How to Develop a Multi-Grounded Theory: the evolution of a business process theory

In the information systems field there is a great need for different theories. Theory development can be performed in different ways – deductively and/or inductively. Different approaches with their pros and cons for theory development exists. A combined approach, which builds on inductive as well as deductive thinking, has been put forward – a Multi-Grounded Theory approach. In this paper the evolution of a business process theory is regarded as the development of a multi-grounded theory. This evolution is based on empirical studies, theory-informed conceptual development and the creation of conceptual cohesion. The theoretical development has involved a dialectic approach aiming at a theoretical synthesis based on antagonistic theories. The result of this research process was a multi-grounded business process theory. Multi-grounded means that the theory is empirically, internally and theoretically founded. This business process theory can be used as an aid for business modellers to direct attention towards relevant aspects when business process determination is performed.

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

[2]  Mikael Lind,et al.  Problems with Communication Quality in Commitment Management , 2005 .

[3]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  The Problem of Agency; How Humans Act, How Machines Act , 2003 .

[4]  Anders Hjalmarsson,et al.  Modelling interaction and co-ordination as business communication in a mail-order setting , 2003 .

[5]  Pär J. Ågerfalk.  Grounding through operationalization: constructing tangible theory in IS research , 2004, ECIS.

[6]  B. Glaser.  Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence Vs. Forcing , 1992 .

[7]  Vernon E. Cronen,et al.  Practical theory, practical art, and the pragmatic‐systemic account of inquiry , 2001 .

[8]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of Qualitative Research , 1992 .

[9]  A. Koller,et al.  Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language , 1969 .

[10]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Continual Permutations of Action. , 1993 .

[11]  Allen S. Lee,et al.  Information systems and qualitative research , 1997 .

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

[13]  Göran Goldkuhl,et al.  Multi-grounded theory - Adding theoretical grounding to grounded theory , 2003 .

[14]  Göran Goldkuhl,et al.  BEYOND GOODS AND SERVICES - AN ELABORATE PRODUCT CLASSIFICATION ON PRAGMATIC GROUNDS , 2000 .

[15]  Stefan Cronholm,et al.  Grounded Theory in Use - a Review of Experiences , 2002 .

[16]  Göran Goldkuhl,et al.  Towards an integral understanding of organizations and information systems: Convergence of three theories , 2002 .

[17]  M. Hammer,et al.  REENGINEERING THE CORPORATION: A MANIFESTO FOR BUSINESS REVOLUTION , 1995 .

[18]  Ewa Braf,et al.  Knowledge demanded for action : studies of knowledge mediation in organisations , 2004 .

[19]  Mikael Lind,et al.  The generics of business interaction - emphasizing dynamic features through the BAT model , 2004 .

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

[21]  Jan L. G. Dietz,et al.  Understanding and Modelling Business Processes with DEMO , 1999, ER.

[22]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through Information Technology , 1992 .

[23]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[24]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Qualitative Analysis For Social Scientists , 1987 .

[25]  Börje Langefors,et al.  Theoretical analysis of information systems , 1973 .

[26]  Fredrik Karlsson,et al.  Method configuration: method and computerized tool support , 2005 .

[27]  Göran Goldkuhl.  Anchoring scientific abstractions - ontological and linguistic determination following socio-instrumental pragmatism , 2002 .

[28]  Mikael Lind,et al.  Dividing Businesses into Processes Foundations for Modelling Essentials , 2002 .

[29]  H. Blumer.  What Is Wrong with Social Theory , 1954 .

[30]  J. Dewey.  Logic, the theory of inquiry , 1938 .

[31]  Göran Goldkuhl,et al.  Conceptual Determination when Developing a Multi-Grounded Theory - Example : Defining ISD Method , 2004 .

[32]  Göran Goldkuhl,et al.  Designing Business Process Variants - Using the BAT Framework as a Pragmatic Lens , 2005, Business Process Management Workshops.

[33]  G. Goldkuhl.  Meanings of Pragmatism: Ways to conduct information systems research , 2004 .

[34]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Understanding computers and cognition - a new foundation for design , 1987 .

[35]  Terry Winograd,et al.  The action workflow approach to workflow management technology , 1992, CSCW '92.

[36]  M. Alvesson,et al.  Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research , 2000, QMiP Bulletin.

[37]  A. Kellerman,et al.  The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration , 2015 .

[38]  H. Harrington.  Business process improvement : the breakthrough strategy for total quality, productivity, and competitiveness , 1991 .

[39]  B. Latour.  Technology is Society Made Durable , 1990 .

[40]  A. Bryant.  Re-grounding Grounded Theory , 2002 .

[41]  R. Hirschheim,et al.  The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead ... long live the paradigm: the legacy of Burrell and Morgan , 2000 .

[42]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Special issue on action research in information systems: making is research relevant to practice--foreword , 2004 .