DATA ANALYSIS

in qualitative research
1 GENERAL INFORMATION
Now that you have explained HOW you will collect your data, you must also explain to the reader how you will ANALYZE all those words! Most of you will also do more than one case study, so what is written below is based on that assumption. As explained, analysis means making sense of the data collected so you can present findings and draw specific conclusions at the end of your thesis (i.e. answer your research questions). Remind the reader what you brought up in methodology on how you will handle the analysis of all these WORDS and how this will provide a foundation on which you can draw conclusions. Again, you just want to explain here that Miles and Huberman (1994) refer to analysis of qualitative data as being organized into three stages: References brought up in this document are available at the end. NOTE: Some of this may be used in your analysis chapter, but most of how you will analyze your data should be presented already in Chapter Three and then just remind the reader in your analysis chapter (Chapter Five). Yin (1994) states that every case study should start with a general analytical strategy. These general analytical strategies with regards to case studies provide the researcher with a system by which s/he can set priorities for what it is they need to analyse and why. As Herriott and Firestone (1983) stated in Yin (1994), The evidence from multiple cases is often considered more compelling, and the overall study is therefore regarded as being more robust (p. 45). The way in which the data will be analysed is very important for any research study. For many of you in your work, it will involve the analysis of the interviews you conducted (i.e. words you collected), as well as the review and use of any documentation that the firms feel they are able to hand over (i.e. annual reports, brochures, etc.). As previously stated, these multiple sources of evidence (i.e. triangulation) are what add to a studys validity (Yin, 1994). Yin (1994) adds that before data can actually be analyzed, a researcher using case studies can choose from two general analytical strategies: Relying on theoretical propositions is the most common (and advised) strategy (according to Yin, p. 103-104). The result of this is the collection of data based on research questions taken from previous studiesand here you are comparing your findings with these previous studies (or those you used in your frame of reference). (MOST OF YOU USE THIS ONE)! Developing a case description can be used as a strategy as well, according to Yin, but this is less favorable and should only used when little previous research has been done (this is NOT the case for most if not all of you).

Yin (ibid.) then explains that specific techniques (and here he refers to Miles & Huberman, 1984) can be used to actually analyze the data. We use more recent thinking from these authors: Many of you will rely on two main forms of analysis for your case study data: 1. Within-case analysis: Comparing your data against the theory you are using. 2. Cross-case analysis: Data in one case compared to data in the other cases. In writing about qualitative data analysis, Miles and Huberman (1994) state that the focus is on data in the form of words in our case words that emanate from the interviews conducted. These words require processing, according to these authors, and this processing is itself a form of analysis.

2 ANALYSIS AS A 3-STEP PROCESS:

In their extensive writing on qualitative data analysis, Miles and Huberman (1994) define data analysis, as consisting of three concurrent flows of activity: (1) Data reduction, (2) Data display, and (3) Conclusion drawing/verification (p. 10). Upon first obtaining data during a data collection period, Miles and Huberman explain these three stages of qualitative data analysis as follows:

1. Data reduction should not be considered to be separate from analysis, but as a

part of it. This reduction of the data is analysis that helps to sharpen, sort, focus, discard, and organize the data in a way that allows for final conclusions to be drawn and verified. They add that data can be reduced and transformed through such means as selection, summary, paraphrasing, or through being subsumed in a larger pattern. YOU OFTEN USE YOUR WITHIN-CASE ANALYSIS TO DO THIS, BUT CROSS-CASE (developing matrices to organize your data and search for patterns) CAN ALSO BE USED (see next section) Remember, cross-case analysis allows you to take your data and see if it fits (or does not fit) with the existing theory you are relying on.

2. Data display is the second major activity which the researcher should go
through, and this means taking the reduced data and displaying it in an organized, compressed way so that conclusions can be more easily drawn. These authors explain that, humans are not powerful processors of large amounts of information, and that extended text can overload humans information-processing capabilities (op. cit., p. 11, with reference to Faust, 1982). It is further explained that good displays are, a major avenue to valid qualitative analysis (op. cit., p. 11). In conclusion, they state that, as with data reduction, the creation and use of displays is not separate from analysis, but is a part of it. USING CROSS-CASE ANALYSIS (with matrices) WORKS BEST HERE!

