Posted by Monika Kosz on March 25, 2005 at 06:14:06
In Reply to: Re: Are you really doing your research? posted by Question on March 23, 2005 at 20:11:49:
I think that there is some communication break down, but I would not say that it is a language thing.
I went back to this post to answer you once more. This time I will do more than my best.
You wrote:
'It is about the need for you to discuss with us when doing research.' Let me explain the method of research that I am using.
An interview is a conversation between interviewer and respondent. The aim of it is to get the answers to particular questions. It is a process in which the two sides cooperate with each other. As far as the interview is concerned, one can distinguish a couple of types: oral and written, categorized and uncategorized, open and hidden, individual, collective and panel.
For the sake of lack of possibility to meet the respondents personally, the classic way of interview was out of the question. It was carried out in a written form through the Internet. Originally I had wanted to use the chat board as a way of contacting the respondents, but because there was no e-mail contact, I had to post my questions on the chat board. As a result the interview engaged couple of people, so it was a collective interview. It was partially categorized which means that it touched upon the list of particular problems, but respondents did not answer in chronological order. (source of terms and definition: J. Sztumski, Wstęp do metod i technik badań społecznych, Katowice 1995,p.122). As Sztumski writes: 'when asking questions the interviewer should not influence the answers of the respondents.' (ibid. p.125)
As you can see there is a great misunderstanding on your side. You would like me to discuss and I HAVE TO CARRY OUT AN INTERVIEW (the particular method of research). I am not supposed to share my conclusions with you as I may influence your answers. Do you understand that?
What is more, as Sztumski writes: 'the interviewer should ask wh-questions because they do not suggest the answers' (ibid. p.125). Some of you wanted me to ask yes/no questions, as you can see I have not done it because of this reason.
It seems that you have not read all the posts, because there is one in which I tried to validate the information I got from some book. Some helpful person hepled me to do it and it occured that her experience is different from the description of the author of the book. Moreover, my research is not about organizational structure, but about organizational culture. Believe me there is a great difference. If you read the posts, you would know what is the topic of my research.
The questions are not meaningless, just because you do not understand them. They are concerned with physical and status symbols, taboo, myths, rituals, etc. You seem to understand this questions on the superficial level. There is also the possibility that you do not find the research on organizational culture meaningful. Then as I had written before I can do nothing about that.
Of course I have the data from different books as well as from the sites of ex-members. I can give you the whole bibliography if you want, but most of them are in Polish. I really doubt if you understand the titles. Tell me if you want it and I will send it to you.
I forgive you your being blunt and hope that you read this and the previous posts to understand better before you are blunt again.