A Catalunya

Interviews are more flexible and dynamic methods when compared to questionnaires in terms of gathering data (Seale, 2011; Verd, 2004). These interviews are also able to gather data with much more detail and depth. It can also be a more sensitive and friendly method of data gathering and an easier means for drawing constructs from answers (Seale, 2011; Talmy, et.al., 2010). Changes in responses can therefore be credited to participants. By conceptualising questions in the way for all respondents, a standardization of questions can be set forth (Seale, 2011; Silverman, 1973). However, this is not usually the case for interviews as questions may be phrased differently for different respondents. In general interviews, are used to gather qualitative information, and coding can then apply to the responses (Seale, 2011; Bryman, 2006). Surveys apply questionnaires, which are usually distributed to a large population. This is seen in quantitative studies. Benefits for interviews include the possibility of asking complicated but explainable questions (because the interviewer is present); interviews are usually longer because there is more time to ask follow-up questions; there is also more coverage in terms of questions asked (open

Page 147 of 334

questions); visual aids can also be used to clarify; interviewer can also manage the context and the setting where the interview would unfold (Seale, 2011; Britten, 1995).

However, issues have also been noted in interviews, especially in terms of costs, which can limit the conduct of the survey and the size or coverage (Seale, 2011; Britten, 1995). There may also be bias during the research process that can impact on how reliable answers may be. Biases may also be seen in terms of how the questions are presented, or in terms of the personal opinions of the interviewer (Seale, 2011; Flaherty, et.al., 1988). Telephone interviews and computer-assisted interviews have become the newer means of carrying out interviews (Seale, 2011; Flaherty, et.al., 1988). These systems have become more convenient for both researcher and interviewee because of time convenience, and because it costs less. Responses may also be entered directly into the computer (Seale, 2011; Reich, 2000). As such, these methods of conducting interviews have become the cheaper and the quicker means of carrying out surveys. There are also fewer effects observed in relation to the interviewer (Seale, 2011; McLellan, et.al., 1980). In effect, the interviewer’s personal qualities would have less of an impact on the responses (Seale, 2011; Straub, 1989). These methods are also not as intrusive as face-to-face interviews.

The advantages and disadvantages of questionnaires also have to be presented (Seale, 2011). Surveys are usually presented through these questionnaires; as such, the questions have to be simple and must be easily understood (Seale, 2011; Vaughn and Leff, 1976). They also have to be complete and clear because there is no interviewer who can clarify the questions. Surveys administered using these questionnaires can be beneficial where the respondents would want more time to consider or gather data (Seale, 2011; Wilkinson and Birmingham,

Page 148 of 334

2003). Surveys applying self-completion questionnaires enjoy some advantages as compared to face-to-face interviews. For one, they are very cheap and they support more geographical coverage as compared to the face-to-face interviews (Seale, 2011; Horner, et.al., 2004). They are valuable in implementing research where the respondents are not found in one location. In applying self-completion questionnaires, the bias error is decreased and the interviewer can be anonymous for the interviewee (Seale, 2011; Esposito, 2001). Self-completion questionnaires are nevertheless welcomed because they are usually short and simple (Seale, 2011; Voss, et.al., 2002). Unfortunately, there is also less control over who actually answers the questionnaire.

The interviews are collection methods where prepared questions are asked of the respondents in order to gain their insight on the subject matter of research (Harrell and Bradley, 2009). These interviews usually involve personal face-to-face meeting between interviewer and respondent (Harrell and Bradley, 2009). In some cases phone or video interviews are also conducted (Harrell and Bradley, 2009). There were fifteen interviews done with five respondents each from the three construction companies chosen for this study. Appendix one shows the ethical approval for the interview template and questionnaire template that were used in the survey.

Selection criteria used were the following with specific details on experience and position in the company presented in the table below.

 Worked with the company at least three years. These represent years of being in the construction company having experienced its issues and having experienced the different implementation of policies.

Page 149 of 334

 Worked in the construction setting/site at least 2 years. On-field or on-site experience is important in order to get an idea of how these workers felt being exposed in the site with or without safety policies/resources.

 With experience in a management position in the construction industry for at least 1 year. Managerial position would help establish insight on whether or not policies are being implemented on-site and how these policies are being implemented on the field.

Table 3-1 summarises the research participants used in collecting interview data. There was no position preserved for managers; except any participant who had been allocated management responsibilities was found to be ideal for the research.

Table 3-1 Characteristics of interviewees

Interviewees Position Experience

1 Foreman 7 (3 years on-site; 4 as foreman)

2 Foreman 10 (4 years on-site; 6 as foreman)

3 Safety officer 7 years on site as safety officer

4 Safety officer 9 years on site as safety officer

5 Safety Engineer 12 years on site as safety Engineer

6 Safety Engineer 16 (7 as foreman; 9 years on site as safety Engineer)

7 Architectural Engineer

Page 150 of 334 8 Architectural

Engineer

20 years as Architectural Engineer

9 Mechanical Engineer 19 years as Mechanical Engineer

10 Electrical Engineer 24 years as Electrical Engineer

11 Civil Engineer 17 years as Civil Engineer

12 Site supervisor 22 (8 years as Engineer, 14 years as site supervisor)

13 Project Manager 33 (10 as Civil Engineer, 23 as project manager)

14 Project manager 35 (11 as Civil Engineer, 24 as project manager)

15 Project Manager 27 (10 years as Civil Engineer, 20 years as project manager)

Management responsibility, therefore, did not focus the hierarchical structure of the organisation; rather on the role they played projects so as to obtain their view on safety culture and safety performance.