2G.">On the adaptation of Grounded Theory procedures: insights from the evolution of the 2G

Purpose – To articulate the interpretations and adaptations of Grounded Theory made within the 2G method, and the motivations behind them.Design/methodology/approach – Literature review and conceptual approach reflecting on the authors' experience of having developed the 2G method.Findings – Identifies six adaptations of Grounded Theory as being of particular interest. Five relate to method procedures, namely: developing a core category; coding interview data; exposing evolving theories to stakeholders; developing multiple concept frameworks; and inter‐linking concepts. The sixth relates to expectations on method users, and the tension between expertise relating to the phenomenon being analysed, and openness in interpreting the data.Research limitations/implications – Shows how Grounded Theory procedures have been adapted and used in IS methods. Specifically, the paper illustrates and makes explicit how a specific method (the 2G method) has evolved.Practical implications – Provides insights for users of G...

[1]  C. Brodsky The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research , 1968 .

[2]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[3]  B. Glaser Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory , 1978 .

[4]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. , 1993 .

[5]  Bengt Starrin,et al.  Från upptäckt till presentation : Om kvalitativ metod och teorigenerering på empirisk grund , 1991 .

[6]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. , 1992 .

[7]  Lorraine M. Duvall,et al.  A study of software management: The state of practice in the United States and Japan , 1995, J. Syst. Softw..

[8]  Anders Nilsson Evolution of Methodologies for Information Systems Work : A Historical Perspective , 1995 .

[9]  Rebecca E. Grinter Understanding the role of configuration management systems in software development , 1996, CHI Conference Companion.

[10]  J. T. Black Who's the customer? , 1996 .

[11]  Victor R. Basili,et al.  An Empirical Study of Communication in Code Inspections , 1997, Proceedings of the (19th) International Conference on Software Engineering.

[12]  Gerry Larsson,et al.  Along the path of discovery : Qualitative methods and grounded theory , 1997 .

[13]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Coordination problems and method features , 1998, Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[14]  J. R. G. Wood,et al.  A further exploration into information systems development: the evolution of Multiview2 , 1998, Inf. Technol. People.

[15]  Victor R. Basili,et al.  Communication and Organization: An Empirical Study of Discussion in Inspection Meetings , 1998, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[16]  J Hughes,et al.  The development of the GIST (Grounding Information Systems) methodology: determining situated requirements in information systems analysis , 1998 .

[17]  Björn Lundell,et al.  Method support for developing evaluation frameworks for CASE tool evaluation , 1998 .

[18]  B. Glaser Doing grounded theory : issues and discussions , 1998 .

[19]  Debra Howcroft,et al.  Grounded Theory: I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it , 1999 .

[20]  Carolyn B. Seaman,et al.  Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering , 1999, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[21]  Guillermo Owen Applications of Game Theory to Economic Equilibrium , 1999, IGTR.

[22]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Grounded action research: a method for understanding IT in practice , 1999 .

[23]  Galal H. Galal-Edeen,et al.  A Qualitative Scenario Approach to Managing Evolving Requirements , 1999, Requirements Engineering.

[24]  B. Glaser The Future of Grounded Theory , 1999 .

[25]  J. Kendall Axial Coding and the Grounded Theory Controversy , 1999, Western journal of nursing research.

[26]  Laurence Brooks,et al.  Assessing organisational obstacles to component-based development: a case study approach , 2000, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[27]  Adam Rehbinder,et al.  Developing a Framework for Pre-usage Evaluations of CASE-tools: a field-study , 2000 .

[28]  Debra Howcroft,et al.  Grounded Theory: never knowingly understood , 2000 .

[29]  M. Hill,et al.  Who's the customer? , 2000, Dermatology nursing.

[30]  G H Galal,et al.  From contexts to constructs: the use of grounded theory in operationalising contingent process models , 2001 .

[31]  C. Urquhart An encounter with grounded theory: tackling the practical and philosophical issues , 2001 .

[32]  Maurizio Morisio,et al.  COTS-based software development: Processes and open issues , 2002, J. Syst. Softw..

[33]  Björn Lundell,et al.  Comments on ISO 14102: the standard for CASE-tool evaluation , 2002, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.

[34]  E. Jones,et al.  A grounded theory approach to modelling learnability of hypermedia authoring tools , 2002, Interact. Comput..

[35]  John D'Ambra,et al.  Understanding the use of an electronic process guide , 2002, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[36]  Akhilesh Bajaj,et al.  An estimation of the decision models of senior IS managers when evaluating the external quality of organizational software , 2002, J. Syst. Softw..

[37]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Internet Software Engineering: A Different Class of Processes , 2002, Ann. Softw. Eng..

[38]  Björn Lundell,et al.  The 2G method for doubly grounding evaluation frameworks , 2003, Inf. Syst. J..

[39]  Brian Fitzgerald,et al.  Software development method tailoring at Motorola , 2003, CACM.

[40]  Guy Fitzgerald,et al.  Where now for development methodologies? , 2003, CACM.

[41]  Björn Lundell,et al.  On Understanding Evaluation of Tool Support for IS Development , 2004, Australas. J. Inf. Syst..

[42]  Brian Lings,et al.  Method in action and method in tool: a stakeholder perspective , 2004, J. Inf. Technol..

[43]  Björn Lundell,et al.  Taking Steps to Improve Working Practice: A Company Experience of Method Transfer , 2004, IT Innovation for Adaptability and Competitiveness.

[44]  Björn Lundell,et al.  On Transferring a Method into a Usage Situation , 2004, Relevant Theory and Informed Practice.