| Course | RES 724 Qualitative Methods and Design (RES/724) |
|---|---|
| Week | 8 |
| Paper type | Doctoral qualitative research design |
| Length | about 1,173 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | DBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for RES 724 Week 8
A Complete Qualitative Design: How Iowa Successors Make Sense of Leading Family Manufacturers
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
RES/724: Qualitative Methods and Design
Week 8 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The learner, the firms, the successors and the planned study are composites written for a model paper.
This paper brings together seven weeks of work by a composite vice president of commercial lending in Des Moines, Iowa, into a qualitative research design for her DBA study.
Problem
Family-owned manufacturers anchor many Iowa towns, and most expect to pass leadership to the next generation. The banker has seen successors of financially sound firms struggle in their first years, and some firms sold soon after succession. Sharma et al. (2003) studied satisfaction with the succession process in family firms through surveys of successors and founders and found that factors such as the incumbent's willingness to step aside and the successor's readiness shaped satisfaction. Research of this kind measures outcomes and predictors well, but it says less about what successors go through day to day, especially when the founder remains in the building. Families, advisers and lenders lack that understanding.
Purpose and Questions
This interpretative phenomenological analysis aims to explore the meaning successors give to their early years at the head of Iowa family-owned manufacturers when a founding parent has stayed involved.
Central question: In their first years at the helm, how do successors of Iowa family manufacturers understand what it means to lead while a founding parent is still part of the business?
Subquestions address authority in relation to the founder, relationships with long-serving employees and responsibility for the family's legacy.
Tradition and Philosophical Basis
Larkin et al. (2006) argued that IPA has two aims: to understand and give voice to participants' concerns, and to develop an interpretative account of what those concerns mean in context, in which the researcher's engagement is acknowledged rather than removed. Both aims fit: successors' voices are missing from the literature, and the banker's knowledge of the setting can inform interpretation if handled reflexively. The study assumes that experience is understood through the meanings people give it and that knowledge is produced in the interaction between researcher and participant.
Participants and Sampling
Homogeneous criterion sampling will recruit eight to ten successors who are children or children-in-law of the founder, have led an Iowa family manufacturer with at least 20 employees for one to five years and have a founding parent still involved. Clients of the banker's employer and people she knows personally are excluded. Recruitment runs through the state family business center, a manufacturers' association and limited referrals, with information power justifying the sample.
Data Collection
Each successor takes part in two semi-structured interviews of about 90 minutes, a month apart, in a private setting away from the plant. A walk-through of the plant between interviews, with moderate participation and written field notes, and documents the successor chooses to share, such as company histories and succession announcements, provide context and second-interview prompts. Interviews are recorded and transcribed verbatim.
The founder's office, the walk across the shop floor and the anniversary book all become questions for the second interview, and the successor interprets them.
Analysis
Every successor's transcripts are worked through completely before the next successor's: reading and rereading, exploratory comments, experiential statements and personal experiential themes. Cross-case comparison, supported by a matrix display, produces group experiential themes, with divergence reported. Memos and an analytic log form the audit trail; qualitative software organizes data.
Quality
Four principles for judging qualitative work guide quality (Yardley, 2000): sensitivity to context through grounding in literature and setting; commitment and rigor through two interviews and case-by-case analysis; transparency and coherence through the audit trail and theme table; and impact through a plain-language summary for participants and advisers. Member reflections on case summaries, peer debriefing and a reflexive journal complete the plan.
Ethics
The university's ethics board will review the design. Consent forms explain the purpose, time, recording, confidentiality steps and the right to withdraw. In a small community, pseudonyms, general industry labels, ranges for town and firm size and agreed changes to distinctive details protect identities. Employees and founders who appear in observations are described only by role. The banker will not discuss financing or offer advice.
The Researcher's Role
As a lender to family firms, the banker brings knowledge of the setting and assumptions about succession, recorded in a reflexive journal: that a founder's continued presence holds successors back, that daughters meet more pushback than sons and that struggling successors were simply underprepared. The journal, peer debriefing and attention to divergent cases help ensure these do not dictate the findings.
Alignment Check
The problem, a missing understanding of successors' experience, leads to a purpose and questions about sense-making. IPA studies sense-making. Homogeneous sampling provides people who share the experience. Two interviews provide depth, and observation and documents provide context. Case-by-case analysis keeps each successor's account intact before comparison. Quality strategies fit an interpretive tradition.
Checking Against a Reporting Standard
Tong et al. (2007) developed COREQ, a 32-item checklist for reporting interview and focus group studies, covering three domains: who did the research and how they reflected on their role, how the study was designed and how analysis and findings are reported. Reviewing the design against it revealed two omissions: the plan did not state whether participants knew the researcher's occupation before interviews, and it did not say whether transcripts would be returned to participants. The design now states that successors will know she is a banker, with her role explained in the invitation, and that transcripts will be offered on request.
Revisions Made in Assembly
Bringing the weeks together exposed two inconsistencies. Week 3 described the interviews as about 90 minutes, while the pilot interviews in Week 4 ran about 70; the design keeps 90 minutes as an upper limit and tells participants to expect 60 to 90. Week 5 planned to request family charters, but Week 7's ethics discussion raised concern about documents involving relatives who have not consented; the design now asks for charters only when the relevant family members agree in writing.
