Transparency is once again a central issue of debate across types of qualitative research. Work on how to conduct qualitative data analysis, on the other hand, walks us through the step-by-step process on how to code and understand the data we've collected. Although there are a few exceptions, less focus is on transparency regarding decision-making processes in the course of research. In this article, we argue that scholars should create a living codebook, which is a set of tools that documents the data analysis process. It has four parts: (1) a processual database that keeps track of initial codes and a final database for completed codes, (2) a "definitions and key terms" list for conversations about codes, (3) memo-writing, and (4) a difference list explaining the rationale behind unmatched codes. It allows researchers to interrogate taken-for-granted assumptions about what data are focused on, why, and how to analyze it. To that end, the living codebook moves beyond discussions around intercoder reliability to how analytic codes are created, refined, and debated.