Qualitative Research Resources

Define the Unit of Analysis:

Have you explicitly stated whether you are sampling people, events, cases, or groups?

Justify the Context:

Have you explained why you chose this specific context or unit? For example, is it a "prototypical" case or an "extreme example" that is ideal for building theory?

Clarify Sampling Logic:

Have you explained that your sampling was "purposeful" or "theoretical" (chosen to illuminate the theory) rather than random or based on convenience?

Distinguish Coding Levels:

Does your narrative or figure distinguish between Step 1 (First-order codes: "what informants say") and Step 2 (Second-order codes: "what the literature says/enfolding theory")?

Visualize the Translation:

Have you included an "organizing figure" that visually maps how you moved from raw data (e.g., quotes) to theoretical labels (constructs)?

Transparency:

Is the "chain of evidence" clear enough that a reader can see how you arrived at your interpretations, avoiding the trap of "too much telling"?

Power vs. Proof Quotes:

Unique Content:

Does each location present distinct data? Ensure you do not repeat the exact same quotes in the text and the tables.

Avoid Quantifying:

Have you avoided converting small-sample qualitative data into numbers (e.g., percentages), which can mislead the reader and strip away "taken-for-granted meanings"?

Identify the "Protagonist":

Have you chosen a central theme, process, or concept to serve as the "figure" (focal point) of your story, allowing other themes to serve as the "ground" (background)?

Process Flow:

If you are describing a process (e.g., how identity changes), does your story (and any "box and arrow" diagrams) clearly depict the flow of time and causality?

Coherence:

Do the themes cohere into a single story, rather than appearing as a list of disconnected "protagonists" vying for attention?

Our data suggests that, as Informant A eloquently put it, "The organization was in a state of constant flux, a ship without a rudder, making it impossible to find one's footing." This quote encapsulates the central challenge.

Choosing the Protagonist:

We made professional identity change the hero of the story.

Casting Supporting Roles:

This choice clarified the roles of others: daily tasks became challenges to identity, artifacts became resources for identity construction, and competence was a parallel development.