A Simpler Understanding of Classic GT How it is a fundamentally different methodology

Main Article Content

Ólavur Christiansen

Abstract

The author reduces the research rationale of classic grounded theory (GT) methodology and the consequential classic GT research procedures and stages down to their essential elements. This reduction makes it possible to compare classic GT to other research methodologies in a manner that is simpler and yet concise. This methodological analysis and synthesis has been conducted while applying and after having applied the classic GT methodology in practice in a major project. The fundamental differences between classic GT versus other adaptations of GT, as well as other qualitative-inductive research approaches, are mainly explained by the very different approaches in solving the problem of many equally justifiable interpretations of the same data, and by the consequential differences in research procedures, and how they are applied. Comprehension of methodological differences in details will always be relevant. However, an uncomplicated and still concise explanation of the differences between these methodologies is necessary. “Grounded theory” (GT) is used as a common label in the literature for very different research approaches. This simpler approach of comparing the methodologies will be helpful for researchers, who might want to consider several options when deciding which research methodology to use, and who need quickly to understand some of the most essential methodological elements.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Christiansen, Ólavur. (2007). A Simpler Understanding of Classic GT: How it is a fundamentally different methodology. Grounded Theory Review, 6(03), 39–62. Retrieved from https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/360
Section
Research Articles

References

Alvesson, Mats and Skoldberg, Kaj (2000), Reflexive Methodology, New Vistas for Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, London

Brytting, Thomas (1991), Organizing in the small growing firm, a grounded theory approach, Published Ph.D. dissertation, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm.

Christiansen, Ólavur. (2005), The theory of “opportunizing” and the sub-process of “conditional befriending”. Journal of Business & Economics Research, Vol. 3, No 4, pp. 73-88.

Christiansen, Ólavur. 2006. Opportunizing: A classic grounded theory study on business and management. Grounded Theory Review: An international Journal, Vol. 6, No 1, pp.109-133

Creswell, John W. (1998), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions, Sage Publications, London.

Denzin, Norman K. and Lincoln, Yvonna S. (Eds.), (2000), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, London.

Glaser, Barney G. (1978), Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory: Theoretical Sensitivity, The Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.

Glaser, Barney G. (1992), Emergence vs Forcing: Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis, Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.

Glaser, Barney G. (1998), Doing Grounded Theory: Issues and Discussions, Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.

Glaser, Barney G. (2001), The Grounded Theory Perspective: Conceptualization Contrasted with Description, Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.

Glaser, Barney G. (2003), The Grounded Theory Perspective II: Description’s Remodeling of Grounded Theory Methodology, Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.

Glaser, Barney (2004), Glaser’s explanations on a seminar in London, April 2004.

Glaser, Barney G. (2005), Grounded Theory Perspective III: Theoretical coding, Sociology Press Mill Valley, CA.

Glaser, Barney G. and Strauss, Anselm L. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: strategies for qualitative research, Aldine De Gruyter New York.

Hartman, Jan (2001), Grundad teori, teorigenerering på empirisk grund, Studentlitteratur, Lund, Sweden.

Kuhn, Thomas S. (1996), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Third Edition, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Lakatos, Imre (1970), Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. In Lakatos and Musgrave (eds.), 1970, Criticism and Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.

Lee, Frederic S. (2002a), Post Keynesian Price Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK:

Lee, Frederic S. (2002b), Theory creation and the methodological foundation of Post Keynesian economics, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 26, pp. 789-804.

Lee, Frederick (2005), Grounded Theory and Heterodox Economics, The Grounded Theory Review: An International Journal, Vol. 4, No 2, pp. 95 116.

Locke, Karen (2001), Grounded Theory in Management Research, Sage Publications, London.

Lowe, Andy (2005), Trust in Emergence. Keynote presentation delivered to the 3 rd International Qualitative Research Convention, Johor Bahru, Malaysia, August 23 rd , hosted by University Teknologi, Malaysia.

Morse, Janice M. (Ed.), (1994),Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods, Sage Publications, London.

Simmons, Odis E. (2002), Summary of the stages of a GT research, unpublished paper.

Simmons. Odis E. (1995), Illegitimate use of the “grounded theory” title, pp. 163-169 in Barney G. Glaser (Ed.), 1995, Grounded Theory 1984-1994, Volume One, Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.

Strauss, Anselm and Corbin, Juliet (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research. Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.

Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin (1998), Basics of Qualitative Research, Second Edition. Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, Sage Publications, London.