Interviewology: Questioning questions

"To be.....or not to be. That's not really a question" Francois Truffaut

A fascinating little (well not so little, and rather dense) overview of the interviewing process. Philosophically, the whole process (hole process) of interviewing has the potential for so many
pitfalls in every stage from the creation of the questions, to the appropriateness for the target group, to the answers from the target group to the assessment of the collected interview data or answers via quantitative or qualitative coding assessments, that we must be careful to, at very least, be concerned about accuracy. At very most, we should acknowledge as many of the pitfalls as possible. In short we must question ourselves at each stage. It is probably a good idea to get a peer review or "second set of eyes" to look at questions from a different (hence less subjective than just one's own) point of view. I see interviews as beyond conversations in that they are intentionally purposeful. And end when the purpose the purpose is complete. And some how recorded and reviewed for the intended pupose. While conversations can have purposes (all in some ways do actually).....but the intention from the beginning is made clear, either explicitly or implicitly. When you walk in for a job interview, even if you are not told to do so, you are to attempt "professional behavior."
By the way if one is doing a an "ethnographic autobiography, " does one need to be sure to have an interview ready to keep oneself on task or appropriately un-subjective for the task at hand? Does one "question oneself" in this instance? That was just one question I didn't see addressed.