Feasibility
The banker can recruit through organizations that already serve successors, interview on evenings and weekends and analyze one case at a time alongside her job. Twenty interviews of about 75 minutes produce roughly 25 hours of recording, manageable with professional transcription.
Limitations
The study describes the experiences of a small, deliberately chosen group of Iowa successors in manufacturing; readers must judge transfer to other industries and regions. Successors who agree to participate may be those more comfortable discussing their experience. Successors will be recalling events, and later experience may color those memories. And the banker's interpretations, though documented, are hers.
Timeline
Months 1 to 2: ethics approval and recruitment. Months 3 to 6: first and second interviews, walk-throughs and document collection. Months 5 to 9: case-by-case analysis. Months 10 to 11: cross-case analysis and member reflections. Month 12: writing.
Conclusion
The design aligns a practical and scholarly problem with an IPA study of eight to ten Iowa successors, using two interviews, observation and documents, case-by-case analysis, Yardley's quality principles and ethics tailored to a small community. Checked against COREQ and revised where needed, it is ready for committee review and ethics submission.
References
Larkin, M., Watts, S., & Clifton, E. (2006). Giving voice and making sense in interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 102-120. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp062oa
Sharma, P., Chrisman, J. J., & Chua, J. H. (2003). Predictors of satisfaction with the succession process in family firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 667-687. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00015-6
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349-357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
Yardley, L. (2000). Dilemmas in qualitative health research. Psychology & Health, 15(2), 215-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440008400302
What the RES 724 Week 8 instructions ask
RES 724 ends by having doctoral learners lay out a complete qualitative research design. Requirements typically include the problem and purpose, research questions, the chosen tradition and its philosophical basis, participants and sampling, data collection procedures, analysis, trustworthiness strategies, ethical considerations, the researcher's role and limitations, often with a timeline. Some versions ask learners to evaluate the design against a published reporting standard or to add an appendix with the interview guide and consent form. Bring the earlier weeks' work into one consistent design, revise where pieces no longer fit, support each choice with methods and topic literature in APA, and explain how each component serves the research questions.
How this RES 724 Week 8 example is built
Our model design opens with the problem that successors in family manufacturing firms can struggle in ways financial measures do not show, a gap the succession literature has noted, since most studies measure satisfaction or outcomes rather than lived experience. It then restates the central question and three subquestions and justifies IPA with research on its two aims of giving voice to participants and making interpretive sense of their accounts. The design covers eight to ten successors, two interviews with each, a walk-through and documents, case-by-case analysis, Yardley's quality principles, ethics in a small community and the banker's insider position. A reporting checklist for interview studies then confirms that nothing a reviewer expects is missing.
RES 724 Week 8 grading rubric: where the points go
Doctoral graders reward qualitative designs that are coherent, complete and transparent. Strong papers align problem, purpose, questions, tradition, sampling, data, analysis and quality strategies and show that alignment explicitly. Credit goes to designs that revise earlier pieces openly when they conflict, to realistic feasibility, to ethics tailored to the setting and to frank discussion of the researcher's position. Graders also value checking the design against a recognized reporting standard and a timeline that a working professional could actually keep. Careful methodological citations in APA and a consistent vocabulary from first page to last complete a strong final design.
RES 724 Week 8 help: mistakes to avoid
Qualitative design papers often stitch earlier assignments together without checking that terms and decisions still agree, such as a sample size that changed or a tradition that no longer fits a subquestion. Read the design as one document. Another frequent gap is a design that claims a tradition but describes generic interviewing; show what the tradition changes. Learners also underplay the researcher's role in interpretive designs such as IPA. Some papers list limitations that are really strengths of qualitative work, such as small samples; state real limits instead. Finally, use a reporting checklist to catch omissions before submission. Attach the interview guide so reviewers can see the questions. A tutor can help you read your design as a committee member would.
Related RES 724 sample papers
Other RES 724 week samples
- RES 724 Week 1: Qualitative Traditions
- RES 724 Week 2: Qualitative Research Questions
- RES 724 Week 3: Sampling and Access
- RES 724 Week 4: Interviewing
- RES 724 Week 5: Observation and Documents
- RES 724 Week 6: Coding and Analysis
- RES 724 Week 7: Trustworthiness
More DBA sample papers
- ORG 727 Week 8: Evaluating Results
- RES 709 Week 8: Research Plan
- RES 710 Week 8: Applying Statistics
- RES 720 Week 8: Quantitative Analysis Plan
RES 724 Week 8 questions, answered
What does RES 724 Week 8 usually cover?
It usually covers a complete qualitative research design: problem, purpose, questions, tradition, sampling, data collection, analysis, trustworthiness, ethics and the researcher's role.
Where can I find a free RES 724 Week 8 sample paper?
The RES 724 Week 8 qualitative design on family business successors is above, complete and free.
What is COREQ?
A 32-item checklist for reporting qualitative interview and focus group studies, covering the research team, study design and analysis and findings.
Is a small sample a limitation in qualitative research?
Not in itself; small purposeful samples suit in-depth designs, though readers must judge how far findings transfer to other settings.
How do you show alignment in a qualitative design?
By showing how the problem leads to the purpose and questions and how the tradition, sampling, data and analysis are chosen to answer those questions.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All RES 724 week samples · All courses