Semi-structured interviews

When conducting qualitative research, in-depth interviews are often chosen as the primary research method (Bell et al., 2019). Qualitative interviews can be either semi-structured or unstructured. Both permit for more flexibility than quantitative interviewing due to a less structured approach (Bell et al., 2019). As such, the goal of qualitative interviews is to investigate how individual subjects make decisions, create meaning, think, and behave to shed light on social complexities (Brenner, 2006).

Conducting qualitative interviews is perceived as an adequate method to shed light on the complex process of CBBE formation and detect potential differences among LV customers belonging to Gen X and Gen Y.

Qualitative interviewing allows to adjust the sequence and direction of questions asked, which enables researchers to react to individual interviewees’ responses and explore emerging themes (Bell et al., 2019). They resemble a conversation that allows for two-way communication (Yin, 2011), building a relationship between interviewee and interviewer (Seidman, 2006). The respondent is central in qualitative interviewing, hence the interviewer ought to engage just enough in the conversation as to initiate the interviewee’s responses and simultaneously give the interviewee enough room to ensure his or her autonomy (Seidman, 2006).

Contrasting semi-structured and unstructured interviews, the latter provide even more flexibility as they do not follow any structure and instead follow the natural flow of conversation prompted by an initial question (Bell et al., 2019). Semi-structured interviews, in contrast, offer more structure as they are built on interview guides that list specific questions to be addressed during the interview (Bell et al., 2019).

This study will be based on semi-structured interviews because of the following advantages.

Firstly, the higher emphasis on structure allows for a more specific research focus (Bell et al., 2019).

By creating an interview guide, questions may be formulated prior to the first interview to ensure that all relevant dimensions of CBBE are addressed throughout the interview. Furthermore, it ensures a certain degree of consistency across interviews which will facilitate the analysis of cross-generational data. At the same time, semi-structured interviews allow us to steer the interview into different directions and follow up on relevant themes. This offers the valuable opportunity to dive deeper into the participants’ realities and reveal taken-for granted assumptions, ultimately supporting the generation of relevant insights. The interview guide has been modified iteratively in line with grounded theory.

64 One of the main limitations of interviews is the risk of incorrectly interpreting the meaning of the data (Yin, 2011). Participants often attribute meanings to mannerisms or words which the researchers may not be aware of, leading to a false interpretation of meaning (Yin, 2011). Relatedly, respondents may not be able to equally well express themselves in an obvious manner. To mitigate this risk, we have focused on listening carefully during the interview and subsequently analyze interviewees’ responses in a coherent and consistent manner to discover the underlying meanings, attitudes and perceptions of the respondents (Rubin & Rubin, 1995).

Interview Design

The 16 in-depth interviews were conducted within a time period of three and a half weeks (01.03.2020-25.03.2020). Out of the 16 interviews, five were conducted in person in Düsseldorf and Copenhagen.

The remaining eleven were conducted via Skype. This enabled to include more respondents of different nationalities in the sample to ensure a broad set of perspectives and to reduce bias. Moreover, the last five interviews had to be undertaken via Skype due to the global outbreak of Covid-19, which prohibited physical contact with participants.

Overall, the interviews lasted between 30 and 60 minutes, resulting in a total of 646 minutes of interview recordings. The interview length was heavily influenced by the participants’ immersion with LV.

Selecting a variety of different LV consumers to guarantee the coverage of different perspectives in this study, hence, explains the variance in interview length. Full transcripts of all interviews can be found in Appendix 4. The interviews were transcribed in parallel to their conduction, leading to an early identification of occurring themes and facilitating the selection of additional interviewees.

The interviews were organized as follows:

1. Upon selection of the single case LV, an initial interview guide was created, covering all relevant dimensions of CBBE (see Measurement Scale, p.41). During the interview process, this guide was modified iteratively based on the findings and insights generated.

2. The guide and the criteria for sample collection were developed simultaneously following the purposive sampling procedure.

3. Potential interviewees were selected and contacted. Not all interviews were scheduled immediately but instead in the course of one month to incorporate first insights of previous interviews into the selection of additional participants.

65 4. Interviews were scheduled in quiet environments and to the convenience of the interviewee

and digitally recorded to ensure accurate transcription.

Interview guide

Following the implications of semi-structured interviews, an interview guide was designed (see Appendix 1). This guide is built around the dimensions of CBBE derived from Aaker (1996), Keller (2009) and Baalbaki and Guzmán (2016). The guide was designed to reveal how customers belonging to different generational cohorts build brand equity in relation to LV, serving as a framework to ask the same questions to both generations so that they could be compared to one another afterwards. The respondents themselves were not aware of the generational component of this study, and the questions were designed to explore personal experiences, social worlds and attitudes of respondents in relation to LV. To be able to analyze generational differences without priming respondents’ opinions, they were not asked about age or generational cohort related matters.

Importantly, this guide only suggests a loose structure and encourages the change of sequence and the modification of the overall guide during the interview process. As such, questions were adjusted and added as insights emerged during the interviews which were not previously considered. This process is in line with grounded theory, which stresses “the importance of not starting out with too many preconceptions” (Bell et al., 2019, p. 440). To ensure the successful extraction of information and avoid the induction of bias and respondents’ answers, questions throughout the guide are primarily posed in an open-ended, non-directive and straightforward fashion (Yin, 2011; Tracey, 2013). The following section will elucidate the interview guide’s structure.

1) The introduction presents the interviewee with background information on the researchers and the study, highlighting elements such as interview durability, confidentiality and recording of the interview.

2) The first section serves to create rapport between interviewer and interviewee and, hence, focuses on background and lifestyle. After a general introduction, generative questions, such as

“How do you describe your own lifestyle?”, are intended to make the respondent feel comfortable and induce his willingness to share information (Tracey, 2013). Furthermore, questions were steered towards shopping habits without probing connection to the luxury market yet.

66 3) The third section directly addresses respondents' engagement with luxury purchases. Open questions such as “Do you purchase luxury goods?” are asked to generate unbiased insights regarding the participants’ general involvement and attitudes towards luxury consumption.

4) After providing interviewees with a definition of what constitutes luxury fashion, the fourth section is divided into six subsections to cover the different dimensions of CBBE: Brand awareness, brand imagery, organizational association and brand leadership, social influence, loyalty, and sustainability. The sequence of CBBE dimensions in the guide is arranged according to how sensitive the required information is.

a) Brand awareness was incorporated by asking questions concerning brand recall and recognition. Moreover, to fully explore the dimensions of CBBE, this section first introduces LV as the focal brand, functioning as the first indicator of participants’

involvement with the brand.

b) Brand imagery addresses brand personality and values, brand feelings and the brand’s history, heritage, and experiences. Moreover, questions regarding usage and purchase situations and user profiles were asked.

c) Organizational association and brand leadership concerns LV’s perceived uniqueness, innovativeness and popularity. It also asks participants regarding their opinions towards LVMH.

d) Social influence explores topics of social approval by asking questions related to how LV products affect the way consumers perceive themselves or others.

e) The loyalty dimension is directed at participants’ satisfaction and preference as well as the brand’s price premium.

f) The sustainability dimension specifies two forms of sustainability, namely environmental and social sustainability (Hansmann, Mieg, & Frischknecht, 2012).

Upon giving participants an overview on these forms of sustainability, they are asked to evaluate LV’s engagement in environmental and social sustainability, respectively.

5) Finally, respondents are given the opportunity to finish the interview on their own terms (Bell et al., 2019). Therefore, the interview is wrapped up by asking participants for any further remarks on what makes LV as a strong brand in their eyes.