This commentary offers reflections on the conversation about grounded theory in management and organization studies. It highlights the institutional context in which we are having this conversation, noting its consequences for grounded theory practice. It also raises questions about the definition and boundaries of grounded theory, including the role of theory in the analytic process, and it argues for a pragmatic consideration of its research practices.
AdlerP. S. (2009). A science which forgets its founders is lost. In AdlerP. S. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of sociology and organizations: Classical foundations (pp. 3–19). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
2.
AgarM. (1999). How to ask for a study in qualitatitish. Qualitative Health Research, 9(5), 684–697.
3.
AgarM. (2004). We have met the other and we are all nonlinear: Ethnography as a nonlinear dynamic system. Complexity, 10(2), 16–24.
4.
AllwoodC. (2012). The distinction between qualitative and quantitative research is problematic. Quality and Quantity, 46, 1417–1429.
5.
BeckerH. S. (2000). Response to the “Manifesto.”Ethnography, 1, 257–260.
BrymanA. (1984). The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: A question of method or epistemology?British Journal of Sociology, 35, 75–92.
8.
BrymanA. (1995). Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge.
9.
ColquittJ.Zapata-PhelanC. P. (2007). Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1281–1303.
10.
CovanE. K. (2007). The discovery of grounded theory in practice: The legacy of multiple mentors. In BryantA.CharmazK. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory (pp. 58–74). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
CreswellJ. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
GarverE. (2001). Science and teaching reasoning. Argumentation, 15, 1–7.
HambrickD. C. (2007). The field of management’s devotion to theory: Too much of a good thing?Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1346–1352.
15.
HammersleyM. (1992). Deconstructing the qualitative-quantitative divide. In BrannenJ. (Ed.), Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative research (pp. 39–55). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Company.
16.
HammersleyM. (1996). The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Paradigm loyalty versus methodological eclecticism. In RichardsonT. S. (Ed.), Qualitative research methods in psychology and the social sciences (pp. 159–174). Leicester: BPS Books.
17.
HansonN. (1958). Patterns of discovery: An enquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18.
HiningsC. R.GreenwoodR. (2002). Disconnect and consequences in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 411–421.
19.
HintikkaJ.1999. Inquiry as inquiry: A logic of scientific discovery. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing.
20.
HintikkaJ.2001. Is logic the key to all good reasoning. Argumentation, 15, 35–57.
21.
KelleU. (2005). Emergence vs. forcing of empirical data? A crucial problem of grounded theory reconsidered. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2), Art. 27. Retrieved fromhttp://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0502275
22.
KelleU. (2007). The development of categories: Different approaches in grounded theory. In BryantA.CharmazK. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory (pp. 245–264). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
LaudanL. (1977). Progress and its problems. Towards a theory of scientific growth. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
24.
LockeE. A. (2007). The case for inductive theory building. Journal of Management, 33, 867–890.
25.
LockeK. (2011). Field research practice in management and organization studies: Reclaiming its tradition of discovery. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 613–652.
26.
LockeK.Golden-BiddleK. (1997). Constructing opportunities for contribution: Structuring intertextual coherence and problematizing in organizational studies. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1023–1063.
27.
MillsC. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
28.
MorseJ. M.SternP. N.CorbinJ.BowersB.CharmazK.ClarkeA. E. (2009). Developing grounded theory: The second generation. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
29.
SandelowskiM.VoilsC. I.KnaflG. (2009). On quantitizing. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3, 208–222.
30.
ScottW. R. (2004). Reflections on a half-century of organizational sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 1–21.
31.
SpectorP. E.RogelbergS. G.RyanA. M.SchmittN.ZedeckS. (2014). Moving the pendulum back to the middle: Reflections on and introduction to the inductive research special issue of Journal of Business and Psychology. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 499–502.
32.
StarS. L. (2007). Living grounded theory: Cognitive and emotional forms of pragmatism. In BryantA.CharmazK. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory (pp. 75–94). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
StraussA.CorbinJ. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory techniques and procedures. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
SuddabyR. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 633–642.
35.
TurnerB. 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, 225–246.
36.
TurnerB. A. (1983). The use of grounded theory for the qualitative analysis of organizational behavior. Journal of Management Studies, 20, 333–348.
37.
Van de VenA. (2015). Welcome to the academy of management discoveries. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1, 1–4.
38.
Van MaanenJ. (1979). Reclaiming qualitative methods for organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 520–529.
39.
Van MaanenJ. (2011). Ethnography as work: Some rules of engagement. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 2018–2234.
