Workshop Round-up: Interview Techniques

I was invited by PAN Artistic Director, John Martin, to run a workshop with the Fortune Group on conducting interviews for use in performance. The workshop was part of PAN’s ongoing Taste of Memory project. It was my first encounter with the group and I was struck by their enthusiasm and ingenuity in adapting to the different interview scenarios we set up.

One of the potential outcomes of the Taste of Memory project is a public performance that will draw on interview material recorded by the group. The group already collected part of that material during the summer using ‘Flip Cams’ to interview members of their local communities. The short video clips offer fascinating glimpses of food cultures, intimate cooking practices and memories of meals gone by.

Part of the aim of my workshop was to build on those initial experiences by getting the group to think about how decisions made during the interview process affect the final ‘story’ that gets told. The first half of the workshop was spent picking apart the various stages of the interview process and teasing out perceived difficulties.

The elements we covered included: choosing an interview topic, sourcing and approaching a suitable interviewee, composing questions and structuring the interview, choosing the right time and location, the right recording equipment, and the role of body language in the rapport between interviewer and interviewee.

The second part of the workshop put these key points to work in mock interviews. The group was split into pairs, each pair was given a recording device (audio or video) and one of three interview scenarios:

• Scenario 1: Interview with a local MP at his/her constituency office.
• Scenario 2: Interview with the mother/father of a group member in his/her living room.
• Scenario 3: Interview with the owner of a restaurant in his/her restaurant kitchen.

Each pair was given 20 minutes to prepare for the interview and had to consider the following points: what their rapport with the interviewee would be, what they wanted to get out of the interview, what questions they would ask and how they would ask them, and the most efficient use of their recording devices would be.

In the meantime group leaders set up the three spaces and rehearsed their new ‘characters’ in preparation for the interviews. Each character was given specific traits that would challenge the interviewers’ planned approaches and each location was given a degree of (in)formality that would also need to be taken onboard. For example, the MP was to be encouraging but incredibly pushed for time; the mother/father was to be vague in his/her responses and camera shy; and the restaurant owner was to be strict, proud and pushy.

These cliché characters and contrived scenarios were designed to get the groups thinking on their feet. Their purpose was not to so much to emulate real interview experiences, but rather to provoke discussion and to think about how they would do it differently when the opportunity for the next real interview arose. Given the short preparation time, the groups did very well. Here are the recordings:

Scenario 1: MP Interview (audio)

Scenario 2: Friend's Mother Interview (video)

Scenario 3: Restaurant Owner Interview (audio)

The feedback session was lively and full of ideas. Each pair was asked to talk about their experiences and say what they would have done differently had they been given a second chance. They then listened to an account of the interview from the perspective of the interviewees. The differences of perspective were revealing and gave the interviewers much to think about. Key points raised in the feedback session included:

• The need for better preparation, including a more focused and progressive line of questioning, and an overarching structure to the interview.
• The ability to explain to the interviewee the nature of the project and the intended outcome and use of the interview material.
• Better technological preparation. Not having to worry about camera angles, camera shake, audio levels whilst recording.
• The importance of a more relaxed and confident rapport with interviewees to encourage more in-depth answers to questions.
• The importance of building trust with the interviewee, even if it's on the basis of a brief encounter. One of the interviewees felt the interviewers had not given her their full attention.
• The importance of having back-up questions when answers are not forthcoming.
• The need to be flexible and the ability to reformulate questions on the spur of the moment to get the interviewee to go from the general to the specific.
• The ability to discern when best to use 'open' or 'closed' questions.
• The importance of having a strategy for pair work based on clearer communication and better planning.

The overall outcome of the workshop was very positive and provided the group with new ideas for a series of short, informal interviews they will conduct next week. I'm grateful to all PAN staff for the opportunity to participate in the project and to the Fortune Group for their enthusiasm and curiosity. I look forward to seeing the Taste of Memory project come to fruition.