important? 13 “About how fast were the cars going when they [……] into each other?” Metaphor Mean speed estimate Smashed 41 mph Collided 39 Bumped 38 Hit 34 Contacted 32 The difference of 9 mph is 27% higher. (Loftus & Palmer, 1975)
  14. 14. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The need for a clean approach - 5 14 Lack of high-quality examples 344 pages
 Recommends: “in-depth” interviews … … yet, there is only 1 page of interview transcript.
  15. 15. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The need for a clean approach - 6 15 Presupposition Interviewer: Tell me a little bit about what you do. DC: I’m an advisor here. We get them straight off the street. I sit down with them and make out an educational plan. I like it when they know what’s expected of them. Interviewer: How many students do you have? DC: About 100. Interviewer: 100! Are you able to have a relationship with so many? Designing Qualitative Research, Catherine Marshall and Gretchen Rossman, 2010. 6th edition Figure 4.2 p. 103
  16. 16. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The need for a clean’ approach - 7 16 Cumulative ‘leading’ effect of questions: Interviewer: Let me ask you this question. How has this memory affected your life? What kind of impact has it had on your life? Interviewee: My dad’s girlfriend’s apartment or my grandmother? Both? Interviewer: The first memory. How has this impacted, what impact has it had on your life? Interviewee:  … it definitely has a very large impact. … Magnus Englander .The Interview: Data Collection in Descriptive Phenomenological Human Scientific Research. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 43 (2012) 13–35
  17. 17. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 17 Statement from Interviewee Coded by Interviewer Sometimes I will be sat watching trash TV and thinking I should be doing something rather than watching this rubbish. Wasting time/inactive I read a lot. Doing But sometimes I am too tired and I just want to veg out. Tired/depressed But it’s been good to move out of mum and dad’s. Independence It’s not healthy to rely on them as they won’t last forever. Unhealthy to be dependent. Coding of an interview: http://www.slideshare.net/aidenyeh/qualitative-research-lectureshortened p. 49 The need for a clean’ approach - 8 (data analysis)
  18. 18. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The need for a clean approach - 9 (presentation of findings) Berger asks “whether she wishes she were in a different place in her life” Kathleen: No, I think this is the journey. And I could stay in this [uncertain space], I think, forever.... I don’t know what to say, it just feels like it will emerge. But no, where I am right now feels very much like – it doesn’t feel like a hiatus. It feels like it is the journey and that work will emerge from this place. Berger comments: It is clear that Kathleen is on the edge of her knowing. ‘edge’ (of knowing) is mentioned 104 times in Berger’s article; not once does this metaphor appear in the interviewee data cited in the article. Berger, J. G. 2004, "Dancing on the Threshold of Meaning: Recognising and Understanding the Growing Edge", Journal of Transformative Education, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 336-351. 18
  19. 19. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Clean approach applied to the 5 stages of a research project 19 Research Project Stage Application of a Clean Approach Design Formulation of research questions, protocols and methodology Data Collection Clean interviewing Metaphor elicitation (Symbolic Modelling) Analysis - coding - model/theory construction Stay close to text Role of metaphor Testing / Validation Clean Interview Validation Protocol Cleanness Ratings Presentation of results Clarity of source of data
  20. 20. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 PhD research using Clean Interviewing ❖ Metaphors of leadership ❖ Creative arts and media ❖ Intuition & premonitions ❖ Attitude of workers aged 65+ ❖ Pastoral counselling ❖ Metaphors we teach by ❖ Metaphor in counselling and qualitative research interviews ❖ Improving teaching & learning in Higher Education ❖ Identity alignment in legal services firms 20
  21. 21. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Other research using Clean Interviewing ❖ Work-Life Balance of managers ❖ Evaluating coaching ❖ Community & large organisation information capture ❖ Change management - before & after ❖ Metaphors of EFL teachers' roles ❖ Ethnomethodological study of Symbolic Modelling ❖ Metaphor in creative cognition ❖ Flood protection: a Dutch case study ❖ Use of symbolism in counselling ❖ Legacy of war: Experiences 21
  22. 22. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 The Leading-to-Clean Continuum 22 More content introduced More presupposed More restrictive syntax Less content introduced Less presupposed Less restrictive syntax Mildly/ Potentially leading Strongly leading Contextually clean Classically clean J Lawley, Protocol for Validating ‘Cleanness’ of an Interview, 8 Oct 2014
  23. 23. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Classically Clean A question from the Clean Language set (or a close derivative) that includes the interviewee’s words without the introduction of interviewer metaphors, concepts, opinions or presuppositions. It also includes statements that only reflect back the interviewee’s words. e.g. And is there anything else about that ‘inspiring the team to achieve the goals’? 23
  24. 24. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 12 commonly used Clean Questions - by function 24 Relate over Time And then what happens? And what happens next? Relate over Time And what happens just before [event]? And where does [ ] come from? Relate across Space And when/as [X], what happens to [Y]? And is there a relationship between [X] and [Y]? And is [X] the same or different as [Y]? Identify And how do you know [ ]? And that's [ ] like what? Develop Form And what kind of [ ] is that [ ]? And is there anything else about [ ]? And where/whereabouts is [ ]? Tosey, P., Lawley, J. and Meese, R. (2014) Eliciting Metaphor through Clean Language: an Innovation in Qualitative Research, British Journal of Management 25(3), 629-646.
