933124

Course
Analysis of qualitative data

Faculty

Nanna Mik-Meyer, Professor MSO, Department of Organization, Copenhagen Business School

Lise Justesen, Associate Professor, Department of Organization, Copenhagen Business School

Course Coordinator
Nanna Mik-Meyer, Professor MSO

Prerequisites
The PhD student should be well versed in basic literature on qualitative methods and be in the middle of – or just finished with – his/her data collection. In connection with the application the student should send one document:

A brief note (no more than 300 words), listing:
• Your research topic and research question(s)
• Precise description of the data you have gathered by 14 August 2018
• Key concepts/theoretical perspective(s) that inspire your research
• Five key questions on methodological/analytical issues in your project

The document should be sent to Katja Høeg Tingleff kht.research@cbs.dk. Deadline for sending this document is 14 August 2018.

The PhD student will be told if he/she is accepted to the course before 17 August  2018.

If you are accepted you should work out a three-pages (maximum) analysis of data gathered in your PhD project. The three pages shall offer an analysis of interview quotes/sequences or text from documents. This data should weigh 1/3 of the presentation (approx. one page) and the analysis of the data should weigh 2/3 of the presentation (approx. 2 pages).

Deadline for sending this text is 6 September 2018.

Certificates will be granted to students with full participation in all sessions. The students will receive a diploma where it is certified that the students have taken part in and completed all requirements for the PhD course.

Aim
An important feature of qualitative research is that it generally describes itself as inductive rather than deductive, that is, qualitative research develops interpretation and concepts based on empirical data rather than collecting data to test for given hypotheses or models. However, qualitative analyses vary in relation to when in the process concepts enter the analytical work. Consequently, this course will involve analytical approaches that have an explicit conceptual basis and an analytical approach that builds the conceptual framework along the way.

A central goal of the course is to teach the students how to develop strong analysis from a qualitative dataset. In order to do so the students are taught to conduct qualitative analyses in a systematic, consistent and transparent way. The course will enter the so-called black box of how to conduct qualitative analysis and focus on the actual analysis of qualitative data, that is, when interviews or documents are analysed and the role of concepts in this undertaking. The course will involve concepts inspired by different research traditions, namely, Grounded Theory (Charmaz’s version), Symbolic Interactionism and Actor Network Theory and show students how different conceptual approaches contribute to specific analysis of data.

Course content

Teaching style
Dialogue-based lectures, group discussions as well as concrete feedback sessions to all participating students. The three pages analysis of data provided by all participants will constitute the outset for discussions in the course (cf. ‘student presentations’), and you must be prepared to participate in discussions of your individual presentation as well as other students’ analyses.

Lecture plan
Day 1
10.00 Introduction to the course and presentation Nanna Mik-Meyer
11.00 Lecture 1: THE BLACK BOX OF QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS – PART 1 Nanna Mik-Meyer
12.00 Lunch
13.00 Lecture 2: THE BLACK BOX OF QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS – PART 2 Nanna Mik-Meyer
14.00 Joint discussion
15.00 Lecture 3: THE BLACK BOX OF QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS – PART 3 Nanna Mik-Meyer
16.00 Day ends
Day 2
9.00 Lecture 4: EXAMPLE 1: GROUNDED THEORY Nanna Mik-Meyer
10.00 Joint discussion
10.45 Lecture 5: How to conduct a GT analysis Nanna Mik-Meyer
11.30 Break
11.45 Student presentations and discussions
12.30 Lunch
13.30 Student presentations and discussions
15.00 Break
15.15 Student presentations and discussions
16.00 Day ends
Day 3
9.00 Lecture 6: EXAMPLE 2: ACTOR NETWORK THEORY Lise Justesen
10.00 Joint discussion
10.45 Lecture 7: How to conduct an ANT analysis Lise Justesen
11.30 Break
11.45 Student presentations and discussions
12.30 Lunch
13.30 Student presentations and discussions
15.00 Break
15.15 Student presentations and discussions
16.00 Day ends
Day 4
9.00 Lecture 8: EXAMPLE 3: SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM Nanna Mik-Meyer
10.00 Joint discussion
10.45 Lecture 9: How to conduct an SI analysis Nanna Mik-Meyer
11.30 Break
11.45 Student presentations and discussions
12.30 Lunch
13.30 Student presentations and discussions
15.00 Break
15.15 Lecture 10: PROS AND CONS TOWARDS DIFFERENT ANALYTICAL APPROACHES Nanna Mik-Meyer
16.00 Course ends

Learning objectives
1) The course will provide the students with hands-on knowledge on how to conduct systematic, consistent and transparent analyses of qualitative data.

