Search results

The purpose of this chapter is to enable interviewers to understand how they can elicit interviewee-generated data that are not ‘muddied’ by the researcher. The chapter has three main components. First, we discuss the authorship of data and illustrate how questions may unwittingly affect this authorship. Second, we outline the problem with ‘leading’ questions and introduce three features of leading questions that are relevant to researchers from different research epistemologies. Third, we introduce the ‘cleanness rating’, which is a way to categorise how questions are used in an interview according to the extent to which they are leading or ‘clean’. We conclude with the difference this can make for researchers, including enhancing the capacity for interviewers to reflect on their practice and making their role in the generation of interview data more transparent.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the nature of leading questions used by a representative sample of investigative interviewers of children. In particular, it examined whether these interviewers use the type of questions that are known to elicit reports of false activities or events among child samples.

A total of 82 police officers who were authorized to conduct interviews with alleged child abuse victims conducted individual mock interviews with children aged 5‐7 years. The focus of the interviews was an event that was staged in the children's school a week earlier. Prior to the interview, each officer was provided with accurate and inaccurate information about the event, including details about an activity that did not occur. The officers' task was to elicit as detailed and accurate account of the event as possible using the techniques they would “normally” use in the field.

Although the officers refrained from using coercive interview techniques, two problematic types of questions were relatively common. These include: questions that presumed that an activity/detail occurred that had not been previously mentioned by the child; and questions that included highly specific details about an activity. Both of these techniques had featured in prior laboratory research on children's false event narratives.

These results support the need for better training techniques for assisting officers to avoid the use of leading questions.

While it is well established that investigative interviewers do sometimes use leading questions when interviewing children, this is the first study to specify the incidence of various types of leading questions.

The aim of this chapter is to explore clean language interviewing (CLI) for incidents where a serious injury or fatality (SIF) has occurred and to identify what difference this type of interviewing can make where high risk and high efficacy must co-exist. The primary focus is non-criminal SIF investigative interviews in North American utilities and the use of CLI in root cause (RC) accident investigations.

Nearly 900,000 serious injury or fatality accidents occur annually in the US, which are quite literally a matter of life and death for individuals, distressing for loved ones with grave consequences for organisations in which they occur. Despite the gravity of these accidents, training for interviewers is woefully lacking. This chapter describes how 11 experienced root cause analysts conducted investigative interviews and reports on their experience before and after learning skills in clean language interviewing.

Findings show that when investigators learn how to ask cleaner or non-content leading questions, there is a higher level of confidence in the data elicited. The analysts noted several advantages of conducting interviews with clean language including: appreciably easing interviewee's response to questions; creating an environment of trust and non-blame for injured individuals and witnesses; and a non-interrogative approach that provided psychological and emotional safety. Transcripts of an interview prior to and post training in clean language interviewing methods illustrate the difference that questions make. The chapter concludes by highlighting some benefits and challenges of using clean language interviewing in serious injury or fatality interviews.

To conclude this book, we take stock of the state of the field of clean language interviewing (CLI). The field has matured considerably in 20 years and yet is still young and emergent. Through articulating the principles of CLI and exploring its application in many fields of practice, we hope this book might come to be seen as a milestone on its path. From its informal beginnings and earliest applications, we believe we can claim with justification that clean language interviewing has developed into a well-specified, well-tested and well-appreciated method that can be used to access both explicitly- and tacitly-held knowledge in a wide range of research projects.

As editors of this volume, we have been gratified and humbled by the ways in which CLI has been used by the contributors. Part II has demonstrated the value of clean language interviewing in both academic and applied research. The applications presented illustrate that CLI has breadth – given the diverse fields in which it has been applied – as well as depth, due to the various levels at which it can be used.

Our aim in this chapter is to reflect on themes that have emerged from the contributions in Part II and the experience of compiling the book as a whole. We begin by reviewing the frameworks that we regard as essential to CLI, then discuss three issues of practice and theory that have emerged from Part II. We sum up the key benefits and limitations of CLI for interviewers and interviewees before indicating some possible directions for future research.

This paper presents an eight‐questions model for leadership and management decisions. The eight questions provide a comprehensive and integrated system that can help managers become more competent as managers, and as leaders, by bringing more thoroughly considered decisions. They are based on managerial responsibilities and on existing motivation and leadership theories, as reported in the literature. Managers who develop the habit to ask these eight question with all decisions that affect stakeholders, will find them easy to apply as guidelines to better decisions. The model also applies to individuals who are not in managerial positions but find themselves in leadership roles in teams or projects at work, in their professions, or at home. For thinking about leadership and managerial functions, and for higher education and human resource development, the eight‐questions model provides a more practical and actionable guide than the Fayol cycle of planning, organizing, leading (or influencing or directing), and controlling, that has been a foundation concept for more than 80 years.

Global collaboration, or the ability to collaborate with people different from ourselves or even across species, becomes increasingly important in our interconnected world to engage constructively with and across difference. As we face more complex challenges, both locally and globally, the need for the creativity and innovation made possible by diverse perspectives is only amplified. Through five stories from our work as consultants and practitioners helping organizations to collaborate, we explore the role of global leadership in collaboration during times of crisis in various sectors. We began by asking ourselves a series of questions about global collaboration that could also serve as future research directions for scholars. We argue that new forms of leadership are required in the global context where both tasks and relationship domains are characterized by high complexity. We conclude by providing insights and recommendations for global leaders to address those complexities through collaboration and help their organizations learn from their experiences in crises and beyond.

