Exercise I: To further explore the learning process, I asked participants to spend two minutes making statements about the problematic situation they believed to be true. If they exceeded the
Analysis 89 The initial coding template, based on literature, was:
1. Simulations: Changes in ways of perceiving the problematic situation a. Change
b. No change
2. Behaviour: Changes in ways of engaging with the problematic situation a. Change
b. No change
3. Participants’ own explanations of changes 4. What participants’ attention gravitated to
5. Things that seemed important but did not fit in any category
The last two categories ended up being empty, as everything I put in these categories was eventually relocated to one of the first three main categories.
The development of the three first categories into the final coding template is illustrated in the three figures below – one figure for each category. First column in each figure contains one category from the initial coding template. Second column contains the codes developed while reading the transcripts. Last column shows which codes were selected for the final coding template based on the Solomon Four Group comparisons. Thus, the kind of changes in ways of perceiving the problematic situation that stood out when performing the Solomon Four Group comparisons were: Removal of judgments on self, Removal of judgments on others, and Increased clarity (Figure 17). Similarly, the kind of change in behaviour that stood out was Importing
behaviour from contexts not previously related to the problematic situations (Figure 18). None of the explanations participants supplied for any changes they experienced were particularly
related to any group – except that participants (obviously) only referred to, e.g. free flow writing, in the groups where free flow writing had been used. Thus, none of the categories developed from participants’ own explanations of changes were included in the final coding template (Figure 19).
As visible in the figures below a large number of categories were removed because they did not show any clear patterns related to groups. However, this does not mean that they are necessarily unrelated to ABMs. I reflect more upon these in Chapter 5.7. Two of the codes that were not used in the final template deserve special attention and are marked with italics in the figures below.
When asked to explain the cause of learning, some participants referred to parts of the
90 Analysis
experience of the learning intervention that were not intended to facilitate learning (Figure 19).
This is discussed in detail in Chapter 5.6.1. When participants related what they had learned, some participants spoke about how they applied new ways of behaving in situations beyond the problematic situation (Figure 18). This is discussed in detail in Chapter 5.6.2.
Figure 17: Development of coding category one
Figure 18: Development of coding category two
Analysis 91
Figure 19: Development of coding category three
Thus the final template became:
1. Increased clarity 2. Imported behaviour 3. Removal of judgments
a. Self b. Others
I now look at the comparisons leading to this template in detail and illustrate each category with examples from the data.
5.2. Effects of time and confounding factors
The only difference between G5 pre-‐interview and G6 post-‐interview is, that the first occurred immediately after formulating the problem and the other about one month after. Therefore, general differences between the 10 G5 pre-‐interviews and the 10 G6 post-‐interviews reveal what kind of effects the passage of time has on what kind of insights participants gain during the testing procedure.
92 Analysis
In both tests, almost all participants expressed that they felt they obtained greater clarity about their problem. This perception was supported by their ability to give concrete details about the content of this clarity. I provide a number of examples of increased clarity in Chapter 5.3.4 below.
Increased clarity appeared both in G5 pre-‐interview and in G6 post-‐interivew.
Two differences stand out. First, in G5 pre-‐interview, many participants found new concepts they became curious about. This did not happen in G6 post-‐interview. Second, in G6 post-‐interview some participants were more positive about their problem, due to events that had occurred in the time between formulating the problem and doing the post-‐interview – e.g. successful experiments with solutions, extra money was found, troublesome employees or colleagues got fired, etc. This did not occur in G5 pre-‐interview – simply because there was little time between formulating the problem and the pre-‐interviewing.
Thus, two effects of the passage of time were identified. First, participants’ ability to see new interesting aspects in the situation seemed to lessen with time. Second, passing of time allowed for experimentation with solutions and/or organisational changes to occur, which made the situation less of a problem.
5.3. Effects of the test-‐procedure
In the following, I explore the effects of the test-‐procedure both independently of any
intervention and in combination with MI and AI. I conclude that the most pervasive effect was a sense of achieving clarity by talking through the subject. In G5 and G6 where no ABM was used, it was primarily clarity of the participants’ own point of view, making them better at arguing their case, or clarity about why the situation was hopeless. In G1-‐4 the clarity was primarily about what the ABM had meant to them.
5.3.1. Effects of the test-‐procedure independently of intervention
The only difference between G5 post-‐interview and G6 post-‐interview is that participants in G5 have been exposed to the pre-‐interivew and participants in G6 have not. Therefore, the general differences between the 10 G5 post-‐interviews and the 10 G6 post-‐interviews can illuminate what kind of effects, having gone through the pre-‐interview, have on what kind of insights participants gain during the post-‐interview procedure.
In both tests, participants experienced increased clarity and the effects of time discussed above.
Analysis 93