More on Qualitative Analysis

Analysis: By Software and by Assessment Group

On the basis of open and axial coding the generic factors were enriched with related terms (topics), so that all case studies could be equivalently analyzed by the software. Next, the chapters and complete interview transcripts were inserted and analyzed by the software. To ensure the integrity of the interpretations, three case studies were analyzed on the basis of either the chapter or the interview transcripts.

This comparison showed similar patterns and no significant differences in the results. We could therefore assume that the write-ups of the case studies were faithful representations of the interviews.

The software analysis measured the presence of generic factors (enriched with related key terms) as described in the case studies and interviews. This analysis computes the extent to which the factors are named and discussed, which implies the presence or importance of a given generic factor and the extent to which the organization is aware of this. To compare the different case studies, the software examined the extent to which a given generic factor, including the related key terms, occurs in each case study per 1,000 words. The number of words that were counted was translated into a percentage, in which 5 words or more were translated to the maximum of 100 percent.

This analysis uses the software of QI Macros© to measure the presence of each generic factor, including the topics derived from them, without assessing its impact on the innovation or breakthrough process.

This analysis can be seen as qualitative analysis techniques that involve a strong use of quantitative analysis approaches such as word count and intrasample statistical analysis.

The advantage of this is that all case studies are analyzed in the same way and are comparable, regardless of the length of the chapters and transcripts. The extent of the impact of each factor, however, is not fully demonstrated in this way. The software analysis supplements a human qualitative analysis by an analysis group who analyzed the case studies with understanding of their full context.

An assessment group of five members analyzed the cases for the extent to which the generic factors have influenced the innovation and breakthrough process (impact). This analysis reflects the averaged analysis from the members of the assessment group. In principle, this was a subjective interpretation: each member indicated the extent of influence that each generic factor had in each innovation and breakthrough process case study by entering a number on a scale from 1 to 5.

All scores are translated to a percentage where the maximum score of 5 is considered as a percentage of 100 percent. The different analyzes were compared and discussed and the members strove to arrive at a shared analysis.

The results of the software analysis and the final valuation of the assessment group are translated to a graphical model in which these results are represented separately.

These two different research methods have produced two separate data sets, which in turn can be compared. In this graphical comparison between the software analysis and the assessment group, we can observe some correlations in the patterns of the generic factors, which imply their importance or influence in the innovation and breakthrough process.

The results of both the research and the analysis of the data are verifiable. All data has been stored and analyzes have been carried out unambiguously, and can be made available for review to anyone interested.

The project does not aim to determine absolute truths, but to provide information on and insights into the development of innovation and breakthrough processes in which the defined generic factors have played a part. The generic factors we chose to focus on are not meant to be exhaustive, but they emerge from a process-centric analysis of innovations and breakthroughs.

These analyzes offer some universal insights into the role that the generic factors played in each process, without prejudice. The aim of this project is to stimulate further discussion around innovation and breakthrough processes and to make organizations aware of their importance so they can use this to their benefit.