In this book the terms ‘clean language’ and ‘clean language interviewing’ are written using lower case, according to the convention of the American Psychological Association (sixth edition). ‘Clean language interviewing’ is sometimes abbreviated to CLI.

Although pretesting is an essential part of the questionnaire design process, the range of methodological work on pretesting issues is limited. The present paper concentrates on the effect of the pretest survey method on error detection by contrasting respondents who are interviewed personally with those who receive an impersonal survey method. The interaction between survey method and respondent knowledge of the questionnaire topic is also considered. The findings show that the pretest method does have an effect on the error detection rate of respondents; however, the hypothesised interaction between method and knowledge was not unequivocally supported. The detailed results illustrate which error types are affected by the method used during pretesting. Implications for future research are considered.

Ports are a significant link in a global supply chain and an economic entity that contributes to the country's economy. India has around 200 ports along its coastline of about 8,000 Km, yet none of them perform at par with many Asian ports. In the Indian port system, cargo throughput and the turnaround time (TAT) of ships calling at ports constitute the most significant performance measures. These performance metrics do not integrate sustainability measures such as emission levels and energy consumed. The draft is a constraint in many ports and ships visit with less than full shipload cargo. The TAT for such vessels may be lower, but the emission per ton of cargo carried is higher compared to a ship with full shipload cargo. Many ports have old or poorly maintained equipment. This state of equipment increases pollution and consumption of energy. In this paper, an attempt has been made to address the issue of undesirable and right outputs simultaneously in an Indian port system. This paper proposes a framework to ensure zero defects in Indian port operations and a port-sustainability-index to measure sustainable services in Indian ports.

The authors used data envelopment analysis (DEA) to show that all private terminals did not perform efficiently and contradicted the notion of Indian policymakers that privatization will lead to an increase in performance levels. A literature review was carried out to identify the dimensions and factors that affect ports' performance. A case study of a major port in India and expert group discussion was done to ascertain the views of stakeholders on deficiencies in the system. The authors complemented this approach with sentiment analysis of opinions expressed by stakeholders over a while, using SentiStrength analysis software (Thelwell, 2010, 2012). The authors used the combined findings to develop the port-sustainability-index (PSI), identify the research question, and develop an ontology of the port system. The authors use the concepts of ontology-design-pattern (ODP) and logistics-service-map (Glöckner et al., 2014; Glöckner and Ludwig, 2016, 2017), opinion mining (Pang and Lee, 2008) and competency questions (Glöckner and Ludwig, 2017) to develop a port system map followed by the identification of critical elements; and the flows (physical and information flow) that gets disrupted due to defects in the system. The ontology led to the identification of competencies and capabilities a port needs to possess. Based on these identification process competency questions were drawn, and the authors identified the plausible defects that port may encounter. The authors suggested the sustainability metrics for monitoring port performance and policy changes based on the competency questions, defects, and mitigation plans.

The authors introduced four KPIs, namely, port-sustainability-index (PSI), load factor (l_x and l_y), draft ratio (d_r), and turnaround-time ratio (TATR). The authors suggested significant policy changes for Indian ports. These included –(1) Introduction of virtual arrival (VA) policy, reducing randomness in the system by pre-scheduling arrivals and activities. (2) Redefining economic life of equipment and machinery in terms of expenditure, income and desired levels of output. (3) Pricing port charges based on stakeholders’ ability and willingness to pay. The port needs to declare its productivity levels and frame their charges accordingly. (4) The ports need to frame an output-oriented privatization policy where it specifies the growth of the port. (5) Framing vessel pricing policy where a vessel may pay tax for the use of non-clean fuel or a get discount for bringing higher parcel load. (6) Levy lower port charges for the shipper for transporting cargo by rail and barges. (7) Introduce a differential pricing system where port levies lower charges for export cargo compared to import load.

The research work can be extended to develop a simulation model to carry out policy experimentations concerning the improvement of performance and carry out sustainable operations. Alternatively, researchers may develop a multi-criteria optimization model to determine the best course of action, keeping the objective function as minimization of PSI value.

This paper provides the means to the Indian ports to remain competitive, lower emission levels and energy consumption, and optimize emission per ton of cargo handled in the port.

Society significantly benefits from this study as it recommends ways to minimize pollution that has a significant impact on human lives. Besides, the measures suggested in the paper will lower the cost of exports and imports, enhancing the real income of consumers.

The area of sustainable port operations has previously been under-researched in the Indian context. Authors contribute to the sustainable port operation literature by suggesting a port-sustainability-index, a framework to assess the defects in port operation and development of a port-ontology for further research in the area of a port system.

Most of the managers I meet (and I reckon to have met a few thousand over the last ten years) are dissatisfied with their lot. Many have an ambition to “retire at forty‐five” (or thirty‐five, depending on their age); a perceptible minority “drop out”, watched more or less wistfully by many of their colleagues; most of all, they tell you they want to do their own thing, to work for themselves.