Data Analysis

As noted earlier, qualitative research enables respondents to articulate their perceptions and experiences freely. However, as Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2007) point out, “this is a continual process in that through the

63

process of social interaction these social phenomena are in a constant state of revision” (p.108). Further, respondents will perceive their situation in different ways as a consequence of their own world view. These interpretations are likely to affect their actions and the nature of the interaction with others (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2007). In seeking to access the perspectives of the study respondents and understand the fundamental meanings they attach to lifestyle entrepreneurship, as previously noted, this study adopts an interpretivist approach to research. An interpretivist approach lends itself well to this type of investigation as it is underpinned by a subjectivist ontology which facilitates understanding of the how and why. It is therefore useful for understanding the social processes among respondents and thus elucidating meaning.

This study uses the constant comparative method to interpret interview information. Constant comparative analysis involves the grouping of data into categories or themes with common elements to identify possible relationships between various pieces of data. It was felt that this would enable an accurate representation of the data and perhaps provide a detailed explanation of the behaviours which constitute lifestyle entrepreneurship. According to Glaser (1965) “keeping track of one’s ideas, as required by the constant comparative method, raises the probability that the theory will be well integrated and clear, since the analyst is forced to make theoretical sense of each comparison”

(p.444).

Having completed the initial face-to-face interviews, time was taken to write up notes on an interview by interview basis. Line by line analysis was undertaken to achieve an understanding of the data. These lines of text were coded when they clustered around certain ideas. All respondent accounts were then compared to each other, within case and across case, to identify commonalities and differences in the interviewee responses. Sometimes issues were mentioned in the same way by respondents. However sometimes respondents mentioned the same issue with disagreement. Key words within the transcribed interviews were then colour coded to highlight the commonalities and differences and to reveal potential categories within the data. Each interview was coded with the previous interview in mind. The interview transcripts were then examined again to identify specific examples

64

relating to these categories. The results of this comparison were noted.

Having revealed the key characteristics of the data, telephone interviews were conducted to substantiate the previous data. Upon completion of these interviews, further comparisons were made, notes were taken and memos written. The data generated from these interviews fell within a number of the original categories. A summary of the interviewee responses were then displayed within a matrix with columns and rows. The matrix was used as a visual aid to provide a general overview of the importance of lifestyle issues among respondents.

At this point, it became possible to write up theoretical memos on the commonalities and differences in the interview data. According to Glaser (1965 p.441) “... different categories and their properties tend to become integrated through constant comparisons which force the analyst to make some related theoretical sense of each comparison”. It is felt that the process of constantly comparing interviewee responses and the memoing of ideas enabled a coherent understanding of the interview data, common patterns and themes and their interrelationships. At this point, the interviews had generated sufficient evidence to saturate all significant categories and as such the interviews were adding nothing to what was already known about the category.

The interview data revealed five key factors which define lifestyle entrepreneurship. These include: Freedom and Flexibility; Physical Boundaries; Self-Image; Social Interaction and Continuity and Change. These issues were repeatedly present in each interview. All memos regarding each of these issues were brought together for summarising and analysing prior to the discussion of each of these factors in turn. The properties and dimensions of each category are discussed in detail. Illustrative examples in the form of verbatim quotes from the transcripts are used to highlight consistencies and differences in interviewee responses and to demonstrate the links between the categories mentioned above. Further analysis revealed the relationships between these categories and that some were manifestations of the primary categories.

65

Using these factors, three key areas of primary focus were identified.

Prevalent categories were identified based on the motivations of the individual for business and their business behaviour. These include a financial focus (those respondents primarily seeking economic benefits); a combined focus (includes those who seek a work/life balance through the provision of Bed and Breakfast accommodation); and finally a lifestyle focus (those who view Bed and Breakfast provision as essential to their way of life). However the research also revealed that not all respondents fall neatly into one or other grouping, rather, they fall somewhere between the two extremes of financial and lifestyle. Thus the results from the interviews were used to develop a continuum. This continuum clearly illustrates the position of the respondents in terms of the degree to which they immerse themselves in the processes associated with lifestyle entrepreneurship. The continuum is instrumental in demonstrating that lifestyle entrepreneurship is present to varying degrees.

Chapter four provides a detailed discussion of the findings from the analysis of the interview data.