Ses Putting it together pt eet ea se pfa sstata a epste Structuring a qualitative PhD

1
S???es? - Putting it together??µ? p???t????/
e?µ??e?t???? ??e??a? se p????f???a?? s?st?µata
?a? ?????????? ep?st?µe? Structuring a
qualitative PhD getting publications out of it

• Nancy Pouloudi

2
? pa???s?as?

• Starting small papers
• S????? p??ß??µata
• ???te???µe?? d?µ?
• ??t?st????s? µe t? d?µ? e??? d?da?t??????
• ?a?ade??µata, ap? t? ??? ß?a?µ??a
• G?a ?a ???f??µe µe ?p??? st??

3
??? e??e??????µe t??? ???t??

• 1. ?saf?? d?at?p?s? e?e???t???? p??ß??µat??
  (µ??te?e t? e?e???t??? p??ß??µa)
• 2. ????? (?pe?-a?s??d????) d?at?p?s? p??ß??µat??
  (a?t? t? paper ?a a????e? t? s?????? t??
  ??e??a?)
• 3. ???e?p?? ?e???t??? ?p?ßa??? (e?µa? ??a?
  ft???? ?a? µ???? ?e?ad???? de? ??? p?? ?a
  st??????)
• 4. ???ß??µat??? µe??d?????a (s??? µ?? ap??a????
  t?? p???? µ??! µa e??a? p??fa??? t? ??a?a
  ??at?)
• 5. ???ß??µata st?? eµpe????? d???e?? (ed? ta
  ?a?? ded?µ??a!)
• 6. ?e? ?p?????? s?µpe??sµata (a? de? µp??e?? ?a
  ?ata??ße?? t? ??a?a ?a? ??at? e??a? s?µa?t??? de?
  s?? a???e? ?a e?sa? ???t??)
• 7. ?a s?µpe??sµata e??a? ?s?eta (ß?.1, 4, 5, 6)

4
??µ? e??? paper(µe p????a ?? e?d?p??e?? d?af????
t?? e?µ??e?t???? ??e??a?)

• 1. Introduction
• research problem and objectives
• research context (scope audience)
• 2. Theoretical background (literature review)
• 3. Methodology
• what and why
• how and why
• 4. Empirical data analysis
• 5. Conclusions
• summary
• contribution (theory? practice? methodology?)
• limitations and further research

5
?etaf??? st? d?da?t?????

• Defining a research problem
• Identify relevant research areas
• Classify relevant knowledge
• Identify gaps in the literature
• Explore relevant methodologies to tackle research
  problem (how why can qualitative research help)
• Investigate relevant empirical material
• first level analysis based on literature
• second level analysis insights from the data
• Theoretical/ empirical/ methodological
  contribution

6
Corresponding chapter structure

• 1. Introduction
• 2. Literature review
• 3. Research methodology
• 4. Description of empirical setting
• 5. First analysis of empirical setting
• 6. Second analysis of empirical setting
• 7. Conclusions overview, contribution,
  limitations further research
• ??a ap?? pa?at???s?
• e?t?? ap? t? 3 t? 7, ? t?t??? t?? ?efa?a???
  p??pe? ?a s?et??eta? µe t? d?da?t?????!

7
The 3 Ss

• Story (research problem)
• Structure
• Sentence

8
False assumptions

• Research is sequential and linear
• First you do then you write up

9
Methodology in interpretive research

• Philosophical assumptions (phenomenology,
  hermeneutics, critical theory)
• Methodology (action research, grounded theory)
• Methods (case study)
• Data Collection (what data? how are they
  collected? who was approached? why?)
• Data Analysis (common themes, differences in
  interpretation)
• Conclusions from the analysis

10
Lets become specific
11
Nancys thesis
Stakeholder analysis for interorganisational
information systems in healthcare

• Interorganisational systems research issues
• The stakeholder concept in the strategic
  management and information systems literature
• Research methodology
• An interpretive approach to identify and analyse
  interorganisational systems stakeholders
• Describing the drug use management domain from a
  stakeholder perspective
• Instrumental and normative aspects of
  interorganisational information exchange in
  healthcare
• Conclusions and further research directions