  25. 25. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Contextually Clean A question or statement that only introduces ‘neutral’ words based on the context within which the interview is conducted, or the inherent logic in the interviewee’s information. e.g. (1) - And what was the effect of that afterwards? (evaluative interview) e.g. (2) So what is leadership? (research topic) 25
  26. 26. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Mildly/Potentially Leading A question or statement that introduces words not used by the interviewee, however these words are not strongly metaphorical or presuppositional and have no discernible affect on the interviewee’s answers. e.g. Interviewer: If you were to use a picture to describe that ‘process of escalation’, that’s like what? Interviewee: Hard to say as a picture. Are you thinking as a metaphor? I can’t think of a metaphor but … [gives a metaphor]. 26
  27. 27. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Strongly Leading A question or statement that introduces words, frames or opinions (especially via metaphors and presuppositions) that cast doubt on the authorship of interviewee answers. e.g. (1) Interviewee: I don’t know if this is managing or leading. Interviewer: And maybe it doesn’t matter whether it’s ‘managing or leading’. e.g. (2) Interviewer: What is the image you carry around that drives your actions today? 27
  28. 28. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Activity: Rank questions from most Clean (1) to most Leading (10) 28 RANK Ref QUESTIONS a Please can you describe what you consider is a good coaching relationship? b How important do you think the coaching relationship is? c How important is the coach-client relationship to outcome? d Is there a bond between the coach and client? e What is the coaching relationship like at the beginning of coaching? f Does the context of the coaching have any relation to the coach-client relationship? If so, how? g How does the client influence the coach-client relationship? h How does the coach influence the coach-client relationship? i How does the coach maintain the coaching relationship? j How does the coach handle a rupture in the coaching relationship?
  29. 29. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Activity: Rate Interview A 29 Strongly Leading Mildly Leading Contextual Clean Classically Clean Q1 I just want to get you talking about what the heart attack meant to you and if it’s changed your life. But just to get you started, tell me a bit about how it happened. A I remember it though it were yesterday. I was one of them people who never thought it could happen to them. I'm a six-footer, twelve and a half stone. I was in an active job, all day every day. It was a shock. Q2 Did it make you feel frightened, or worried, or....? A: At first, but then, I'd say no I just, you know, plod on, you know, carry on. I just don't know why it happened really. Q3 Was it hard to go back to work then? A: Yes. I used to be union rep, I've given that up. I used to be on the PTA Committee, I've given that up. In fact, my work was divided amongst 6 people while I was off. So I think that sort of told them just how much of a load I'd been carrying. Q4 Do you think it's changed your outlook about the future? A: Yes, I’ve got a bit more, I won't say totally, a bit more of the sort of approach to life: well life could end tomorrow so make the most of it now. And I'm trying to do that - but breaking the habits of a lifetime is a bit difficult. Q5 So your outlook is different?
  30. 30. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Activity: Rate Interview B 30 Strongly Leading Mildly Leading Contextual Clean Classically Clean Q1 So how did that session go? B: It went really well. It was a real journey. I saw into some of the patterns of thinking that had been holding me back really clearly and I felt like I dug deeper into my understanding of the topic and of my own reaction, so it was positive for me. Q2 So it was a journey, and you saw into your patterns that had been holding you back, and you delved deeper, and that was positive for you. So anything else about how the session went? B: One of the things that I enjoyed about it was that we got into a good rhythm and a good flow. We found a point of focus and used that to move forward to create some specific goals for the session and then I think by the end of them we felt we’d met those goals. Q3 So by the end of the session you felt that you’d met the goals. Okay and how would you assess the session? B: Do you mean give it a judgement or what I use to create the judgement? Q4 Both, yes we’ll take both. B: Okay, so the overall assessment, it was really productive and valuable. And was I able to be present for it and be vulnerable in the space, it’s a pretty vulnerable space a lot of the time. Q5 You were able to be present and vulnerable in that space. And when it was really productive, how do you know how productive it was?
  31. 31. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Activity: Clean Interviewing Use only ‘classically clean’ questions to investigate the research topic: Identify what the interviewee considers a good work-life relationship. 31
  32. 32. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Activity: Clean Interviewing Use only ‘classically clean’ and ‘contextually clean’ questions to investigate the research topic: The role of research in the interviewee’s career. 32
  33. 33. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 Clean Interviewing Publications Grove, D. J. & Panzer, B. I. (1989). Resolving Traumatic Memories: Metaphors and symbols in psychotherapy. Irvington. Lawley, J (forthcoming 2017). Clean Language Interviewing: Making qualitative research interviews verifiable. Chapter 3 in Becoming a teacher: The dance between tacit and explicit knowledge. Editors, Švec, V., Nehyba, J. & Svojanovský, P. MUNI press: Masaryk University. Lawley, J & Linder-Pelz, S (2016) Evidence of competency: exploring coach, coachee and expert evaluations of coaching. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice. 9(2):110-128. Linder-Pelz, S & Lawley, J (2015) Using Clean Language to explore the subjectivity of coachees’ experience and outcomes. International Coaching Psychology Review, Sep 10(2):161-174. Rain, T., Lawley, J & Henwood, S (2016) From coaching and therapy to research interviewing: Reflections and recommendations from practice, Acuity, 5 14-28. Tosey, P (2015). And what kind of question is that? Thinking about the function of questions in qualitative interviewing. Chapter 14 in Handbook of Research Methods on Human Resource Development. Editors, Saunders, M. N. K. & Tosey, P., Tosey, P., Lawley, J. & Meese, R. (2014), Eliciting Metaphor through Clean Language: An Innovation in Qualitative Research. British Journal of Management, 25:629–646. Van Helsdingen, A. & Lawley, J. (2012). Modelling Shared Reality: Avoiding Unintended Influence in Qualitative Research, Kwalon: Journal of the Netherlands Association for Qualitative Research, 3:1-7. For other research applications of Clean Interviewing see: cleanlanguage.co.uk/articles/articles/264/1/Citations-and-Research/ 33
  34. 34. James Lawley, UNITEC, 2017 34