Data Analysis

The data analysis follows the “explanation-building” (Yin, 2012, p.176) strategy. Yin (2009, p.141) maintains that “here, the goal is to analyse the case study data by building an explanation about the case”. The following sub-sections describe the specific steps taken to analyse and interpret the interview and documentary data.

4.4.1 Data Screening

In this step, I transcribed the audiotapes and familiarised myself with both the in-depth interview data collected and the relevant documents. This was necessary for defining the initial coding structure, in preparation for the actual data analysis. First, I mapped, in very general terms at this stage, the responses provided into processes, routines and skills, in line with conceptual framework. Second, I carried out preliminary analyses to ascertain whether data collected adequately reflected policymaking at FMST and were therefore suitable for answering the research questions. The preliminary analyses also served as a guide to where and how I should proceed in the data analysis (Bazeley, 2007, p.68). For example, by sorting stakeholders’ interview responses on consultation and participation into broad categories, I was able to determine the extent of variation in the responses provided by FMST interviewees and therefore to determine whether this variation merited further investigation. Third, I carried out detailed data manipulation as I describe in the next section.

4.4.2 Data Manipulation

The second step involved data manipulation. In order to gain more insights on how the evidence collected helped illuminate the aim of the research, which is to explain the roles that capabilities play in STI policy formulation, the development and evolution of these capabilities at FMST; I embarked on a detailed manipulation of the interview data. In line with Stake (1995, p. 53), it was necessary for me to “review raw data under various possible interpretations” and “search for patterns of data (whether or not indicated by the issues)”, in order to, “seek linkages between [policy {addition mine}] activities, and outcomes”, as captured in the interview data.

This step enabled me to draw tentative conclusions and organise the relevant aspects of the interview data according to the main issues under investigation: processes, routines

and skills for policy formulation at FMST. This measure is in line with Yin (2009, p.129) who suggests that “a helpful starting point is to ‘play’ with your data”.

Therefore, in order to manipulate and better understand my data I followed the approach recommended by Yin (2009, p.129), which involves:

1. “Putting information into different arrays

2. Making a matrix of categories and placing the evidence within such categories 3. Creating data displays – flowcharts and other graphics – for examining the data 4. Tabulating the frequency of different events

5. Examining the complexity of such tabulations and their relationships

6. Putting information in chronological order or using some other temporal scheme”.

I used NVivo, a computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software and data manipulation tool to organise and code sections of the interview data collected. NVivo was able to perform some of the bullet points above while I carried out the rest of the activities manually. In particular, NVivo was helpful in locating and matching key words and phrases (bullet points 1 and 2), as well as conducting searches and for showing where and when multiple combinations of information relevant to the codes can be found (bullet points 4 and 5).

In order to get the best out of the software NVivo, I followed the guidelines for coding suggested by Bazeley (2007, pp. 67-68). The guidelines include, maintaining a broad view of the data, identifying texts that are particularly relevant to the areas you need to focus on, identifying sequences and sorting answers according to questions that were asked. I coded the data into broad categories of processes, routines and skills; placing responses captured under the relevant policy process. Within each policy process I identified the routines and skills used in carrying out the routines. I also used the data captured to clarify the key stages involved in the policy formulation, map the policy capabilities involved within each stage, create a flowchart, and further examine the chronological order of events.

By using NVivo to organise sections of the data, I was able to summarise the responses from each group of interview questions thereby putting the evidence into tables and useful order for analysis. Nevertheless, “you cannot use the software’s outputs themselves as if they were the end of your analysis” (Yin, 2009, p.129). I subsequently, therefore,

followed the steps prescribed by Yin (2009) for building an explanation of the roles that capabilities played in the policy formulation at FMST, the development of these capabilities and their evolution over the years at FMST. I present the results and findings in the next chapter.

