Task07.

Provide a unique answer and your own work.

Give an Opinion as your interpretations with this DATA ANALYSIS AND PRELIMINARY FINDINGS, in terms of the relevance of a whole-person learning approach to family business education? Your findings or opinions will help a lot for my study. Thank you.

DATA ANALYSIS AND PRELIMINARY FINDINGS

Data analysis was multifaceted and involved numerous coding exercises within and across our constructed cases. To accomplish this, the four authors formed two teams; both included "external" researchers not affiliated with the university from which the data were collected. Any disagreements on interpretation were first discussed within each team before being addressed between the teams.

To enhance the validity of our findings, each team's analyses were exchanged for review. We repeatedly returned to the original data, which led to a process of iterative coding of abstract categories. We first coded the transcripts using an open coding methodology. This involved scanning the transcripts, identifying key concepts, making cross-transcript comparisons, and attempting to organize the data into discrete categories. Recalling the first part of our research question, we were particularly interested in finding the key transformations experienced by next-gens.

The coding analysis was initially guided by our interview protocol, which systematically probed students about their experiences related to each element of the course (i.e., PGDs, parent interview, life plan, one-on-one coaching, lecture-based sessions). We then began to conceptually order these experiential accounts into broader, more abstract categories. Following Gioia, Corley, and Hamilton (2013), these categories and their underlying data structure which features selected quotes that conceptually support five broad experiential categories:

(1) the practical application of course materials,

(2) self-reflection,

(3) normalizing,

(4) emotional responses, and

(5) enhanced communication. To explore the second part of our research question concerning how these experiences might impact next-gens' development as successors, we performed the same open coding methodology, but with an emphasis on the data that were related to the deeper, more probing questions in the interview protocol. This stage of the analysis also relied heavily on the data gathered from the parent and lab instructor interviews, which aided in externally validating the accounts of corresponding next-gens.

Interpretations of the broad categories arising from this stage were not as directly connected to student experiences on their own, yet clearly demonstrated the existence of course-related influences on family business and early-stage succession-relevant outcomes. Specifically, we identified five general categories related to early-stage successor developments:

(1) understanding family business attachment,

(2) managing role expectations,

(3) developing incumbent-successor trust,

(4) making career decisions, and

(5) extending temporal perspectives. We then assessed how the emerging themes and concepts might be interrelated, to understand the underlying processes that link the course's elements to student experiences and successor development. We searched for cross-case similarities that were linked to existing abstract concepts found in the pedagogy literature related to WPL. Specifically, we employed structural coding, thereby applying a more purposeful examination of the data.

This approach is useful when an existing conceptual lens can help frame the analysis and may thereby uncover content-based data that represent the topic of inquiry related to our research question. Underpinning this stage was the notion that cognitive, emotional, and social intelligences are observable by way of the competencies exhibited by our interviewees.

Our study's broad categories and their underlying meaning illustrates the relationships we ultimately observed between the course's elements, students' experiences, and successor development.

Part ii.

Your friend's birthday is tomorrow. She does not own a watch, yet you know that she would enjoy having one.

(a) Draw a budget constraint / indifference curve graph for your friend, with Quantity of All Other Goods on the vertical axis and Quantity of Watches on the horizontal axis. Show what her indifference curves must look like for her to choose not to buy a watch even though she puts some value on having one.

(b) Now, suppose that you buy a $100 watch and give it to your friend for her birthday. On your graph from part (a), show what your friend's budget constraint looks like after you give her the watch. Does this move her to a higher utility level? Briefly explain.

(c) Your friend is appreciative, but you sense that she would rather have had a gift certificate that is redeemable at a wide variety of places. On your graph from parts (a) and (b), show what your friend's budget constraint would look like if you gave her a $100 gift certificate instead of the watch. Does this move her to a higher utility level? Briefly explain.

(d) Which of the two potential gifts increases your friend's utility by more? Briefly explain.