There is no standard approach to the analysis of qualitative data. Interpretivists, for instance, resist categorising or coding their data, preferring to work from the transcripts of interviews (Saunders et al., 2012). It was indicated by Saunders et al. (2012) that using the transcripts or notes of qualitative interviews or observations by thoroughly reading and re-reading them is one approach to analysing this type of data.
Collis and Hussy (2009) stated that the main method of analysing qualitative data can be by classifying the data into the quantifying methods and the non- quantifying methods which include general analytical procedures. This method is suitable for all types of qualitative research. Some authors such as Braun and Clarke (2006) and Boyatzis (1998) called the general approach for analysing qualitative data ‘thematic analysis’. Boyatzis (1998: 4) has argued that thematic analysis is “not another qualitative method but a process that can be used with most, if not all, qualitative methods…”. Collis and Hussey (2009) stated that the general analytical procedure approach (thematic analysis) provides the methodical rigour and the systematic processes which are required. Braun and Clarke (2006: 79) defined thematic analysis as “A qualitative analytic method for: identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within data. It minimally organises and describes your data set in (rich) detail. However, frequently it goes further than this, and interprets various aspects of the research topic”
On the other hand, researchers who use multiple case studies as the main strategy for their research can organise the data analysis process into two stages: within- case analysis and cross case analysis (Yin, 2009; Ayres et al., 2003; Creswell, 2009).
Based on the above discussion, this research is qualitative research and the main research strategy is multiple case studies and, therefore, the data was analysed by using the thematic analysis approach which includes general procedures for analysing. It offers an accessible and flexible approach to analysing qualitative data especially for those not particularly familiar with qualitative research (like postgraduate students) (Collis and Hussey, 2009).
In addition, the analysis and discussion is organised in two stages: within-case
analysis (which means analysing each case separately and drawing conclusions
for each case) and cross-case analysis (in this stage the similarities and differences among the findings of the cases will be discussed and the cases findings will be combined as an attempt to answer the research questions); these stages are recommended for multiple case study research.
In order to deal with the huge volume of qualitative data that has been collected via the multiple case studies, general procedures for the thematic analysis was set up as follows:
• The research aim and questions were taken into consideration by the researcher at all stages of the analysis.
• All interviews were written into Microsoft Word. The interview transcripts were returned back to the respondents for confirmation that they were a true record of what was said and all the notes from the direct observations were written into Microsoft Word and were linked to their interview transcripts.
• Any material collected by interviews, documents or direct observations was carefully referenced.
• The researcher started the analysis by reading and re-reading the transcripts of the interviews and the notes of the direct observations and documents many times and thus became very familiar with the data (this step in the process was supported by Saunders et al., 2012; Creswell, 2009).
• Next, the researcher started coding the data. Coding refers to ‘the most basic segment, or element, of the raw data or information that can be assessed in a
meaningful way regarding the phenomenon’ (Braun and Clarke, 2006: 88).
After the data was coded, the researcher grouped the codes into small categories according to the themes which emerged dependent upon the research questions (such a strategy is supported by Saunders et al., 2012; Collis and Hussey, 2009). In this process, eight themes were identified (size of the organization, innovation, top management support, internal champion support, overhead costs and cost structure, usefulness and importance of cost information, product diversity, manufacturing flexibility and complexity and intensity of the competition). Both case studies were analysed separately. Then, the findings from both case studies were combined and discussed. 4.14 Chapter Summary
This chapter has provided an overview of the research methodology. Based on the aim, objectives and research questions of this study, the interpretivism philosophy was chosen as the research philosophy and the deductive and inductive approaches were selected and justified. A multi-case study approach was adopted as the strategy for this research. The data collection tool chosen was face-to-face semi-structured interviews for the main source of evidence and this is to be triangulated by documentation and direct observations. Finally the data is to be analysed by using the thematic analysis.
CHAPTER FIVE
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
5.0 Introduction
This chapter presents the findings and discusses the empirical investigations carried out within the two case studies. The findings were produced from 27 face- to-face semi-structured interviews.
The literature review elicited factors that should encourage the cement industry in Libya to adopt ABC and listed them in eight factors. The aim, objectives, research questions which are stated in chapter one guided the researcher in the collection of the relevant data.
As stated, the main purpose of this study is to identify and assess the viability of the adoption and implementation of ABC in the Libyan cement industry. In order to achieve this aim the following research questions were designed:
• Why does the cement industry in Libya need to adopt the ABC system?
• Are the factors that assist in the adoption of the ABC system present in the cement industry in Libya?
This chapter will present the findings using intra-case analysis and cross-case analysis; these methods are recommended for multiple case study research (Yin, 2009). This means that each case will be analysed and discussed separately, illustrating the similarities and differences among the findings of the cases; then the findings from the separate cases will be combined.