IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v42y2024i2p161-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Walking interviews in organizational research

Author

Listed:
  • Bilsland, Karen
  • Siebert, Sabina

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to discuss the benefits of walking interviews in organizational research. We discuss five specific strengths of walking interviews and compare them to sit-down interviews and shadowing. Cognisant of the importance of place within which research is conducted, we analyze the walking interview method of collecting research material, and we put forward socio-spatial methodology for application in organizational research. The key theme running through this paper is that the place where research takes place matters; it matters when the focus of research is on materiality of organizations, but it also yields insights into other (place-sensitive) organizational phenomena. We identify five strengths of walking interviews: co-creation of meaning, reversal of power between interviewer and interviewee, places as prompts, the interview as a sensory experience, and insights into emotions. We discuss limitations of walking interviews, as well as strategies for mitigating these limitations.

Suggested Citation

  • Bilsland, Karen & Siebert, Sabina, 2024. "Walking interviews in organizational research," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 161-172.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:42:y:2024:i:2:p:161-172
    DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2023.04.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237323000506
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.emj.2023.04.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:42:y:2024:i:2:p:161-172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.