On the adaptation of Grounded Theory procedures: insights from the evolution of the 2G method

Abstract

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 Grounded Theory (GT) and developers of IS methods on how GT procedures have been interpreted and adapted in previous and the authors' own research. Originality/value -Provides insights into how Grounded Theory (GT) procedures have been adapted for use in other IS methods, with insights from the authors' own experience of having developed the 2G method. Reflects on the use of GT procedures in a number of case studies related to tool evaluation. Identifies six areas in which specific interpretations or adaptations of GT were considered necessary in the contexts in which the studies were undertaken, and justifies these six departures from standard interpretations of GT procedures.

Professional designers' adaptations of IEC 61499 to their individual work practices

“…The transcribed material was then coded freely with 'open codes' that emerged from the interviews (see e.g. [13]), and recurring themes and concepts were identified based on these open codes. The most prominent concepts are discussed in the next section.…”

“…Even when software development methodologies are used with some success, the engineers must possess a certain background knowledge that is not provided by the method [8]; this background knowledge, the experience and personal problem solving practices of an individual designer, is depicted at the lowest level of our framework. The adaptation and adoption of methods is context dependent and requires research in that context [13]; this paper focuses on the impact of automation designers' existing individual work practices on the use of IEC 61499, and vice-versa.…”

Professional identity construction among software engineering students

“…Grounded theory (GT) method seems to be appropriate for these types of studies as it allows theory generation based on systematic data collection and data analysis. Interest in GT has increased among the researchers in this field, as evidenced in recent publications in core IT and software journals (Day, 2007;Kunda and Brooks, 2000;Lings and Lundell, 2005;Morisio et al, 2002;Ramesh et al, 2002;Scott et al, 2002). In the present work, we followed GT approach to understand the mechanism of professional identity construction among software engineering students.…”

Modelo de identificação e análise de impactos da implantação de ferramentas case.

“…Diversos modelos presentes na literatura identificam e auxiliam na análise dos impactos da implantação de ferramentas CASE nas organizações, com os mais diversos focos: a) Quantitativo e focado em impactos relacionados ao processo de desenvolvimento -Insertion Impact Analysis Method de Bruckhaus (1995de Bruckhaus ( , 1997 b) Focados em utilizar indicadores econômicos para a avaliação dos impactos da ferramenta -EcoPost de Mutschler et al (2006); c) Focados em aspectos organizacionais e aspectos qualitativos -2G de Lundell e Lings (2003Lings ( , 2005, modelo de Orlikowski (1993) Kitchenhan (1996Kitchenhan ( , 1997.…”

“…Lings (2003Lings ( , 2005 Para fazer a avaliação, o método constrói relacionamentos através dos dados coletados nas entrevistas e em outras fontes de dados encontradas na organização, para identificar pontos importantes para a escolha e avaliação da ferramenta CASE com o foco na perspectiva organizacional e na perspectiva tecnológica. Desses dados são criados indicadores baseados na interação entre a perspectiva organizacional e a perspectiva tecnológica, considerando assim, fatores relacionados com a organização, como por exemplo, estratégias de longo prazo da organização e relacionadas com as características das ferramentas, como por exemplo, necessidades tecnológicas específicas do processo de desenvolvimento.…”