4.4.3 Explanation Building

This research employs the explanation building data analysis technique, which is “a special type of pattern matching” (Yin, 2009, p.141). Nevertheless, unlike pattern matching, in explanation building technique, “the explanation may not have been fully stipulated at the beginning of the study” (p.143). “To ‘explain’ a phenomenon is to stipulate a presumed set of causal links about it, ‘how’ or ‘why’ something happened”

(Yin, 2009, p. 141). Yin maintains that explanation building technique is particularly suited in case studies where the phenomenon under investigation cannot be precise and the causal links may be complex and difficult to measure in any precise manner.

Furthermore, this analytic technique is most suitable in cases “in which the explanations have reflected some theoretically significant propositions” (Yin 2009, p.141), as I have outlined earlier in previous chapters and sections. To reiterate, this research is based on the theoretical propositions that (1) specific sets of organisational capabilities (policy processes and routines) and individual capabilities (skills) play important roles in policy formulation and are therefore required in government institutions such as FMST; and that, (2) skills serve to support policy processes and routines. These theoretical propositions inform the thesis’ aim, conceptual framework and research questions which seek to explain (a) the role of capabilities in policy formulation at FMST, (b) how and why these capabilities were developed, and, (c) to what extent the capabilities may have evolved at FMST and why.

In order to analyse the empirical interview data collected at FMST and secondary evidence, using the explanation building technique, I followed the steps outlined by Yin (2009, p. 143), which involves a series of iterations shown below:

1. Making an initial proposition (a theoretical statement) about the role of

capabilities in policy formulation at FMST [as outlined in preceding paragraph above]

2. Comparing the findings of the case study against the proposition put forward 3. Revising the proposition in line with the findings emanating from the data and

evidence gathered

4. Comparing other specific details of the case study against the revision 5. Comparing the revision to the facts of the secondary data reviewed

6. Repeating this process as many times as needed. [I repeated this process two times]

By applying this iterative data analysis technique to the evidence collected I was able to identify and examine the roles played by the policy processes, routines (and skills in general) involved in formulating Nigeria’s 2012 national STI Policy at FMST. In order to operationalise this analytic technique, I compared the interview findings at various stages of the examination, with the initial thesis propositions. Following the comparisons of the findings of the case study against the propositions put forward, I identified the specific roles played by policy processes, routines (and less of skills) in formulating Nigeria’s 2012 national STI Policy at FMST.

The comparisons and analyses that followed revealed that the findings emanating from the interview data and secondary evidence gathered are in line with the theoretical propositions advanced. However, to improve the robustness of the research and conclusions drawn from the data, it is important to revise the theoretical propositions and test rival (alternative) explanations – a key step (3 above) in the explanation building technique outlined (Yin, 2009, p.143). Therefore, to satisfy this step of the analysis, I revised the initial proposition into variations that include (a) policy processes and routines do not play significant roles in policy formulation, (b) processes and routines may be important but not essential and therefore may not be required, in the sense policies can be formulated on the basis of skills alone.

In Step 4, I then re-examined the findings using the revised propositions as a basis to further investigate:

A. How and why specific policy processes and routines were utilised in the policy formulation exercise, i.e. the role(s) played by the policy process or routine. Using Agenda Setting as an example, I examined, if Agenda Setting plays any role(s), if yes, how significant were roles? If did not play any role(s), why?

B. Was the Agenda Setting policy process (and routines) required, i.e. essential or could another or other policy process have replaced it, played the same role and produced similar or better results. Again using Agenda Setting as the example for Step 4 analyses, I found that Agenda Setting policy process (and routines) played significant roles, were required, could not be replaced by other policy processes.

In addition, I found that Agenda Setting process must be incumbent (i.e. present) at FMST and therefore it is a core policy capability. In contrast, the analysis revealed that there are policy processes and routines, such as Setting Policy Priorities, which although played significant roles are related to Agenda Setting and so not essential to be incumbent although desirable if they are;

C. Similarly, I examined how and why the policy processes and routines were developed at FMST; following the same line of interrogation, i.e. testing the proposition against rivals;

D. Based on the interview responses provided, I determined to what extent (radical or incremental) policy capabilities may have evolved (RQ3) at FMST and why;

having established roles (RQ1) and development (RQ2) of the policy capabilities;

E. As a next (second) round in repeating the process I investigated if different actors, activities or procedures were employed, what impact could these have made on the roles, development or evolution of the policy processes and routines examined.

