Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On Emergence and Forcing in Information Systems Grounded Theory Studies: The Case of Strauss and Corbin

  • Chapter
Enacting Research Methods in Information Systems: Volume 1

Abstract

Grounded theory method (GTM) (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Strauss and Corbin, 1990; Charmaz, 2006) is characterized by the continuous interplay between the collection and analysis of data in order to generate theory that is firmly grounded in empirical phenomena (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Strauss and Corbin, 1998). The method is now an accepted research approach in the information systems (IS) discipline (Urquhart et al., 2010; Matavire and Brown, 2011). That said, there are many debates around the application of GTM, and the method is contested (Duchscher and Morgan, 2004; Bryant and Charmaz, 2007). Important debates relate to the underlying epistemology (Mills et al., 2006), role of prior theory (Jones and Noble, 2007), and coding procedures (Kelle, 2007). As a result, there are now different strands of GTM, which differ in various aspects, including induction, deduction, and verification (Heath and Cowley, 2004; Matavire and Brown, 2011). Bryant and Charmaz (2007) argue strongly that GTM can be seen as a ‘family of methods’, and we would concur with that view. Mills et al. (2006) write that GTM ‘can be seen as a methodological spiral that begins with Glaser and Strauss’ original text and continues today’ (p. 25). Specifically, they use the terms ‘traditional’ and ‘evolved’ in order to distinguish the work of Glaser from that of Strauss, the two co-founders of the method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Ågerfalk, P.J. and Fitzgerald, B. (2008). Outsourcing to an Unknown Workforce: Exploring opensourcing as a global sourcing strategy, MIS Quarterly 32(2): 385–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • AIS (2007). Senior scholar’s basket of journals. [WWW document] http://home.aisnet.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=346 (accessed 5 August 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, R. (2008). Examining Technology, Structure and Identity During an Enterprise System Implementation, Information Systems Journal 18(2): 203–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association (2010). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 6th edn, Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azad, B. and King, N. (2008). Enacting Computer Workaround Practices within a Medication Dispensing System, European Journal of Information Systems 17(3): 264–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. and Pries-Heje, J. (1999). Grounded Action Research: A method for understanding IT in practice, Accounting Management and Information Technologies 9(1): 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. and Pries-Heje, J. (2001). A Multiple-Theory Analysis of a Diffusion of Information Technology Case, Information Systems Journal 11(3): 181–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. and Pries-Heje, J. (2004). Short Cycle Time Systems Development, Information Systems Journal 14(3): 237–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjørn, P. and Ngwenyama, O. (2009). Virtual Team Collaboration: Building shared meaning, resolving breakdowns and creating translucence, Information Systems Journal 19(3): 227–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boychuk Duchscher, J.E. and Morgan, B. (2004). Grounded Theory: Reflections on the emergence vs forcing debate, Journal of Advanced Nursing 48(6): 605–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, A. (2002). Re-Grounding Grounded Theory, Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application 4(1): 25–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, A. and Charmaz, K. (eds.) (2007). Grounded Theory Research: Methods and practices, in The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, London: Sage, pp. 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, P.J. and Davis, G.B. (1998). An Investigation of Media Selection among Directors and Managers: From ‘self’ to ‘other’ orientation, MIS Quarterly 22(3): 335–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, S., Sarker, S. and Sarker, S. (2010). An Exploration into the Process of Requirements Elicitation: A grounded approach, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 11(4): 212–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (1983). The Grounded Theory Method: An explication and interpretation, in R.M. Emerson (ed.) Contemporary Field Research: A collection of readings, Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Co, pp. 109–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded Theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods, in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 509–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A.E. (2003). Situational Analyses: Grounded theory mapping after the postmodern turn, Symbolic Interaction 26(4): 553–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A.E. (2005). Situational Analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conboy, K. (2010). Project Failure En Masse: A study of loose budgetary control in ISD projects, European Journal of Information Systems 19(3): 273–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J. and Strauss, A.L. (1990). Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria, Qualitative Sociology 13(1): 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J. and Strauss, A.L. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, J.M., Junglas, I. and Silva, L. (2009). Information Flow Impediments in Disaster Relief Supply Chains, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 10(8): 637–660.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeSanctis, G. and Poole, M.S. (1994). Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive structuration theory, Organization Science 5(2): 121–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1922). Human Nature and Conduct, New York: Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dey, I. (1999). Grounding Grounded Theory: Guidelines for Qualitative Inquiry, San Diego: Academic Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Doherty, N.F., Coombs, C.R. and Loan-Clarke, J. (2006). A Re-Conceptualization of the Interpretive Flexibility of Information Technologies: Redressing the balance between the social and the technical, European Journal of Information Systems 15(6): 569–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espinosa, J.A., Slaughter, S.A., Kraut, R.E. and Herbsleb, J.D. (2007). Team Knowledge and Coordination in Geographically Distributed Software Development, Journal of Management Information Systems 24(1): 135–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feller, J., Finnegan, P., Fitzgerald, B. and Hayes, J. (2008). From Peer Production to Productization: A study of socially enabled business exchanges in open source service networks, Information Systems Research 19(4): 475–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galal, G.H. (2001). From Contexts to Constructs: The use of grounded theory in operationalising contingent process models, European Journal of Information Systems 10(1): 2–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galliers, R.D., Whitley, E.A. and Paul, R.J. (2007). The European Information Systems Academy, European Journal of Information Systems 16(1): 3–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B.G. (1978). Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory, Mill Valley, CA: The Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for qualitative research, Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goo, J., Kishore, R., Rao, H.R. and Nam, K. (2009). The Role of Service Level Agreements in Relational Management of Information Technology Outsourcing: An empirical study, MIS Quarterly 33(1): 119–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goode, S. and Gregor, S. (2009). Rethinking Organisational Size in IS Research: Meaning, measurement and redevelopment, European Journal of Information Systems 18(1): 4–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulielmos, M. (2004). Systems Development Approach: Transcending methodology, Information Systems Journal 14(4): 363–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly 30(3): 611–642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackney, R., Jones, S. and Lösch, A. (2007). Towards an E-Government Efficiency Agenda: The impact of information and communication behaviour on E-reverse auctions in public sector procurement, European Journal of Information Systems 16(2): 178–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, H. and Cowley, S. (2004). Developing a Grounded Theory Approach: A comparison of glaser and strauss, International Journal of Nursing Studies 41(2): 141–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmström Olsson, H., Conchúir, E.Ó., Ågerfalk, P.J. and Fitzgerald, B. (2008). Two-Stage Offshoring: An investigation of the Irish Bridge, MIS Quarterly 32(2): 257–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, K.S. and Wood-Harper, T.A. (2006). The Shaping of I.T. Trajectories: Evidence from the U.K. public sector, European Journal of Information Systems 15(2): 214–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J.C., Newell, S. and Pan, S.-L. (2001). The Process of Global Knowledge Integration: A case study of a multinational investment bank’s Y2K Program, European Journal of Information Systems 10(3): 161–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R. and Noble, G. (2007). Grounded Theory and Management Research: A lack of integrity? Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An international journal 2(2): 84–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. and Hughes, J. (2001). Understanding IS Evaluation as a Complex Social Process: A case study of a UK local authority, European Journal of Information Systems 10(4): 189–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keddy, B., Sims, S.L. and Stern, P.N. (1996). Grounded Theory and Feminist Research Methodology, Journal of Advanced Nursing 23(3): 448–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keil, M., Im, G.P. and Mähring, M. (2007). Reporting Bad News on Software Projects: The effects of culturally constituted views of face-saving, Information Systems Journal 17(1): 59–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelle, U. (2007). The Development of Categories: Different approaches in grounded theory, in A. Bryant and K. Charmaz (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, London: Sage, pp. 191–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, J. (1999). Axial Coding and the Grounded Theory Controversy, Western Journal of Nursing Research 21(6): 743–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khoo, H.M. and