If you’re in a research methods course, you might be studying qualitative methods and have heard of grounded theory. If you’re interested in performing a grounded theory approach to data analysis (or sharing a fresh example with your class), this blog post is for you.
Or, you might be reading this because I mentioned in my research-in-brief article in Public Relations Review that a list of open codes, properties, and examples of participants’ words from my study about Millennial practitioners are available on my blog (that would be this blog post).
One of the challenges of understanding the grounded theory approach to data analysis results from the abstract nature of the explanation:
Open coding: Basically, you read through your data several times and then start to create tentative labels for chunks of data that summarize what you see happening (not based on existing theory – just based on the meaning that emerges from the data). Record examples of participants’ words and establish properties of each code (see my charts below).
Axial coding: Axial coding consists of identifying relationships among the open codes. What are the connections among the codes? This will be easier to understand when you see the last chart of this blog post.
Selective coding: Figure out the core variable that includes all of the data. Then reread the transcripts and selectively code any data that relates to the core variable you identified. Again, this is easier to understand through the last chart of this blog post.
The study I’m using as an example is about relationship building with the Millennial generation of practitioners who work at PR agencies. The data came from asynchronous online discussions (via Focus Forums) with 50 participants and emailed data from one participant.
Research question one: How do Millennial practitioners who work at public relations agencies describe their generation of public relations practitioners?
Open codes for RQ 1
Open code | Properties | Examples of participants’ words |
Wanting experiential learning | Seeking credentials Feeling ambitious Seeking excitement Being eager |
Seeking experience Ambitious Hungry for responsibility Want to be the next big thing Driven Ready to roll Always looking for a new thrill Grow quickly Learn things on our own |
Pioneering social media and easily adapting to change | Being comfortable with social media Wanting to lead Creating and embracing new ideas |
Not being afraid of technology Risk-taking Being fresh Creating and accepting new ideas Embracing a rapid fire speed Being creative |
Feeling entitled due to unique qualifications, as compared to previous generations | Coming equipped with a public relations education and several internships | Mostly PR majors instead of majoring in other fields Being educated in public relations Starting jobs with several internships under the belt Having a great foundation from majors and internships |
Craving immediate feedback and being motivated by feeling appreciated | Desiring attention Wanting to impress Wanting a mentor |
Want to feel valued and appreciated Want to be recognized Want feedback Want to be rewarded for good work |
Advocating a work-life balance |
Seeking personal fulfillment Recharging by enjoying a rich personal life Being raised to believe they could have it all |
Don’t want to work our lives away Want to have room for a life outside of work Raised to expect excellence in our personal lives |
Possessing the personal skills and characteristics needed | Getting along well with people Being intelligent Valuing ethics |
Friendly, sociable Motivated by friendships at work Smart, clever, sharp Ethical |
Research question two: What can be learned about cultivating a long-term relationship with Millennial public relations agency employees based on their own perspectives?
Open codes for RQ 2
Open code | Properties | Examples of participants’ words |
Being groomed | Being mentored Getting to work on new accounts Getting to have face time with the client Being included in discussions about personal long-term goals and organization’s long-term goals Getting funding for graduate school and skills workshops |
Mentored Trained to specialize in a needed area Assigned to new accounts Included in new business planning Involved in conversations about the long-term outlook of the department Meeting about long-term goals and incentive packages Sent to professional development sessions Paid for graduate school Face time with the client |
Constantly learning | Having intriguing work Developing professional skills |
Intriguing work Constantly learning, training |
Receiving verbal encouragement and making observations | Feeling appreciated Noticing low turnover and receiving messages about growing the company from within |
Asked if I’m happy Talk about the future Get regular reviews Constant congratulations Get messages about growing the company from within Very little turnover |
Being cared for as a whole person | Caring about personal well being by both the organization and senior management Encouraging and enabling a healthy personal life |
Personal development fund Lacking a personal touch (negative evidence) [Senior exec.] like a second mother Long hours, low pay (negative evidence) |
Working in a good environment | Working in an organic culture Feeling like they fit in Working with great people Agreeing with the organization’s philosophy and values |
Personality of the office If I fit in Open and honest communication I love the environment Wonderful people We don’t have titles. My old large agency put so much emphasis on titles and I think it hindered work quality The organization isn’t as dynamic as other employers (negative evidence) |
Having interests and preferences accommodated | Getting to choose projects, dress and hours | Get to choose my accounts Get to wear jeans Flexible hours |
Research question three: What irritates or upsets Millennials when receiving feedback on their work?