Exploring rival propositions was a vital aspect in the data analysis. I revisit rival explanations in Chapter 6 and further discuss how they were addressed in this thesis. I present the findings of the data analysis in Chapter 5.

As I stated in Chapter 1 (Introduction) and the preceding sections, this study focuses on organisational capabilities (i.e. policy processes and routines) for policy formulation at FMST. This is reflected in the significantly less interview data collected on individual

capabilities (skills), as skills play supporting role as argued above. In line with this objective, therefore, the data analysis concentrates on policy processes and routines and less emphasis on skills, reflecting the data captured. Nevertheless, due to the considerably large number of unique activities contained in individual routines identified, I analysed routines in a more selective manner, which will be explained in Chapters 5 and 6.

I collected data on skills during the interview questions. However, because this study focuses on processes and routines, with skills playing a supporting role; it was not necessary to dedicate any major section to skill. I rather integrated discussions on skills into processes and routines. In analysing skills therefore, I focused only on data useful in improving our understanding of the roles that skills play in carrying out tasks contained in policy routines. In this context therefore, I investigated which skills were relevant to carrying out the policy routines identified in the policy processes examined.

In addition to the interview data captured at FMST, I also analysed policy documents and compared the interview findings to the facts of the secondary data (Step 5). I reviewed the secondary data for frequencies of policy processes, routines and skills, paying particular attention to how the information contained in these documents might contribute to deepening our knowledge of policy formulation. The review of policy documents helped to establish recorded accounts of how policy capabilities may have developed, evolved and the roles that policy capabilities played in previous policymaking at FMST.

Stake (1995, p.68) explains that “gathering data by studying documents follows the same line of thinking as interviewing” and that documents can be key repositories of evidence.

Chapter Summary

This thesis seeks to deepen our understanding of the role of capabilities in policymaking.

This chapter provides justifications for the thesis research design, the rationale for the choice of case study research strategy, and the selection of FMST as the illustrative case study for the investigation of these issues. I discussed the steps taken to carry out the pilot (first phase) and the interview (second phase) of data collection through semi-structured interviews at FMST. I explained how emphasis was placed on methodological versatility and how/why certain formal procedures were followed to improve accuracy, ensure the credibility of the case study data collection exercise and validity of the research.

Arguments for the use of secondary sources of evidence, by systematic search and

incorporation of relevant policy documents, were advanced. I explained how data triangulation (and corroboration) were achieved by capturing interview data from FMST and non-FMST (stakeholder’s) participants and secondary data by review of policy documents.

I also revisited the theoretical propositions underpinning this study by arguing that specific set of capabilities are needed in government institutions in order to formulate policies aimed at supporting socio-economic development. This proposition, which informs the theoretical orientation, guides the case study data collection and analysis. It also helps to focus attention on relevant data while ignoring others. Yin (2009, p. 131) posits that “theoretical propositions stemming from ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions can be extremely useful in guiding case study analysis”.

The chapter concludes by describing the steps taken to operationalise the data analysis methodology, which is based on the explanation building technique.

In the next chapter I present the findings of the thesis.

Chapter 5. Findings

Introduction

In this chapter, I present the findings of the research. Section 5.1 rehearses the research and interview questions. Section 5.2 presents the interview findings on policy processes, routines and skills. I provide preliminary discussions in this chapter with in-depth discussion of the findings reserved for the next chapter. In Section 5.3, I use the findings to develop and present the key stages involved in policy formulation at FMST, and demonstrate how the fieldwork data addresses the research questions (RQ) in line with the conceptual framework.