2) The course will discuss qualitative analysis in relation to the aforementioned three perspectives and their criteria of how to progress from data to analysis.

3) By sharing examples of actual analysis, the students with have a good platform for developing the quality of their PhD’s projects’ analyses as well as learn from the discussions of fellow students’ projects.

On completion of the course, students should have better understanding of the craft skill needed for conducting convincing qualitative analyses.

Exam
N/A

Other

Start date
10/09/2018

End date
13/09/2018

Level
PhD

ECTS
4 ECTS

Language
English

Course Literature

Primary literature

Blumer, H. (1986) Chapter 1 “The methodological position of symbolic interaction” and chapter 3 “Society as symbolic interaction” in Blumer, H. (ed) Symbolic Interactionism. Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press. (approx. 70 pages)

Charmaz, K. (2016) Grounded Theory, in Smith, J. (ed) Qualitative Psychology. A Guide to Research Methods. London: Sage.

Charmaz, K. (2000) Constructionist and objectivist grounded theory, in Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Clarke, A. E. (2003) Situational analysis: grounded theory mapping after the postmodern turn, Symbolic Interactionism, 26 (4): 533-576.

Clarke, V., Braun, V. & Hayfield, N. Thematic analysis, i Smith, J.A. (red.) Qualitative Psychology: A practical guide to research methods. London: SAGE. 

Gephardt, R. 2004. What is qualitative research and why is it important? Academy of Management Journal, 7: 454–462.

Holstein, J. A. & Gubrium, J. F. (1995) The active interview. New York: Sage.

Latour, B. (2005) “Third source of uncertainty: Objects too have agency”, “Fourth source of uncertainty: Matter of facts vs. matter of concern” and “Fifth source of uncertainty: Writing down risky accounting”, in Reassembling the Social, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 63-140.

Mik-Meyer, N. (2016) Othering, ableism and disability: a discursive analysis of co-workers’ construction of colleagues with visible impairments, Human Relations, 69 (6): 1341-1363.

Pratt, M. G. (2008) Fitting oval pegs into round holes: Tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals, Organizational Research Methods, 11 (3): 481-509.

Pratt, M. G. (2009) For the lack of a boilerplate: tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research, Academy of Management Journal, 52 (5): 856-862.

Searle, C. & Silverman, D. (1997) Ensuring rigour in qualitative research, The European Journal of Public Health, 7 (4): 379-384.

Tryggestad, K., Justesen, L. and Mouritsen, J. (2013), “Project temporalities: How frogs can become stakeholders". International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 6 (1): 69-87.

Supplementary literature

Blumer, H. (1986) Symbolic Interactionism. Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. (2000) (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Goffman, E. (1990) The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Double day.

Justesen, L. & Mik-Meyer, N. (2012) Qualitative research methods in organisation studies. Copehagen: Hans Reitzels Publishers.

Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Patton, M. Q (2001) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Silverman, D. (2013) Interpreting qualitative data. London: Sage.

Fee
DKK 5,200 (covers the course, coffee/tea, lunch and one dinner)

Minimum number of participants
11

Maximum number of participants
20

Location
Copenhagen Business School
Kilevej 14 A
2000 Frederiksberg
Room: KL4.74 (4th floor)

Contact information
The PhD Support
Katja Høeg Tingleff
Tel.: +45 38 15 28 39
E-mail: kht.research@cbs.dk

Registration deadline
14/08/2018

Please note that your registration is binding after the registration deadline.

In case we receive more registrations for the course than we have places, the registrations will be prioritized in the following order: Students from Doctoral School of Organisation and Management Studies (OMS), students from other CBS PhD schools, students from other institutions than CBS.
Top