12
Introduction

• Ch. 1 Interorganisational systems research
  issues
• 1.1 Drivers for adopting interorganisational
  systems
• 1.2 Interorganisational systems as political
  systems
• 1.3 Reviewing the interorganisational systems
  research agenda
• 1.3.1 Shifting concerns in information systems
  research and practice
• 1.3.2 Shifting concerns in interorganisational
  systems research and practice
• 1.3.3 Interorganisational systems stakeholders
• 1.4 The British healthcare environment
• 1.5 Overview of the research contributions
• 1.6 Structure of the thesis

13
Literature review

• Ch. 2 The stakeholder concept in the strategic
  management and information systems literature
• 2.1 Definitions who is a stakeholder?
• 2.2 Stakeholder theories of management
  descriptive, instrumental and normative aspects
• 2.2.1 Instrumental uses of the stakeholder
  concept
• 2.2.2 Normative uses of the stakeholder concept
• 2.3 Information systems stakeholders
• 2.3.1 Use of the stakeholder concept in
  information systems research
• Stakeholder analysis to assist information
  systems planning
• and strategy formulation
• Stakeholder analysis to assist information
  systems
• development and implementation
• Ethical notions of stakeholding in information
  systems
• 2.3.2 Recent developments and challenges in the
  study of information systems stakeholders
• Stakeholder analysis and soft systems
  methodology
• Stakeholder analysis and actor network theory
• 2.4 Summary and conclusions

14
Conclusions

• Ch. 7 Conclusions and further research
  directions
• 7.1 Overview of the research
• 7.2 Research contributions
• 7.2.1 Theoretical contributions
• Interorganisational systems stakeholders
• Descriptive, instrumental and normative aspects
  of interpretive stakeholder analysis
• 7.2.2 Methodological contributions
• 7.2.3 Practical contributions
• 7.2.4 Overview of the research contributions
• 7.3 Limitations of the research approach
• 7.4 Areas for further research

15
Some publishable stories
16
The main published PhD paper

• Pouloudi, A., Whitley, E. A. (1997).
  Stakeholder Identification in Interorganizational
  Systems Gaining Insights for Drug Use Management
  Systems. European Journal of Information Systems,
  6 (1), 1-14.
• Introduction
• A review of participants and stakeholders in
  information systems development
• Stakeholder identification
• Findings
• Stakeholder identification
• Examples of the viewpoints of the stakeholders
• Conclusions
• This evolved from an earlier ECIS paper (1995)
• 11 citations

17
Paper on empirical data (1)

• Pouloudi, A. (1997). Conflicting Concerns over
  the Privacy of Electronic Medical Records in the
  NHSnet. Business Ethics A European Review, 6
  (2), 94-101.
• Introduction
• Background
• An alternative approach to stakeholder analysis
• Research findings
• Implications for privacy and NHSnet success
• Conclusions
• This evolved from an earlier ETHICOMP paper
  (1996)

18
Paper on empirical data (2)

• Pouloudi, A. (1998). Stakeholder Analysis in
  Health Interorganizational Systems The Case of
  NHSnet. In K.V. Andersen (Ed.), EDI and Data
  Networking in the Public Sector (pp. 83-107).
  Boston Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Introduction
• A stakeholder analysis approach for health
  interorganisational systems
• Background why the NHSnet?
• Identifying the NHSnet stakeholders
• Discussing important issues for NHSnet use
• The 2nd part of the ETHICOMP (1996) paper
  analysis appendix in the PhD

19
Paper on empirical data (3)

• Pouloudi, A. (1999). Information technology for
  collaborative advantage in health care revisited.
  Information Management, 35 (6), 345-357.
• Introduction
• Research approahc
• NHSnet a brief case description
• NHSnet and CHINs Reviewing the lessons
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• Based on Ferratt, T.W., Lederer, A.L., Hall, S.R.
  Krella, J.M. (1996) Swords and plowshares
  information technology for collaborative
  advantage. Information Management, 30 (3),
  131-142

