DATA ANALYSIS

Published studies generally describe research sites and data collection methods, but give little space to the discussion of the analysis (Eisenhardt, 1989). Thus one cannot follow how a researcher arrives at the final conclusions from a large volume of field (Miles and Huberman, 1994).

I intend to respond to these weaknesses by going through the stages by which my data was reduced and analysed. This involved establishing the chronology, coding and writing up the data according to phases and themes, introducing organisational integration into the analysis, comparing the cases and applying the theory. These phases will be discussed accordingly.

The first step in the analysis was to establish the chronology of the cases. This was done by use of internal and external documents. The chronologies are included in the appendixes of each chapter.

The next step was to code the data into phases and themes reflecting the factors and features in the dissertation framework. For the interviews this implied marking the text with a specific phase and a theme and grouping the paragraphs on the same theme and phase together. The same procedure was followed in organising the documents.

I then wrote up the cases using phases and themes to structure them. Before starting to write up the cases, I scanned the information on each theme, built up the facts and filled in with perceptions and reactions which were illustrative and representative of the data.

The documents were fIrst and foremost useful in establishing the facts, but they also provided me with some perceptions and reactions that were validated in the

interviews. This included documents such as internalletters, internal newsletters and articles from the press. The interviews were less factual as intended and provided me with input to assess the perceptions and reactions. The limited observation was useful to validate the data from the interviews. The result of this step was two descriptive cases.

To make each case more analytical I introduced the three dimensions of organisational integration into the analysis. This helped to focus the case and to develop a framework that could be used to compare the cases. The cases were now structured according to phases, organisational integration and themes reflecting the factors and features in the dissertation framework. The result ofthis step is outlined in chapter 7 and 8.

All these steps were made to make me more familiar with each case as a stand alone entity. This is a process that according to Eisenhardt (1989, p. 540):

... allows the unique patterns of each case to emerge before the investigators push to generalise patterns across cases. Inaddition it gives investigators a rich familiarity with each case which, in tum, accelerates cross-case comparison.

The comparison between the cases provided the next step in the analysis. Here I used the categories from the case chapters, filled the features and factors and compared and contrasted the fmdings.

The idea behind cross-case searching tactics is to force investigators to go beyond initial impressions, especially through the use of structural and diverse lenses on the data. These tactics improve the likelihood of accurate and reliable theory, that is, theory with close fit to the data (Eisenhardt, 1989).

Now I had a number of overall themes, concepts and relationships that had emerged from the within-case analysis and cross-case comparisons. The next step was to compare these emergent fmdings with theory from the organisational field of mergers and acquisitions and literature from the four perspectives discussed in chapter five.

This method of generalisation is "analytical generalisation" in which a previously developed theory is used as a template with which to compare the empirical results of the case study (Yin, 1989). This comparison of emergent concepts, theory or hypotheses with the extant literature involves asking what it is similar to, and what does it contradict, and why. The key to this process is to consider a broad range of theory (Eisenhardt, 1989). On the whole, linking emergent theory to existent literature enhances the internal validity, generalisability, and theoreticallevel of theory building from case research.

According to Eisenhardt (1989, p. 544) examining literature that conflicts with the emergent literature is important for two reasons

First, if the researcher ignores conflicting fmdings, then confidence in the fmdings is reduced. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, conflicting literature represents an opportunity. The juxtaposition of conflicting results forces researchers into a more creative, framebreaking mode ofthinking than they might otherwise be able to achieve. The result can be deeper insight into both the emergent theory and conflicting literature, as well as sharpening the limits of generalisability of the focal research.

Similarly, she claims that literature discussing similar findings is important because it ties together underlying similarities in phenomena not normally associated with each other. The result is often a theory with a stronger internal validity, wider generalisability and higher conceptuallevel.

The analytical generalisation in my study includes exploring and developing the concepts and examining the relationships between the constructs. In carrying out this analytical generalisation I act on Eisenhardt's (1989) recommendation to use a broad range oftheory. First, my fmdings are compared and contrasted with the organisational stream on mergers and acquisition literature ofwhich the framework is built. Then I draw from the four other theoretical perspectives outlined in chapter five, and study how these perspectives can contribute to my understanding of the fmdings. Finally, I discuss fmdings that cannot be explained by the merger and acquisition literature nor the four theoretical perspectives.

6.SSUMMARY

This chapter was divided into four parts; research design, validity and reliability, data collection and data analysis. In the first section I argued that the nature of the research questions set the requirements for an exploratory in-depth study able to cover

sensitive issues and the contextual, historical and processual nature of the study. I then discussed how the longitudinal comparable case study fitted these requirements as opposed to other approaches.

In the next section on validity and reliability five criteria were examined. I started to discuss the objectivity criteria and how this study has responded to it. Next, I

concluded that the longitudinal comparative case study provided a strong design in terms of construct and internal validity. Moreover, I argued that the form of

generalisability in these types of studies as opposed to quantitative is fundamentally different and follow the replication technique of quasi experiments. As for reliability, I argued that this criterion was relevant in qualitative as well as quantitative research.

In the third section the sampling and data collection procedures were addressed. The sampling procedures included the rationale behind the selection of time periods, business areas, divisions and sites. In the next sub-section the data collection

procedures including interviews, documents and observation was discussed. The main emphasis was on the key informant interviews that provide the most important input to the analysis.

The last section in the chapter examined the process of data analysis. Here I presented the steps involved,including establishing the chronology, coding and writing up the data according to phases and themes, introducing organisational integration into the analysis, comparing the cases and applying the theory.

Chapter 7: