The method of data collection was based on a semi-structured interview instrument developed through documents review. Before the interview, a brief questionnaire was sent to interviewee contractors for the convenience of collecting basic background information, such like age, job title, work duration, etc.
Questionnaire before Interview
Based on the concern that there might be potential factors influencing the informants’
feedback to interview, there were totally six questions constructed in this questionnaire to inquire contractors’ basic background, including age, educational background, work duration before the current job, work duration of present work, job tile, and welfare provided by the client organization. Assembling the collected information form this pre-interview questionnaire, results are listed as following:
1. Age: C1 and C2 were both born in 1982, and C3 was born in 1981.
2. Educational background: C1 graduated from a college; C2 and C3 have master’s degree.
3. Work duration before the current job: All of them had no work experiences previously.
4. Work duration of present work: C1 has worked for this client organization for 16 months; C2, 11months, and C3, 15 months.
5. Job title: C1 is a computer engineer, C2 is a programmer, and C3 is a research and development engineer.
6. Welfare provided by the client organization: C1 and C3 have holiday bonus for the three important Chinese holidays, but C2 reports none.
Interviews
Interview method was preferred in this study to achieve the purpose of exploring mutual work experiences of contractors and their immediate supervisors. The researcher used individual interview format to inquire each participant’s perspective and feelings through their sharing of work experiences with each other. Interviews were conducted by one to one and face to face during dinner time and took averagely forty minutes to one hour in each conversation. Face to face and one by one interviews are appropriate for exploring individual insights of the small research population. After each face to face interview, the researcher used e-mail and MSN to have a further understanding on something found ambiguous or worthwhile.
Significantly, all the interview questions were reviewed by experts beforehand, and by which the draft interview questions were, first, adjusted to be more simplified and accurate;
second, following the suggestions from the human resource expert of the famous bank, this research is more likely to make contributions to the practical field; third, questions were classified by one of the experts to make sure that questions are corresponding to research purposes and to help guide the subsequent data analysis process. To be more comprehensible, examples are listed as following:
Questions for contractors
1. “What advantages and challenges do you think the identity of contractor brings about in your personal and work life?” is classified as perspective.
2. “Please describe your supervisor’s management style over you.” is classified as interaction.
Questions for supervisors
1. “What do you think about the role of contractor in the client organization?” is classified as perspective.
2. “Is there any difference in your supervising over regular workers and contractors?
Please describe it.” is classified as interaction.
Additionally, all the questions were used with semi-structured method to make this research more likely to focus on the aimed issues and allow for flexibility at the same time.
The actual manipulation was that with each broad inquiry accompanied several detailed questions or questions brought up depending on the situation of interviewing process. Taking one interview question of contractors as an example as following.
Example: Do you think there is any difference in your supervisor’s interaction with contractors and regular workers? Please describe it.
1. What are the situations respectively in workplace and in private?
2. In what ways does your supervisor usually convey information to you? Do you think the information lucid and sufficient?
3. What are the influences the identity of contractor causing on your communication with the supervisor, such like convenience or difficulties?
4. What do you think about your relationship with your supervisor? Is it harmonious or not?
Observation
In the meantime of interviewing, the researcher observed the way interviewees talk to inwardly gauge their personalities which is considered as an important factor in this research because it affects individual way of thinking and interpersonal behaviors. Based on the observation, the researcher had rough pictures on each interviewee’s personality. C1 (the contractor of Pair 1) was so energetic and outgoing that the researcher did not have to pay much effort to work the conversation up. But he was easily go distraction and digression during the interview. C2 was relatively shy and restricted. In the appointment with him, the researcher was late for twenty minutes and finds the interviewee waiting in the front door of
the meeting place, did not make any call to inform his arrival to me. C3 is a friend of the researcher that made him feel easy to talk about what he thinks of. He is a hard working and smart person who always know what to do in his life. As to supervisors, they were thought to talk in an official way and answer the questions similarly like they have been set before.
What is particularly worth mentioned is that S2 tended to answer the question by question which was not much like a conversation. S1 answered questions one by one as well but with more sufficient feedback and make responses in a more active way. Generally speaking, they were somehow reserved and serious. S3 was relatively talkative though officially also. The researcher felt free and easy to talk to him. When the researcher addressed some opinions, S3 provided feedback actively. He was a good listener and was apt at communication.
Subsequently, after all interviews finished, recorded files were transformed into word documents and transcribed into English by the researcher; also, notes on observation were gathered. The following step was to conduct analysis on those data.