Open codes for RQ 3
Open code | Properties | Examples of participants’ words |
Getting called out | Detesting verbal vomit and being ridiculed Feeling discouraged |
Getting ripped apart Chewed out Bashed Chastised Criticized Thrown under the bus Negative tactics don’t motivate us |
Not being heard | Having work changed, which results in their voice not being heard Working so hard makes this frustrating Believing they don’t have power to say anything |
You slave away and they’ve completely changed what you’ve done My art was changed, which I worked really hard on People are always going to change what you do. Always! Co-worker presented my ideas as her own; no way to address those issues |
Mind reading and expectations for a miracle worker | Believing they have a combination of vague instructions and specific expectations, some of which areunrealistic | Vague instructions Having to mind read Inadequate explanation I’m not a miracle worker |
Axial codes and selective code based on the open codes
Open codes | Axial codes | Selective code |
Wanting experiential learning; constantly learning; working in a good environment;pioneering social media and easily adapting to change; feeling entitled due to unique qualifications, as compared to previous generations; possessing the personal skills and characteristics needed; being groomed | Believing they are ready to be set loose on accounts | Wanting to make a difference |
Craving immediate feedback and being motivated by feeling appreciated; detesting getting called out; receiving verbal encouragement and making observations | Seeking external validation | |
Mind reading and expectations for a miracle worker;getting called out; not being heard | Silently blaming employers for failures | |
Advocating a work-life balance; being cared for as a whole person; accommodating interests and preferences | Wanting a meaningful experience at work and outside of work |
For more information on grounded theory, I recommend Kathy Charmaz’s “Constructive Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Data Analysis.”
If you’re interested in reading the summary of my study, you can find it here, or you can email me for the full-length study at tgallica@uncc.edu.
Happy researching!
Great information and layout! I am currently a college student who has taken and will be taking plenty of research courses. Although the topic can be very boring, you did a great job of organizing the data. I actually enjoyed reading about your study. Good work!
Thanks so much, Chelsey! The key to making it interesting is to find a good topic. I’m sure you have plenty of great ideas. Best wishes with your research endeavors!
Thanks Tiffany for describing the difference with an example, it made very easy to understand.
I’m so glad it was helpful! Best wishes with your research.
Hi I am a lecturer in tourism and I was planning to explain to my year 3 studyent about the above method and I run into your chart. very good work. Easy to make new students to understand the three models. I like the layout because it will make it kind of interactive. Good job.
Many thanks, Latif! Best wishes with your class.
Cheers Tiffany. all the best
Data has been provided in a succinct fashion. Thanks for sharing.
Can this type of coding be used for thematic analysis?
Open coding is the same for both approaches, but thematic analysis does not necessarily include axial coding or selective coding, and these two terms are reserved for the grounded theory approach to data analysis. Thematic analysis is a broad approach to data that does not involve searching for an overriding theme (i.e., the selective code) that ties everything together. It’s far easier to do than the grounded theory approach.
Thank you very much for sharing this, it is very useful.
So, what is the difference between open, axial and selective coding on one hand and open, focused and theoretical coding on the other hand please?
Thank you very much for your example ! I’m french, and actually, it’s pretty difficult to find some informations in my language about how to do a good work following GT.
I’m now doing my axial coding for a research project and I have read somewhere than preparing an axial coding was to put subsidiaries categories around a main category (conditions, context, strategies, consequences). For exemple, I’m working on the change of behavior, so my main category is that. But I’m not sure to do it in the good way. Maybe this main category is the selective part (everything I made before is converging on that), and all the connections I made around this main category are part of axial coding…
I’m not sure to be clear, but if I am maybe you could tell me if I’m on the good way… 🙂
Thank you,
And sorry for my english which is not perfect,
Amandine
Thanks for this article. I’m in the middle of my first grounded theory research report and this was extremely helpful. especially the way you set the tables and example codes out!
This is a good write up. Meanwhile, I need your help on how to go about using the FocuForum. I am working on photovoice as a tool of participation to help farmers move out of their shell and participate in a development programme. But they are not literate. Can I deploy the Focus Forum to elicit reactions from the public about this method rather than the farmers? At least to compare public view on this.