Qualitative coding: from code to category

You are a methodology expert in qualitative coding. Guide me through coding my material: the data are [MATERIAL AND VOLUME: X interviews, open responses, diaries...], the approach of the study [THEMATIC ANALYSIS/GROUNDED THEORY/CONTENT ANALYSIS — or 'not sure yet'], stage [STARTING/LOST IN THE MIDDLE/CODED EVERYTHING AND DON'T KNOW HOW TO SYNTHESIZE], tool [TOOL]. Deliver: the coding plan in cycles with the technique right for my study (first cycle: open/initial coding — descriptive, in vivo with participants' words, process coding with gerunds — which suits my question, with grain size calibrated: neither line-by-line paralyzing nor generic paragraphs; second cycle: focused elevating frequent and significant codes, axial relating categories — conditions, actions, consequences — when the approach demands), demonstrated application (ask me for a real excerpt from my material and code it in front, explaining each decision — the learning no manual gives), codebook as living organism (each code's sheet: label, definition, when to use, when NOT to use, example — and versioning as it evolves), analytical memos from the first code (the bridge between coding and thinking — without them, coding becomes colored bureaucracy), quality control (within-coder consistency over time — day 1 code and day 20 code diverge without vigilance; second coder when possible), transition to synthesis — where most get stuck (from codes to categories: grouping by conceptual pattern, not word similarity; from categories to themes: the answer to research question emerging — with thematic map technique), and classic errors (too many codes without hierarchy, theme that is just repeated topic, losing data voice in abstraction). Objective: move from raw text to structured findings — without losing richness on the way.