13 - Laserfiche WebLink

For the question that was added in 2015, the Associate reviewed all of the responses in order to develop a new codebook. She then used this codebook to code the question to the extent feasible, again setting aside any responses that failed to conform to the coding scheme for the possible addition of new codes. Once all of the interviews that did not conform to the existing coding schemes had been identified, the Associate reviewed the uncoded answers and added new codes as appropriate. This approach ensures that there are minimal percentages of "other" responses to the open-ended questions. Finally, as a check on the integrity of the coding as a whole, the Vice President and Data Analysis Manager checked and validated ten percent of the coding. The resulting data were then exported into the data analytic software SPSS for Windows and checked for accuracy, adherence to the pre-established coding scheme, and internal logic. In addition, preliminary tabulations were reviewed manually to check for errors. Finally, tabulations, means, and other analyses were prepared using SPSS for Windows. Because the 2015 survey included a number of questions that were first asked in 2012, it appeared that it would be both important and potentially useful to compare the two years' results. Accordingly, all of these questions were tested for statistically significant differences (p<.05) between 2012 and 2015. Only four items in two questions exhibited such differences, and these are discussed in the appropriate context in the next section. CITY OF PLEASANTON: 2015 SURVEY OF BUSINESS EXECUTIVES