I wanted to study employee communication at my organization because of the apparent division between union and non-union staff members, especially during times of contract negotiations where anti-management sentiment is at its peak. Specifically, my goal is to understand the perceptions of unionized employees as it pertains to communications sent by management when policies or procedures are implemented. How do union employees perceive these communications? Why are they perceived as such? By studying their perceptions, I hope to gain an understanding of what the organization can do to improve its communications to employees (which may ultimately affect employee morale, but that would be a bonus).
Using social constructivism as a framework and phenomenology as the theoretical approach, I conducted a focus group with 3 union staff members from the same department within the organization in an attempt to answer my research question:
How do full-time union employees in the Administrative Services department at the Research Foundation perceive executive-level communications.
The raw data that I gathered from this one-hour focus group was absolutely amazing. I thought I may have some bias as the researcher in terms of my association with the three staff members, but I was surprised by what I heard from the three participants and how they each strongly defended their opinions and articulated their personal experiences. They were supportive of one another and yet they confidently expressed their own ideas, which at times, were contrary to those of their colleagues. Overall, a great experience to watch unfold before my eyes.
I transcribed the data verbatim (which took many, many hours) and immediately began to notice the patterns emerge. It’s exciting and exhausting at the same time. I found myself attempting to manage pages and pages of transcribed raw data and the organization of this data seemed overwhelming. I read and re-read Powell & Renner’s Analyzing Qualitative Data, but I found that organizing narrative data is just incredibly tedious. My issue became one of “What do I include and what do I exclude?” “This seems good, but there are too many extra words; do these words really express emotion?” I found this part of the project to be the most challenging, but I finally figured out a system that worked by placing each participant’s comments side-by-side on a spreadsheet and highlighting the text that screamed for attention. The patterns were crystal clear.
I’m not sure whether there’s anything concrete that could have actually helped me more than the article on Analyzing Qualitative Data (other than having an expert actually walk me through the data analysis process). In undertaking this research project, it seems you just have to learn by doing and develop a system that makes sense to you and allows you to understand your data to the degree that you can clearly explain what you’ve found.