Both studies analyzed large amounts of qualitative and quantitative data to understand organizational change and cross-cultural mentoring relationships. The first study examined technology changes in renewable energy companies using interviews, public records, and statistical analysis to determine how cognitive flexibility at the team and organization levels impacted the likelihood and scale of changes. The second study used grounded theory and interviews to develop a model of effective practices for mentors in cross-cultural relationships. Both analyzed data dimensions and levels to answer research questions and proposed theoretical frameworks to understand their topics of study.

1. Exploiting Rapid
Change in Technology
Enhanced Learning
… for Post Graduate Education
From Data to Endgame – What does it take?

2. Students Experience the Endgame differently
I like being near the top of a mountain. One can't get
lost here. Wislawa Szymborska
When you're passionate about something, you want it
to be all it can be. But in the endgame of life, I
fundamentally believe the key to happiness is letting
go of that idea of perfection. Debra Messing
If there's not any endgame, we're in quicksand. We
take one more step, and we're still there, and there's
no way out. Richard Shelby

3. Agenda
1. Endgame backwards – qualitative
2. Endgame backwards – quantitative
3. What they have in common – the beginning of a map
through from data to the end
Dissertations discussed today from PQDT Open.

4. The Documents – both from Stanford
Large scale empirical (2009)
• 212 pages
• 6 chapters – used #3 for
theory
• 50 pages of tables at the end
Grounded Theory (2008)
• 440 pages
• 8 chapters – 3 for 3 different
dimensions of the results then 7 for
a model and 8 for conclusion

5. Study #1

6. Abstract
Cognitive flexibility: The adaptive reality of concrete organization change
by Furr, Nathan R., Ph.D., Stanford University, 2009, 201; 3382938
Abstract (Summary)
The question of why some organizations change when others do not is of central interest to
the organization change literature. While large-scale, empirical studies have emphasized
organization demographic characteristics such as size, age and resources, a recent body of
case-based literature has begun to emphasize the role of cognition in determining whether
organizations change. In particular, the literature suggests that organizations characterized
by cognitive flexibility are more likely to change than those characterized by cognitive rigidity.
This study investigates the impact of three core constructs that contribute to cognitive
flexibility—variety, novelty, and framing—on when organizations change their technology. I
examine the impact of these three constructs at both the team and organization level on the
likelihood of three degrees of technical change: major, moderate, and minor. I find that all
three constructs: variety, novelty, and framing contribute to technology change. Furthermore,
I find that the greater the scale of change, the greater the impact of cognitive flexibility on
change. Finally, I investigate the link between change and performance, and find that, in fact,
large changes actually improve performance more than small changes but only after an
initial adjustment delay.

7. How Much Data Was Collected?
Pilot interviews (12) 1 hour each – analyzed whether the
questions made sense… - yes they did so he progressed.
The study – public and private data on the PV industry from
1992 – 2007
Data from Venture Xpert, Dept of Energy and Renewable
Energy Lab – (70 lists total) Data was filled in by interviews
(4)
Data measured in quarterly intervals – all changes in
technology recorded in public documentation

8. How Was It Analyzed?
The analysis conducted as part of this study consists of three parts.
First, conducted a pilot inductive study in which he validated the research
question.
Second, he conducted a deductive analysis to statistically test the effects of
cognitive flexibility on change. As part of this analysis, he also tested the effects
of change on performance.
Third, to more robustly illustrate the statistical analysis he constructed three
cases of organizations from the sample that illustrate the change process
Dependent variable change – major, moderate, minor
Independent variables – team experience, (career histories were extracted from
biographies on the web) science or business – who came and who went in each
company each quarter?

9. Other Things Measured
Structure variety
Technical novelty
Outward opportunity
Measured it all through content analysis
Texts were scored on whether motives for change were
economic vs sustainability and then commercial vs technical
Statistical analysis on cognitive flexibility and change and on
effect of change on performance through correlations and
descriptive statistics.

10. Where did he get to in the end?
Additional exploratory analysis of CEO’s – as to their adaptive flexibility and what
that meant for their organizations.
The results suggest that CEO-level cognitive flexibility does impact change
although the management team as a whole has a greater impact on change than
the CEO alone, particularly for large changes
And then this requires the results are gone through carefully
for each level of change etc.

