Case Studies And Grounded Theory Method In Information Systems Research: Issues And Use

Author(s):  
Walter D. Fernandez ◽  
Hans Lehmann
2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohanad Halaweh

This paper argues that the grounded theory method (GTM) is a positivist-oriented research method from a methodological standpoint. It argues that following the systematic procedures, principles, and mechanism of conducting the research and creating knowledge and theories, and the unavoidable influence of the literature, places GTM under the umbrella of the positivist paradigm. It also sheds some light on practical issues that information systems (IS) researchers face when applying GTM such as applying theoretical sampling and coding in GTM, concerns of presenting GTM data, and the politics of applying GTM. These issues, which are methodological in nature, and their implications will also be discussed.


Author(s):  
Brian J. Corbitt ◽  
Konrad J. Peszynski ◽  
Saranond Inthanond ◽  
Byron Hill

This paper explores an alternative way of framing information systems research on the role and impact of national culture. It argues that the widely accepted structural framework of Hofstede reduces interpretation to a simplistic categorical description which in many cases ignores differentiation within cultures. The alternative model suggests, that national culture can be better understood by seeking out the dominant codes that frame the discourse pervasive in a culture and understanding how that discourse affects the obvious social codes of ritual, custom and behavior and the textual codes which express the nature of that culture. This framework is applied to two different case studies — one in New Zealand and one in Thailand — to demonstrate its applicability.


2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 224-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathy Urquhart ◽  
Walter Fernández

The use of grounded theory method (GTM) as a research method in information systems (IS) has gradually increased over the years as qualitative research in general has become more prevalent. The method offers a systematic way to generate theory from data, but is rarely used to its full potential in IS as a number of myths and misunderstandings about GTM prevent researchers from getting the full potential out of the method. To address this problem, we advance the general level of knowledge of GTM. We clarify aspects of the method that are often misunderstood by novice users or casual observers and provide guidance to address common problems. Exemplars from the IS literature are used to illustrate the concepts and to promote the informed use of the methodology. By doing so, this paper will contribute to improving the use of the method and to the quality and dissemination of grounded theory research outcomes.


Author(s):  
Sven A. Carlsson

The information systems (IS) field is dominated by positivistic research approaches and theories (Chen & Hirschheim, 2004). IS scholars have pointed out weaknesses in these approaches and theories and in response different strands of post-modern theories and constructivism have gained popularity— see, Lee, Liebenau, and DeGross (1997) and Trauth (2001). The approaches argued for include ethnography, constructivism, grounded theory, and theories like Giddens’ structuration theory and Latour’s actor-network theory. (We refer to these different research approaches and theories as “post-approaches” and “post-theories” when distinction is not required).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document