Robey, D. (2007). Deciding to Upgrade Packaged Software: A comparative case study of motives, contingencies and dependencies, European Journal of Information Systems 16(5): 555–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch, L.J. (1997). Portfolios of Control Modes and IS Project Management, Information Systems Research 8(3): 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch, L.J. (2004). Deploying Common Systems Globally: The dynamics of control, Information Systems Research 15(4): 374–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H.K. and Myers, M.D. (1999). A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly 23(1): 67–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. (2001). Asynchronous and Distributed Process Improvement: The role of collaborative technologies, Information Systems Journal 11(2): 87–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, T.J., Niederman, F., Limayem, M. and Chan, J. (2007). The Role of Modelling in Achieving Information Systems Success: UML to the rescue? Information Systems Journal 19(1): 83–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonardi, P.M. (2011). When Flexible Routines Meet Flexible Technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies, MIS Quarterly 35(1): 147–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levina, N. and Ross, J.W. (2003). From the Vendor’s Perspective: Exploring the value proposition in information technology outsourcing, MIS Quarterly 27(3): 331–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, E.T.K., Pan, S.L. and Tan, C.W. (2005). Managing User Acceptance Towards Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems — Understanding the dissonance between user expectations and managerial policies, European Journal of Information Systems 14(2): 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindgren, R., Henfridsson, O. and Schultze, U. (2004). Design Principles for Competence Management Systems: A synthesis of an action research study, MIS Quarterly 28(3): 435–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, K. (1996). Rewriting the Discovery of Grounded Theory After 25 Years? Journal of Management Inquiry 5(3): 239–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maldonado, E. (2010). The Process of Introducing Floss in the Public Administration: The case of Venezuela, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 11(11): 756–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, M.L. and Silver, M.S. (2008). A Foundation for the Study of IT Effects: A new look at desanctis and poole’s concepts of structural features and spirit, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 9(10): 609–632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matavire, R. and Brown, I. (2011). Profiling Grounded Theory Approaches in Information Systems Research, European Journal of Information Systems 22(1): 119–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, Self and Society, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melia, K.M. (1996). Rediscovering Glaser, Qualitative Health Research 6(3): 368–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A sourcebook of new methods, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, J., Bonner, A. and Francis, K. (2006). The Development of Constructivist Grounded Theory, International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5(1): 25–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mourmant, G., Gallivan, M.J.M. and Kalika, M. (2009). Another Road to IT Turnover: The entrepreneurial path, European Journal of Information Systems 18(5): 498–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, P. and Finnegan, P. (2010). Intermediaries in Inter-Organisational Networks: Building a theory of electronic marketplace performance, European Journal of Information Systems 19(4): 462–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W.J. (1993). Case Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating incremental and radical changes in systems development, MIS Quarterly 17(3): 309–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W.J. and Iacono, C.S. (2001). Research Commentary: Desperately seeking the ‘IT’ in IT research — A call to theorizing the IT artifact, Information Systems Research 12(2): 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauleen, D.J. (2003). An Inductively Derived Model of Leader-Initiated Relationship Building with Virtual Team Members, Journal of Management Information Systems 20(3): 227–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramesh, B., Cao, L. and Baskerville, R. (2010). Agile Requirements Engineering Practices and Challenges: An empirical study, Information Systems Journal 20(5): 449–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remus, U. and Wiener, M. (2010). A Multi-Method, Holistic Strategy for Researching Critical Success Factors in IT Projects, Information Systems Journal 20(1): 25–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robrecht, L.C. (1995). Grounded Theory: Evolving methods, Qualitative Health Research 5(2): 169–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, G. and Valverde, M. (2006). Waiting in Line for Online Services: A qualitative study of the user’s perspective, Information Systems Journal 16(2): 181–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, S.D. and Harrison, D.A. (2000). Considering Social Subsystem Costs and Benefits in Information Technology Investment