{"id":790,"date":"2022-08-17T13:13:23","date_gmt":"2022-08-17T10:13:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/?p=790"},"modified":"2023-12-12T10:23:57","modified_gmt":"2023-12-12T08:23:57","slug":"what-is-grounded-theory","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/2022\/08\/17\/what-is-grounded-theory\/","title":{"rendered":"What is Grounded Theory?"},"content":{"rendered":"\r\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Have you ever wondered what Grounded Theory (GT) is all about? If so, here is a short overview of this qualitative research method. In a nutshell, GT is a framework for analysing qualitative data. The method offers a set of flexible guidelines that help researchers to focus their data collection and analysis with the aim of inductively building theories. Research regularly starts with some theories or ideas that guide the investigation and data gathering process. Whereas with GT the process is more inductive, where data is first collected and let to shape the research outcome. In other words, instead of starting with theories or ideas to be tested with the help of the data, the researcher allows the data to shape their research questions and process. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research<\/em> (1967) by Barney G. Glaser and Anselm Strauss was the first book on the method and is one of the most cited books in the field of social science. <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

In order to\r\nunderstand GT, one has to look at the academic backgrounds of both Glaser and\r\nStrauss. Glaser had a traditional positivistic training in quantitative\r\nresearch from Colombia University and Strauss came from University from Chicago\r\nwith a strong tradition of field research and an interpretative approach called\r\nsymbolic interactionism. Their collaboration resulted in a very structured and\r\nrigorous way of conducting qualitative research. GT, therefore, soon became an\r\naccepted form of qualitative research in a largely positivistic world of social\r\nscience.         <\/em><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

The\r\nsuccess and criticism of GT<\/strong><\/h4>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

GT was\r\nrevolutionary in the sense that it challenged a) separation between theory and\r\nresearch, b) views of qualitative research as mainly a preparation for \u2018real\u2019\r\nquantitative measurement, c) opinions that qualitative methods were not\r\nrigorous enough, d) beliefs that qualitative methods are vague, fuzzy, and unsystematic,\r\ne) division of data collection and analysis, and f) assumptions that qualitative\r\nresearch could generate only descriptive case studies and not develop theory. The\r\nfact that Glaser and Strauss not only argued for qualitative research to move toward\r\ntheory development, but also provided guidelines for the entire research\r\nprocess probably contributed to the success of GT. <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Despite its\r\nsuccess, GT is not without its weaknesses and has been much criticized as well.\r\nBryman et al. (2011), for example, argue that GT seldom generate any formal\r\ntheories. Another problem is the confusing and diffuse use of GT terminology in\r\nthe books written on the method. An example of this is the interchangeably use\r\nof the terms \u2018categories\u2019 and \u2018concepts\u2019. The fragmented terminology use\r\ntotally contradicts the claim of GT to be a rigorous and structured method.\r\nHowever, the terminology problem has a natural explanation in the early\r\nsplit-up between Glaser and Strauss after the publication of Discovery of Grounded Theory <\/em>(1967). The two founders of the\r\nmethod have since developed more or less their own versions of GT.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Two\r\nversions of GT <\/strong><\/h4>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Glaser\u2019s book Theoretical Sensitivity <\/em>(1978) further\r\ndeveloped GT but was considered inaccessible to many readers due to Glaser\u2019s\r\nabstract terminology and dense writing. Instead, it was Strauss and his later\r\nco-author Juliet Corbin who made GT more accessible and known to a wider\r\naudience through the books Qualitative<\/em>\r\nAnalysis for Social Scientists<\/em> (1987)\r\nand Basics of Qualitative Research:\r\nGrounded Theory Procedures and Techniques<\/em> (1990). At the same time, Glaser felt\r\nthat the Strauss approach to GT promoted in the two above books was too rigid\r\nand focused too much on development of concepts instead of theories.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

A major difference\r\nbetween the two approaches to GT emerges already in the planning stage of the\r\nresearch project. Strauss and Corbin are of the opinion that a research\r\nquestion can and should be formulated before the data collection starts. Glaser\r\nopposes this view fiercely and argues that a preconceived research question\r\nwill force concepts upon the data instead of letting the data reveal concepts.\r\nThis controversy is clear already from the title Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence vs. Forcing<\/em> that\r\nGlaser (1992) chose for his response to Strauss and Corbin.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

So, which version\r\nof GT is best? That is a problem faced by more or less every researcher\r\ninterested in GT. Both versions have their pros and cons. Hartman (2001)\r\nemphasizes the importance of making a choice, otherwise it is easy to get\r\ndivided and end up with some kind of useless hybrid version of GT. It is\r\ngenerally considered that Glaser is true to the original idea and Strauss\r\n(later together with Corbin) has moved away from it, which of course is not\r\nnecessarily a bad thing as research methods often develop over time.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Gustav Medberg <\/strong>is a Postdoctoral Researcher and Lecturer at the Department of Marketing at Hanken. His main research interests include financial services, service marketing and management, value creation and destruction, and qualitative research methods. <\/em><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Bryman, A., Bell, <\/em>E., Mills, A.J. & Yue, A.R, (2011), Business Research Methods<\/em>. Canadian\r\nEdition. Oxford: Oxford University Press<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Glaser, B. (1978), Theoretical\r\nSensitivity.<\/em> Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Glaser, B. (1992), Basics of grounded theory analysis:\r\nEmergence vs. forcing<\/em>. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Glaser,\r\nB. & Strauss, A. (1967), The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies\r\nfor qualitative research<\/em>. Chicago: Aldine<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Hartman, J. (2001), Grundad\r\nteori. Teorigenerering p\u00e5 empirisk grund<\/em>. Lund:<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Studentlitteratur<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Strauss,\r\nA. (1987), Qualitative analysis for social scientists<\/em>. Cambridge, UK:\r\nCambridge University Press<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Strauss,\r\nA. & Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of\r\nqualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques<\/em>. Newbury\r\nPark, CA: Sage Publications<\/p>\r\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Have you ever wondered what Grounded Theory (GT) is all about? If so, here is a short overview of this qualitative research method. In a nutshell, GT is a framework for analysing qualitative data. The method offers a set of flexible guidelines that help researchers to focus their data collection and analysis with the aim …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":791,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,1],"tags":[118,116,43,117,15],"class_list":["post-790","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cers-blog","category-uncategorized","tag-groundedtheory","tag-marketingresearch","tag-qualitativeresearch","tag-researchmethods","tag-marketing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/790","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/12"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=790"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/790\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":796,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/790\/revisions\/796"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/791"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=790"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=790"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.hanken.fi\/cers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=790"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}