11. Study #2

12. Abstract
Best practices of outstanding mentors in psychology: An ecological, relational, and
multicultural model
by Chan, Anne, Ph.D., Stanford University, 2008, 430; 3313810
Abstract (Summary)
Recent studies have pinpointed disconcerting trends regarding the recruitment, retention, and graduation rates of ethnic
minorities in doctoral programs. Mentoring has been touted as part of the strategy to address this problem. However, there
is a paucity of research on the mentoring of ethnic minorities in academia, particularly with regard to how mentors tackle
cross-cultural differences in mentoring relationships. This dissertation addresses this gap in the literature by examining the
practices of outstanding mentors in cross-cultural mentoring relationships. The sample consisted of 9 mentors nominated for
being outstanding mentors and 17 doctoral-level psychology protégés—all the mentoring relationships diverged along racial
and/or cultural lines. Grounded theory was used in this study to uncover mentor practices as well as to discern a theory of
cross-cultural mentoring. Data was collected from semi-structured interviews with mentors and their proteges, audiotapes of
two actual mentoring sessions, as well as archival materials such as e-mail exchanges.
The data showed that the mentors engaged in a wide variety of practices targeted at three key areas: individual career
development of the protégés, relationship/trust building, and socialization/organizational development of the protégés.
These mentor practices were found to address the special concerns and challenges faced by ethnic minority and culturally
different protégés.
This dissertation contributes to the literature on mentoring by proposing an ecological model of mentoring that emphasizes
the contextual, relational, and multicultural nature of cross-cultural mentoring relationships. The findings from this study
contribute to our understanding of the processes within a mentoring relationship and the ways in which mentors can
successfully negotiate differences.

13. How Much Data Was Collected?
Grounded theory – requirement for looking at evidence from
several angles in order to build theory
26 participants, in depth interviews over 9 months
Document analysis as well: emails, between mentors and
protégé’s
Audio taped sessions (2) were also analyzed
Pilot done to verify ideas – opened ideas about mentor
access that were key at the end

14. How Was It Analyzed?
Triangulation, negative case analysis, member checking,
Reflexive journaling, reactivity
Multiple readings of data and examination over the course
of collection – analysis throughout
Field Notes and memos: observational notes, theoretical
notes, methodological notes, and open and selective coding
Constant comparison of previous ideas to new ones,
reflecting back, integrating categories, delimiting theoretical
options, then writing theory

15. Constructing similarities and
differences in order to propose a map
through from data to the end

16. Process comparison
#1
• Purpose to extend what is known
with broad question: When do
organizations change?
• Lit set up dimensions and levels
• Results in one chapter - 2
dimensions discussed each across
3 levels of change
• Outcomes across each of 3 types
of literature
#2
Both had LOTS of data and complex system for analysis
Similarities:
1. Both had complex system to discuss results across a number of dimensions
• RQ to be answered
• Lit set up the dimensions
• Each dimension became its own
results chapter (= 200 pages)
• Outcomes results taken together- a
model for cross-cultural mentoring

17. Where #1 get to in the end?
The descriptive statistics suggest that entrepreneurial organizations are in fact
highly adaptive. The frequency of technical change suggests that change inside
entrepreneurial organizations is a central feature of early organizational life.
When do organizations change?
1. Cognitive flexibility influences whether /how much
2. That is true at multiple levels within organization
3. CF has a different effect depending on size of change –
more the bigger it is
4. Change improved performance overall

18. Where #2 get to in the end?
Model for mentoring…
The major mentor functions identified in this model are:
• Building trust in the mentoring relationship
• Building community and supportive networks
• Providing access to the inside story
• Providing validation
• Providing support for career development
• Providing protection
Each conceptualized across individual, relationship, and organizational
contexts

19. http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/search.html
Suggested Map for those with Data
What might these comparisons suggest to others?
1. Lit sets up the sort mechanism for your data
2. Questions determine where you want to end up
3. Steps might include:
1. Beginning, during, after analysis sort, sort, sort your ideas into
the different strata determined throught the lit.
2. Keep asking – how do these ideas answer my questions?
3. Keep journal of the progress so you can go back and double
check.
4. Use models from others – as your ideas progress search again.

20. What’s Up at DoctoralNet?
Continuing development in two areas: 1) Support, 2) Non Academic career
tracks and transferable skills
Webinars
Opt-ins For Summer
Track your milestones
30 day challenges – writing and work/life balance
Top 10 motivations
April 11th Read/Listen/Comment Reading Group https://www.bigmarker.com/doctoralnet/Copy-of-Read-Listen-
Comment-Academic-Writing-Help
April 13th Critical Analysis Part 1 with exercise https://www.bigmarker.com/doctoralnet/Critical-analysis-part-one-with-
exercise
April 18th Preparing for your Final Defense/VIVA https://www.bigmarker.com/doctoralnet/Preparing-for-your-Final-
Defence-VIVA
April 18th Lingerers Group: Picking up the pace on literature
work
https://www.bigmarker.com/doctoralnet/Lingerers-Second-Quarter-2-
2017-Picking-up-the-pace
April 20th Critical analysis part two from exercise https://www.bigmarker.com/doctoralnet/Critical-analysis-part-two-from-
exercise
April 24th IRB/Ethics: Ins, Outs, What to do and What to
avoid
https://www.bigmarker.com/doctoralnet/IRB-Ethics-Ins-Outs-What-to-do-
and-What-to-avoid