Decisions: A view from the field on anticipated payoffs, Journal of Management Information Systems 16(4): 11–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultze, U. (2000). A Confessional Account of an Ethnography about Knowledge Work, MIS Quarterly 24(1): 3–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J.E. (2000). Facilitating Interorganizational Learning with Information Technology, Journal of Management Information Systems 17(2): 81–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolander, K., Rossi, M. and Purao, S. (2008). Software Architectures: Blueprint, literature, language or decision? European Journal of Information Systems 17(6): 575–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spears, J.L. and Barki, H. (2010). User Participation in Information Systems Security Risk Management, MIS Quarterly 34(3): 503–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.L. (1987). Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists, Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research, 1st edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1994a). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques, Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1994b). Grounded Theory Methodology: An overview, in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 273–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd edn, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J.M. (1997). Grounded Theory in Practice, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strong, D.M. and Volkoff, O. (2010). Understanding Organization-Enterprise System Fit: A path to theorizing the information technology artifact, MIS Quarterly 34(4): 731–756.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R. (2006). What Grounded Theory Is Not, Academy of Management Journal 49(4): 633–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C. (2001). An Encounter with Grounded Theory: Tackling the practical and philosophical issues, in E.M. Trauth (ed.) Qualitative Research in IS: Issues and trends, Hershey, PA: IGI Publishing, pp. 104–140.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C. (2007). The Evolving Nature of Grounded Theory Method: The Case of the Information Systems Discipline, in A. Bryant and K. Charmaz (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, London: Sage, pp. 339–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C. (2013). Grounded Theory for Qualitative Research: A practical guide, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C., Lehmann, H. and Myers, M.D. (2010). Putting the ‘Theory’ Back into Grounded Theory: Guidelines for grounded theory studies in information systems, Information Systems Journal 20(4): 357–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Niekerk, J.C. and Roode, J.D. (2009). Glaserian and Straussian Grounded Theory: Similar or completely different? Paper presented at the Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists, Vaal River, South Africa.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R. and Cleven, A. (2009). Reconstructing the Giant: On the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2009), Verona, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, D. and Myrick, F. (2006). Grounded Theory: An exploration of process and procedure, Qualitative Health Research 16(4): 547–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive Case Studies in IS Research: Nature and method, European Journal of Information Systems 4(2): 74–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, R. (2001). Research in Information Systems: What we haven’t learned, MIS Quarterly 25(4): v–xv.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, B. and Mallon, B. (2007). A Method to Bridge the Gap between Breadth and Depth in IS Narrative Analysis, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(7): 368–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Work, B. (2002). Patterns of Software Quality Management in Tickit Certified Firms, European Journal of Information Systems 11(1): 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, P. and Ramesh, B. (2007). Software Process Tailoring: An empirical investigation, Journal of Management Information Systems 24(2): 293–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R.K. (2003). Case Study Research. Design and Methods, London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Information Systems, University of Liechtenstein, Vaduz, Liechtenstein

    Stefan Seidel

  2. Manchester Metropolitan University Business School, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK

    Cathy Urquhart

Authors
  1. Stefan Seidel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cathy Urquhart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. London School of Economics and Political Science, UK

    Leslie P. Willcocks

  2. Oxford University, UK

    Chris Sauer

  3. University of Missouri-St Louis, USA

    Mary C. Lacity

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Association for Information Technology Trust

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Seidel, S., Urquhart, C. (2016). On Emergence and Forcing in Information Systems Grounded Theory Studies: The Case of Strauss and Corbin. In: Willcocks, L.P., Sauer, C., Lacity, M.C. (eds) Enacting Research Methods in Information Systems: Volume 1. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29266-3_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation