Rationale for Analysis

It has been established that Grounded Theory does not need to be prescriptive, however the methodology did require the researcher to follow a structured approach to the analysis (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Regardless of whether the Strauss and Corbin (1990, 1998) or Glaser (1978, 1992) approach is followed, there are characteristics which are common to all Grounded Theory research: sensitivity, sampling, comparative analysis, coding and categorising, using literature as a data source, integration of theory, and theoretical memos, as identified by McCann and Clark, (2003).

97

Sensitivity refers to the way in which a researcher will already have initial assumptions and ideas about the phenomenon under investigation (Charmaz, 2002; McCann & Clark, 2003). These assumptions and concepts motivate the pursuit of ideas and empirical enquiry and shape the initial development of the research (McCann & Clark, 2003). However, it is important that Grounded Theory is shaped by the data collection, and these assumptions and concepts are used only to develop, but not limit, the theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Initial literature reviews have been thought to result in an impartial understanding of theory, leading to potentially flawed theories (McCann & Clark, 2003). Glaser (1992) postulated that no literature be consulted, however Strauss and Corbin (1990) encouraged the consideration of existing literature to only what is necessary. This approach was adopted in the current study.

Sampling for Grounded Theory research requires selecting participants who have prior experience of the topic area (Glaser, 1978; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Theoretical sampling for Grounded Theory refers to preliminary data collection and analysis informing the sampling based on the theory emerging from the data (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Here, emergent categories are identified, and the researcher returns to the data collection to refine their properties until no new categories emerge (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Theoretical saturation occurs when no new categories emerge and data on which to develop theory is sufficient (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

Comparative analysis is a fundamental concept for Grounded Theory, where the collection and analysis of data are done concurrently alongside one another (McCann & Clark, 2003; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Coding of data is done throughout data collection, and categories and relationships between categories are constantly compared (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

Coding and categorising of data are central to the development and generation of theory (McCann & Clark, 2003; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Two levels of coding are initially described by Glaser and Strauss (1967), which precedes Strauss and

98

Corbin‘s (1990, 1998) three pronged coding paradigm that allows for reconstruction of a Grounded Theory that is representative of structure and process. This three pronged approach to coding was not advocated by Glaser (1992), who did not agree that it allowed for the development of theory but merely described the data. Despite this, the process developed by Strauss and Corbin (1990, 1998) has been supported by many researchers. It had been suggested that this approach provides a clear process for the coding and categorisation of the data (McCann & Clark, 2003). The three pronged approach developed by Strauss and Corbin has been described as providing opportunity for influences to be identified at both macro and micro- environmental level (McCann & Clark, 2003; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). This was a key element of the current research, and further justified following the approach advocated by Strauss and Corbin (1990).

The coding approach developed by Strauss and Corbin (1990, 1998) involves open, axial and selective coding. Open coding involves identifying concepts as they emerge from the data through the perceptions and the experiences of the participants. Line-by-line coding separates the data into concepts, which are then compared for similarities and differences. Concepts become grouped into categories, each of which represents an issue felt to be important to the participants. Categories are developed through the constant comparison with data.

Axial coding refers to the relating of categories to sub-categories. Axial coding starts to integrate all of the collected data, where categories started to become ‗related‘ to one another, rather than just compared. This element of the methodology is fundamental to the process of the generation of theory, and starts to generate understandings of the situations in which the experiences and perceptions of participants occur. The processes involved relate to the interactions that occur by a person, organisation or social setting in response to a certain issue.

Once the axial coding process has generated categories, sub-categories, and relationships and interactions between them, selective coding is the process of refining the theory, and integrating this in into existing literature. A core category is

99

identified which is deemed representative of the overall focus of the research, and is central and has relationships with all other categories. The whole Grounded Theory coding process was not linear, rather flows through coding at each of the different stages, employing constant comparisons with each level of data, each category, each sub-category and ideas, experiences and perceptions (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). In Grounded Theory methodology, as categories are developed and ideas about theory start to generate, the researcher can review the literature with consideration to emergent themes (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The researcher has to ensure that only literature related to their categories and emergent theory are reviewed, and be careful not to let unrelated but dominant theories cloud judgement (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). In this sense the literature became a source of data.

The integration of theory involves reviewing the literature once the coding process is complete, and links existing research and theory with the properties and constructs of the emergent theory (McCann & Clark, 2003). The findings then take the form of a theory only once all of the major categories and findings have been integrated as a set of interrelated concepts, and not merely a list of themes (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, 1998).

Finally, theoretical memos are the notations made spontaneously throughout the whole research process, simultaneous to data collection, to reflect the researcher‘s generation and extraction of theory as it develops (McCann & Clark, 2003; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). This is a crucial aspect of Grounded Theory research, as the analysis and coding of data provides a basis for further research questions for the researcher, and ensures a true theoretical saturation of the data (Charmaz, 2006). This process enables the coding of categories by defining and understanding the concepts of a category as it arises (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1990).