Coding Data

Charmaz (2006) has described grounded theory methods as a set of flexible analytic guidelines. Consistent with the constructivist assumptions set out earlier in chapter two, a constructivist grounded theory approach to coding (Charmaz 2006, 2014) has been adopted in conjunction with Glaser’s (1998, p140) suggested approach to questioning of the data to identify the participants’ main concern.

The constant comparison central to grounded theory research is an iterative endeavour which requires the researcher to cycle between different phases of coding as categories are refined and conceptually elevated; something which cannot be readily captured in

92 the linear form of a written thesis. However, the research process chronology (figure 4) illustrates the clustering of research processes which reflects, in part, the juggling required as a part-time PhD student but also the pacing of the research process which accompanies the iterative cycling between coding phases, developing theoretical sensitivity, the following of theoretical sampling leads and ultimately theoretical saturation.

Birks and Mills (2015) indicate the importance of not rushing the early stages of the research process as the researcher gets to grips with concurrent data collection and analysis, suggesting that this is helpful in developing researcher reflexivity. Figure 4 reveals the nearly 3-month gap between the collection of the first two interviews and the second two. This is indicative of a period of familiarisation with line-by-line coding and a degree of early data overwhelm. The pattern of data collection also shows how theoretical sampling leads which arose after analysing the third and fourth interviews and comparison with earlier interviews, led to a cluster of interviews being collected over a shorter period of time between August and November 2016. As data from participants five, six and seven were added, tentative focused codes began to be identified and the subsequent pause between interview eight and nine is reflective of the time spent engaged in constant comparison and memo-ing to test out these more focused codes. The tighter cluster of interviews collected between August and November 2016 is indicative of the researcher’s increasing certainty about focused codes and confidence in a core category.

It was possible that theoretical saturation had been achieved after interview eighteen but as the process of constant comparison and theoretical coding progressed in early 2017, some doubts remained and hence a further participant was interviewed, after a gap of a little over four months. Adding this final interview data to the existing bank of data did not lead the researcher to identify further categories but did provide further indicators of existing categories, providing the researcher with confidence that sufficient theoretical saturation of the categories for this study had been achieved (Timonen, Foley and Conlon, 2018).

93 In the following sections, further detail is provided to demonstrate how analysis of the data through initial and focused coding led to the identification of the core and related categories which in turn inform the grounded theory presented in this research. The grounded theoretical perspective is then set out in chapters five, six and seven before integration with the extant literature in chapter eight.

4.2.1 Initial Coding

Transcripts were analysed in a word document using a table. An excerpt is shown in Appendix G which provides an illustration of initial coding from an early transcript. The convention of line-by-line coding was adopted as described by Charmaz (2006, 2014).

Charmaz (2006) advocates the use of gerunds and later adjusts this to suggest coding for actions (2014, p116). This followed an abandoned attempt to use data management software, NVivo, at this early stage which, as described earlier in chapter three, proved unwieldy given the very large number of initial codes which are inevitably generated when following guidance to code everything in early research (Charmaz 2014).

A consistent approach to coding was developed, as illustrated, so that the lines of interest could be marked with reference to the time elapsed in the interview and with line-by-line codes captured in a separate column. These word-processed documents were also saved as PDF files to NVivo, in part as back up and in part to facilitate text searches when required in subsequent stages of the research process when looking for quotations and coding locations. Fieldnotes were also analysed in conjunction with each transcription although in the context of initial coding, those from the first cluster of interviews tended to have a focus on practical issues related to the set up and conducting the interview.

In the data from the first four participants, detailed descriptions of activities regarded as supervision seemed most salient. The participants were from different professions and working in different settings, but there was overlap between the accounts; one-to-one supervision, for example, is described by all participants as the dominant form of supervision practice. The gap between the first two and second two interviews, (see again figure 4) is indicative of the time taken for the researcher to begin to get to grips with line-by-line coding and with constant comparison. Until some confidence with data

94 analysis had been developed it was difficult to move forward with further data collection.

Engaging in constant comparison of incidents with incidents, from and between the first two interviews, a set of 81 possible initial codes was recorded, rising to 88 after the third and 91 after the fourth. Appendix H illustrates how line-by-line segments from the first four interviews were attributed to one such initial code. Through engaging in constant comparison with the data and memo-ing as encouraged in all grounded theory traditions, theoretical questions developed about who to speak to next about AHP supervision.