20
Paper on empirical data (4)

• Whitley, E.A., Pouloudi, A. (2001). Studying
  the translations of NHSnet. Journal of End User
  Computing 13(3), 30-40.
• Introduction
• Understanding the life of a project
• The sociology of translation
• Viewing the translations in an information
  systems project
• Four moments of translation
• Implications beyond the NHSnet
• Conclusions
• This was written after the PhD following one
  further research lead

21
From empirical data to general issues (1)

• Introna, L., Pouloudi, A. (1999). Privacy in
  the Information Age Stakeholders, interests and
  values. Journal of Business Ethics, 22 (1),
  27-38.
• Introduction
• Privacy as the freedom from the judgment of
  others
• Stakeholders and the interests of the other
• Framework for the analysis of privacy claims and
  risks
• Privacy claims and risks in the British NHS
• Conclusion
• This evolved from an earlier ETHICOMP paper
  (1998)
• and helped me conclude the PhD analysis

22
From empirical data to general issues (2)

• Pouloudi, A Whitley, E.A. (2000). Representing
  human and non-human stakeholders on speaking
  with authority. In Baskerville, R., Stage, J.
  and DeGross, J.I. (Eds.) Organizational and
  Social Perspectives on Information Technology
  (pp. 340-354). Boston Kluwer Academic
  Publishers.
• Introduction
• Speaking with authority
• The NHSnet
• Patients
• Encryption algorithm
• Summary and discussion
• This was written after the PhD following one
  further research lead

23
On style
24
The macro structure of a qualitative PhD

• You decide the question (use the literature as
  crutches) and also supply the answer
• Ensure that the two fit together!
• (and are reflected in the title!)
• Writing is about managing the readers
  expectations
• Macro-structure (80,000 words)
• introductory or lead-in (the boring bits?)
• The Core (the original bits) (40-50,000 words)
• afterword (will be taken seriously if core has
  been worthwhile)

25
The micro structure of the PhD

• Chapter about 10,000 words, 4 or 5 sections
• Managing expectations
• headings/sub-headings/sections
• verbal signposts and promises
• literature review scopes readers views of your
  own work (school of thought)
• criticisms bid up the standards you have to meet

26
2. CHAPTER TITLE

• Opening paragraphs (1-4 paragraphs - first
  chapter aim last chapter layout)
• 2.1 Subheading
• 1-2 paragraphs signposting the sub-sections
• 2.1.1 Subsection heading
• arguments
• 2.1.2 Subsection heading
• arguments
• Informal subheading
• arguments
• 2.5 Conclusions
• (start with summary, finish with introduction to
  next chapter, AND HAVE SOMETHING IN-BETWEEN)

27
Replanning the first draft

• Write out headings and subheadings as in text
• One line summary for each paragraph (core
  argument)
• Check for
• simple (not complex)
• big blocks of argument
• logical sequence
• developmental, cumulative (not recursive)
• Think of alternative ways of structuring and try
  them out (using the summaries)
• Youll throw away your 1st draft, but you need it
  to get to the 2nd!!
• Final check
• headings informative, at the right level
• paragraphs enough or too many in the subsection
• paragraphs and sections are linked

28
Seek feedback!

• the obvious bits spell check the document, READ
  it before you ask others to read it
• the difficult part be critical of your work (why
  am I saying this? Can I back it up? Do I back it
  up?)
• paragraph rework and replanning
• ask colleagues and staff for comments
• filter criticism why is the particular person
  telling me this (what can I gain from their
  perspective?)

29
Writing style - DONTs

• The Agatha Christie syndrome never reveal where
  youre heading
• English or Greek? on the other side there
  exists...
• Dont make big claims (unless you can support
  them with references or empirical evidence) be
  critical (doesnt mean dismissive!)
• Avoid excessive use of first person (confidence
  vs. arrogance)

30
Writing style - DOs

• Signpost your sections/chapters tell the reader
  how they relate
• Write simple, clear, SHORT sentences
• Give all details on the references and be
  consistent (e.g., APA style)
• It helps to keep a complete list of your
  references together (ENDNOTE helps)
• Use a consistent style throughout
• (for headings, fonts, headers, references)