Saving time with Nvivo

Qualitative data analysis software can save time (Silverman) is my answer to Minh's assertion here that Word is so good. He writes some provocative blogs, worth reading.

I use NVivo 8 to store, search and retrieve interview text from 30 transcripts. After transcribing I code it against:

1. general codes - process, structure, climate, facts, queries (see Checkland). For a query, I create linked annotations as to what the query is about and how I might follow it up.
2. Metaphors, stories and anecdotes or words that strike me. For example, in one case study, participants used the word 'gel'. IN another type of organisation, people, more than once referred to "skin in the game". The shard use of the terms may indicate the culture.
3. the theoretical framework for engagement, covering aspects of communication and knowledge-ability: mutuality, negotiation of meaning, environment, expertise, contribution, participation and adaptation.

Having coded, I use the NVivo query function. I'll search for a code to draw together all the text that I'd coded under facets of engagement. For a particular case study, I query all the relevant transcripts and documents and emails, copy and pate them into a Word document and then draw on them as reminders and examples as I write the analysis.

Another query I use is text query - I've heard a particular phrase - "Who said it?" I ask myself and search all the files to find it.

I use memos to create:

• a to do list
• a coding journal
• thoughts on each case
• thoughts one each code
• key issues that arise

To develop theoretical aspects, I link from a source file to one of the memos, though I'm not very sure yet of the technicalities. I think cross linking will become more important as I move into cross case analysis. Then Nvivo should be of help in developing the theoretical aspects of my study.

Matrix queries then will be the next facility to experiment with to see what patterns I can find with certain attributes.

---

CHECKLAND, P. (1981) Systems thinking, systems practice.
SILVERMAN, D. (2005) Doing qualitative research : A practical handbook, London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif., Sage Publications.

Ethical issues

My dissertation points on ethical issues must include:

• Dignity, welfare, do no harm
• Care taken to do no harm. Participants and organisations confidentiality respected.
• Data accurately collected and reported
• Permission to conduct research in the manner adopted was gained from the OU ethics committee
• Interviewees and organisations were informed of the nature of the research and given the right to anonymity, offered the chance to withdraw or discontinue participation, given written details of how their details would be stored and used and asked to indicate their agreement
• At the interview stage, interviewees were sent or given a copy of the information sheet and an informed consent form. The form was discussed and collected at the beginning of the interview. The form gave the option of separately giving or refusing permission for the recording of interview. The interviewees were given anonymity in the thesis and in the NVivo files by the use of pseudonyms.

Data collected

Director has just come in - back from her break. First question she asks of course is if I'd had a good holiday. As I mutter something about it being quiet and I had written something, she asks if I'd collected all my data. Ha! think I, third year looms so she thinks I should have collected all my data and it's ready to code and analyse. What an ideal!

Indeed, I'm going to use the data I've already got , but I'm also going to have to use the ad-hoc data that doesn't fit into the planned design using case studies because I can't get access to big IT projects, I can't get to talk to lots of people on one project. But I have got some access to some projects and I have talked to individuals. I might get the chance to talk to other individuals in sufficient depth to know how engagement happens between clients and consultants.

Trade-off between security and sharing

The trade-off between security and sharing was the topic of a lunch time debate yesterday at the Government Computing Exhibition. Speakers were:

• Sureyya Cansoy, Associate Director, Intellect
• John Collington, Group Commercial Director, Home Office
• Toby Stevens, Director, Enterprise Privacy Group

Like the earlier debate, innovation was praised. Suraya Cansoy advised that collecting information across boundaries involved debates about data and security sharing. She had three points:

1. trust has been broken (statistical proof exists)
   
2. recognise the need for action by government and IT industry to restore that broken trust
3. benefits come from information sharing. e.g, the DVLA can access your passport photo so you don't need to entrust your passport to the vagaries of the post
   

John Collington talked without notes - impressive. He told the story of data loss last August, when a supplier lost a memory stick, and consequently a contract for £500,000. The Home Office investigated:

• the required data
• processes
• company
• the person (who lost her job)
  

He stated that we need a culture change to make people aware of the need to protect data.

Questions came from

• William Heath from Ctrl-Shift Ltd on the wrong way to share data
• Brian Williams from Innovation
• Roger Goss Co-director Patient Concern

This debate itself was interesting, but even more interesting was the chap I sat next to who is heavily against Phorm. Since my students have just had to write an essay on Phorm, it was particularly interesting to hear his views. He runs a web site http://www.inphormationdesk.org arguing that the key issue is the immense potential for harm offered by the unfettered interception of web communications.

"If the Royal Mail offered a service which opened letters in order to improve the quality of junk mail, then you would instinctively know it was wrong and appreciate its future risks. Phorm’s offering is no different."

He also offered to keep in touch to help me with my research, so I'm extra pleased.