3. Conclusion drawing and verification is the final analytical activity for the
qualitative researcher. It is here that the researcher begins to decide what things mean. They do this by noting regularities, patterns (differences/similarities), explanations, possible configurations, causal flows, and propositions. However, Miles and Huberman also add that the competent researcher should hold such conclusions lightly, while maintaining both openness and a degree of skepticism. FOR YOUR THESIS, THIS STEP IS YOUR FINAL CHAPTER (CONCLUSIONS). IMPORTANT: You should analysis in detail (and especially discuss these 3 steps) in your methodology chapter, explaining to the reader how you plan to analyze your data. In your actual analysis chapter, you will simply remind them briefly of using this approach.

3 SPECIFICS ON WITHIN-CASE & CROSS-CASE ANALYSIS:

For each of your case studies, or if you are doing only a single case study for your thesis (not very common in a Masters Thesis), the main kind of data analysis you will rely on is referred to as within-case analysis. Here you will go within the case and compare your data to the previous theory(ies) you relied upon and presented in your conceptualization and frame of reference. When comparing it to the previous theory you used, you are seeking patterns: Either your data fits the previous theory, or it does not. Present this, but don't try to explain why -- that is a conclusion and comes later in the final chapter. Basically, in within-case analysis, your data either verifies or falsifies (agrees/disagrees supports/is critical of) previous research. Or perhaps your data brought up something the other studies did not! This is your primary contribution as a scientist -- adding to what has already been done by observing the same thing in a new setting, OR finding something new and presenting that to the old research you relied on. Within-case analysis is a term used from Miles & Huberman (1994), but it is Yin (1994) who discusses comparing your findings to your frame of reference (i.e. previous studies) as one of two ways to analyze case study data. You should realize that within-case analysis is quite repetitive of both the data you collected and the theory you used in your frame of reference. Try to focus on summarizing rather than repeating. Again, your point of conducting within-case analysis is to see how your findings fit with previous findings (most of you are after all being deductive). By summarizing and comparing, you are in fact REDUCING your datanow we move on DISPLAYING that data via crosscase analysis. If you conducted more than one case, then you will also do cross-case analysis, where you make matrices (for example) of various data sets and compare one case to the other(s). Sounds complicated but it's notCross-case analysis is often used to simply analyze your data (and reduce even more) so that conclusions can be drawn from this perspective as well. In cross-case analysis, you may find similarities with what your within-case analysis found, but you often come across a few other patterns or discoveries

as well. This is what makes doing more than one case so worthwhile -- you are making your data a little richer and more generalizable. BUT be careful with the word generalizable, as it can be rather dangerous in case study research. Your overall purpose (research problem), remember, is to gain a better understanding of some phenomena (i.e. the Internet, event marketing, relationships, advertisingwhatever). An EXAMPLE of how your cross-case analysis might be presented is given below: Research Question One: Write out your research questionor it's topic area. Then present a matrix with all the variables you collected data on in your interviews within that research question. Then compare each variable (or set of variables) across each case. Table X: Write out RQ topic here Variable/Case Case 1 Briefly write Variable X Variable Y Variable Z
data in here Briefly write data in here Briefly write data in here

Case 2
Briefly write data in here Briefly write data in here Briefly write data in here

Comparing case 1 with case 2 for this variable in RQ1 = one paragraph of writing! OR use a coding system

SOURCE: NOT NEEDED (IF no source, then it is authors own work!) You can also learn to CODE your responses (contact Tim if you need info or a reference on coding your data). Coding would be, for example, the types of responses given. EXAMPLE: Use of promotional tools in a study I did presented four types of responses when I looked across the cases: (++) = They thought TV advertising was important and they used it; (+-) = they thought it was important but did not use it (-+) = They did not think it was important but they used it (--) = they did not use it and did not think it was important.

4 REFERENCES (for the above information)

The main references you should refer to from the above information (do not refer to this document, please) include: Yin, Robert K. (1994). Case Study Research, Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Miles, Matthew B. & Huberman, Michael A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis, Second Edition.

Hope this helps!