The article discusses common misconceptions of what grounded theory is not, by Roy Suddaby of Alberta, Canada. Grounded theory is not: presentation of raw data, or perfect or routine application of formulaic techniques to data. Grounded theory is not easy nor an excuse for the absence of methodology. It is not theory testing, content or word counts. Grounded theory is new modes of interaction and organization using methodology that is attentive to issues of interpretation and a process not binding itself too closely to longstanding assumptions.

REFERENCES

  • Barley S. R., 1986. Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from the observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31: 78–109. Google Scholar
  • Barley S. R., 1990. The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 61–104. Google Scholar
  • Bartunek J. M. , Rynes S. L. , Ireland R. D., 2006. What makes interesting research and why does it matter? Academy of Management Journal, 49: 9–15.AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Browning L. D. , Beyer J. M. , Shetler J. C., 1995. Building cooperation in a competitive industry: SEMAT-ECH and the semiconductor industry. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 113–151.AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Burrell G. , Morgan G., 1979. Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life. London: Heinemann. Google Scholar
  • Coase R., 1988. The firm, the market, and the law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  • Corbin J. , Strauss A., 1990. Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13: 3–21. Google Scholar
  • Gephart R. P., 2004. Qualitative research and the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 454–462.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Gersick C. J. G., 1988. Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model in group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31: 9–41.AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Glaser B. G., 1978. Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Google Scholar
  • Glaser B. G., 1992. Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Google Scholar
  • Glaser B. G. , Strauss A. L., 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine. Google Scholar
  • Goulding C., 2002. Grounded theory: A practical guide for management, business and market researchers. London: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Husserl E., 1969. Cartesian meditations: An introduction to phenomenology [D. Cairsn, trans.]. The Hague: Martinus-Nijhoff. Google Scholar
  • Isabella L. A., 1990. Evolving interpretations as change unfolds: How managers construe key organizational events. Academy of Management Journal, 33: 7–41.AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Krippendorff K., 2003. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Langley A., 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24: 691–710.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Locke K., 1996. Rewriting the discovery of grounded theory after 25 years? Journal of Management Inquiry, 5: 239–245. Google Scholar
  • Locke K., 2001. Grounded theory in management research. London: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Martin P. Y. , Turner B. A., 1986. Grounded theory and organizational research. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22: 141–157. Google Scholar
  • Morgan G. , Smircich L., 1980. The case for qualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5: 491–500.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Moustakas C., 1994. Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Parkhe A., 1993. “Messy” research, methodological predispositions and theory development in international joint ventures. Academy of Management Review, 18: 227–268.AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Peirce C. S., 1903. The essential Pierce: Selected philosophical writings, vol. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Google Scholar
  • Rynes S. L. , McNatt D. B. , Bretz R. D., 1999. Academic research inside organizations: Inputs, processes, and outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 52: 869–898. Google Scholar
  • Schutz A., 1972. The phenomenology of the social world. London: Heinemenn Educational Books. Google Scholar
  • Spindler G. , Spindler L., 1982. Roger Harker and Schonhausen: From the familiar to the strange and back. In G. Spindler (Ed.), Doing the anthropology of schooling: 21–46. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Google Scholar
  • Strauss A. , Corbin J., 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Sutton R. I., 1987. The process of organizational death: Disbanding and reconnecting. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32: 542–569. Google Scholar
  • Turner B. A., 1981. Some practical aspects of qualitative data analysis: One way of organizing the cognitive processes associated with the generation of grounded theory. Quality and Quantity, 15: 225–247. Google Scholar
  • Wimpenny P. , Gass J., 2000. Interviewing in phenomenology and grounded theory: Is there a difference? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31: 1485–1492. Google Scholar
Academy of Management
  Academy of Management
  100 Summit Lake Drive, Suite 110
  Valhalla, NY 10595, USA
  Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
  Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900