Analysis and Contribution Geoff Walsham Lecture 4 of Course on Interpretive Research in IS - Oslo University

Contents of Lecture 4 Impressions and themes Analyzing all your data Qualitative data analysis techniques Legitimising your approach Constructing a contribution Generalising from interpretive studies

Impressions In addition to field notes, I normally write a personal comment on the interview and the interviewee. Here is one from my colleague Michael Barrett: ‘The meeting started off on a very cool note with X being frank and open with me about his feelings on our meeting. He kept on repeating … that he had to protect his staff from numerous requests made of them from the centre and regions (me being one of them). He was a friend of Y (my contact) but ….

Themes I also generate sets of initial themes from my field notes as a basis for reflection, theorising, and interaction with my co-researchers (if any)

Brazil Country Office - Some Themes Background Internal comms department of 4 people External comms handled by PR agency The software package Little use of anything locally Except for head office intern - to see what is happening back at HQ Functionality issues Slow Messy interface/would like to customise Organizational changes None as yet Not clear what are expectations on the local office HQ ignores Latin America (markets too small)

Analyzing All Your Data Best tool for analysis is your own mind and that of others So read your data carefully and then read it again Make data/theory links as discussed earlier Try your ideas on others through working papers, conversations, seminars

Qualitative Data Analysis Techniques (e.g. Nudist) Method for linking themes to specific pieces of text in your notes and transcripts But very time consuming (displacement activity?) Doesn’t replace the need for thought And can tend to ‘lock you in’ to one way of looking at the data

Legitimising Your Analytical Approach (Klein and Myers 1999)

A Warning about Klein and Myers (1999) Certainly valuable to think about your work in relation to the principles But ‘a particular study could illustrate all of our suggested principles and still not come up with interesting results’ Don’t merely say: ‘I have applied the principles’ Do say: ‘Here are my interesting results’

Constructing a Contribution Who is your audience (or audiences) To what literature are you aiming to contribute? What do you claim to offer that is new to the audience and the literature? How should others use your work?

Example: Klein and Myers (1999) Key audience: interpretive researchers wanting to reflect on their approach and defend their work Literature: interpretive work in IS Claim to offer: Set of principles (based on hermeneutics/pheneomenology) Use by others: ‘In fact, authors may find it useful to refer to the principles when their work is submitted for peer review’ (87-88)

Generalizing from Interpretive Studies (Walsham 1995) Development of concepts Generation of theory Drawing of specific implications Contribution of rich insight

Development of Concepts Zuboff (1988) - concept of ‘informate’ Walsham (2004) - concept of knowledge communities: ‘are a complex network of sense-readers and sense-givers, taking action, reflecting on it, making representations based on their tacit knowing, ‘reading’ others’ representations, and taking further action in turn’

Generation of Theory Theories of organizational consequences of IT - Orlikowski and Robey (1991), Jones and Nandhakumar (1993) Walsham (2004): A basic model of communication with a sociological complement

Drawing of Specific Implications Relationship between design and development and business strategy - Walsham and Waema (1994) Walsham (2004): on incentives and disincentives for knowledge ‘sharing’; on forms of representation etc.

Contribution of Rich Insight Suchman (1987) - limits of machine intelligence; differences between plans and prcatical actions Walsham (2004) - weaknesses of the ‘knowledge as object’ literature; deep meaning of tacit knowledge