Planning the Analysis

References:
Saunders et al., Ch 12
Easterby-Smith et al., Ch 5 p117ff
Introduction: qualitative data
The difficulties

Qualitative methods produce a confusing mass of unstructured bulky

data

There are no clear methodological procedures and there is a lack of

aggregating (statistical) techniques

Qualitative research tends to be ‘end loaded’ – relatively easy to get

started but the problems of data analysis build up later (versus ‘front
loaded’ quantitative methods)

Analysing and writing up is about interpretation – discovering ‘meaning’

in the data – the data are qualitative and the analysis of the data is also
qualitative and subjective – ‘thick description’
Triangulation and Integrating the
Dissertation
 Comparative method
 The comparison of different data sources that agree in their meanings strengthens the
validity of findings if they are independently verified

 The literature
 Most basic kind is comparison of gathered data with literature and other empirical studies

 Multiple data sources

 Can be also be different data sources in your own research…
 Qualitative compared with quantitative data (interviews with survey findings)
 Different qualitative data sources (e.g. different groups of respondents)

 Discrepant cases
 Disagreements and data sources that contradict each other can also be useful and revealing
More Structured Approaches
The use of qualitative software - NVivo, WinMax

You probably will not use this but the feature are:
 Categories: developing the basic variables and
constructs of the research
 Unitising: dividing the data into relevant ‘chunks’
labelled with the categories
 Ease of search, retrieval, and combining data
 Developing new categories and research variables
 Relationships and links: analysis by reorganising the
data, deciding which categories account for most
units of data
Less Structured Approaches

The major one is Grounded Theory

Glaser and Strauss, The Discovery of Grounded Theory (1967)

Aims to ‘bring out’ findings without forcing data into fixed categories

Inductive and interpretive but still fairly systematic

The basic model: familiarization

reflection
concepts
recoding
linking
The grounded theory stages
Familiarization
Just read the data through. Don’t think about it too much but open your mind to what the data are
telling you. Look at all the data not just the ‘interesting’ parts. You also need to ‘read’ and interpret
your data – consider possible biases of interviewees, what people ‘really mean’

Reflection
Continue with the familiarization process but more consciously try to relate parts of the data back to
concepts from your research model. Try to ‘see’ these ideas in the data. Inevitably at this point you
are starting to mentally divide up the data into more (and less) ‘interesting’ parts

Concepts
Firm up the reflection stage and tag specific chunks of data with variables and concepts from the
research model. Statements and passages illustrate and demonstrate particular research ideas

Recoding
This is playing around with the concepts stage and reworking ideas – redefining and naming
particular concepts/ideas as you think about them in more depth, seeing one concept as a special
case of another, merging ideas that turn out to be closely related, etc. This is about the interaction
of model and data

Linking
Bring together the separate concepts into a revised research model. Triangulate these data with
any other evidence
Analysing interview and other qualitative
data
The basic message is ‘don’t panic’ – immerse yourself in the data
and gradually build an account around it

Get your data into a manageable form – field notes, interview tapes,
possibly transcripts, email interviews, secondary material
 Read and re-read your material
 Think about it and try to ‘see’ the variables and ideas of your
research model in it
 Think as deeply as you can about the meanings in the text
 Select ‘interesting’ quotes to use when writing up

Traceability: any qualitative material/quotations used in the text

should be ‘traceable’ to some source - e.g. number your interviews
and transcripts, include them as appendices, and number/page
number the textual material
Writing and style

Interpretation and ‘thick description’

Analysing and writing up is about discovering ‘meaning’ in the data
– the data are qualitative and the analysis of the data is also
qualitative and subjective

You must develop an accompanying and surrounding text and

discussion that interprets and brings out the quoted material

An example:
Knowledge management and knowledge sharing
The research model here was an exploration of knowledge
‘sharing’ – people’s attitude towards sharing their knowledge,
whether they did or did not share, the motives behind sharing
or hoarding, the limits and constraints, whether knowledge
travelled easily across levels and departments, and so on
1. A high proportion of respondents seemed to have a
commitment to freely sharing knowledge as the only
way to get work done.

‘Not to share knowledge is an act of small-mindedness. Today

knowledge can be shared because it is everywhere. It is insane to
say that I will hide this piece of knowledge and that I will put walls
around me so that nobody can know what I know… Of course I will
share my knowledge and experiences because if they don’t get it
from me they will get it from somewhere else and you don’t gain
anything by hiding behind your finger. There has been no instance
that has discouraged me from sharing my knowledge.’ (Product
Manager, male)
2. However, there were qualifying factors. This was within an
understood framework of reciprocation that we called
knowledge trading. So knowledge transfer was not a ‘free gift’
but was more an exchange that included expectations of pay-
back.
‘We know what we are looking for and we know who can give it to us.
So in a sense we give a motive to the other person to share their
knowledge. That is, I will share with somebody some knowledge and
then I will ask for their knowledge, so we mutually share. You cannot
only ask. You give and take.’ (Therapy Area Manager, male)
3. There were also many categories of knowledge that was hoarded and
withheld going on at the same time as knowledge sharing. Trust (based on
a belief in the competence and understanding of others) was a factor that
limited sharing – trust was discretional and selective.

‘Up to a certain extent, knowledge sharing from me to them is

affected. I stop sharing when the other person doesn’t
understand anything and doesn’t respect what I am telling them.
If I see that the other person has no respect and even though I
am making an effort to help them they do not pay attention or do
not respect my help, and also thinks that it is my obligation to
help them, I stop sharing and I don’t move on. But I try not to
stop. I try not to do the things that others have done to me, no
matter how ideal this sounds’ (Key Account Manager, male).
Summarizing…

So the basic qualitative method is

o To firstly familiarise ourselves with the interviews

o To reflect on this material and tie in various quotes and
passages with the research concepts and hypotheses
o To select out those ‘relevant’ passages and embed them
in our writing up
o Interpret passages and bring out their meaning