Grounded Problem & Theory Building

MGMT 8101, Theory Building & Research Design

Notes by Prof. Andy Van de Ven

Plan for Class

• Case studies for grounded problem & theory building
• Discussion of Yin and supplementary readings
• Review student problem statements on web page
• Solving problems with problem statements
Key Point:
Problem Formulation is a grounded theory building process

© Andrew H. Van de Ven, Carlson School, U. of Minnesota, MGMT8101 Theory Building & Research Design PhD Seminar, Spring 2006

Grounded Theory (GT) Building

• … Not a specific method, but a style of doing qualitative
analysis that includes some distinct features, such as
theoretical sampling, use of constant comparisons, and
coding schemes undertaken to explain complex
phenomena (Strauss, 1987).

• Basic question: How capture & explain the complexity of

reality (phenomena) we study?
– Observe reality to appreciate its complexity
– Guide data collection & analysis by successive evolving
interpretations.
– Develop a conceptually rich theory that avoids simplistic
& thin renderings of phenomena in the literature.
Sources: Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine.
Strauss, A. L., 1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.

1
 Deduction, Induction & Abduction
• All scientific theories must be conceived, then
elaborated & then checked out.
• GT calls this induction, deduction & verification
– “Few make the mistake of believing these stood in a
simple sequential relationship… Many mistakenly refer to
grounded theory as “inductive theory” … All three
aspects of inquiry are absolutely essential (Strauss, 1987:
11-12).
• Abduction: inferring a theory/hypothesis to
explain observed patterns that go beyond the
specific case (Peirce, 1955).

Clayton M. Christensen and David M. Sundahl (2001)

2
 Daugherty’s Principles & Rules for GTB
Principles Rules of Thumb for Applying Principle to
Research Practice
GTB Should Capture the Inherent Rule #1: Explore unique characteristics of a
Complexity of Social Life phenomenon.

Rules # 2: Look for social action that underlies

manifest structures

The Researcher Must Interact Rules # 3: Data must reflect, convey social action,
Deeply With the Data meaning

Rule # 4: Subjectivity Cannot be eliminated

Grounded Theory Intertwines Rule # 5: Ground problem statement in the

Research Tasks: Each Is Done In phenomenon.
Terms of Others
Rule # 6: The analysis process determines what
data to get, how much data

Grounded Theory Building Stands Rule # 7: GTB should not be confused with
on Its Own Merits exploratory or pre-testing studies

Rules # 8: “Validity” and “reliability” depend on

coherence, consistency, plausibility and usefulness

Deborah Daugherty, Grounded theory building research: Some principles and practices, in Baum (ed) Companion to Organizations, 2001

Case Study for Theory/Problem Formulation

• Case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a
contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context,
especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and
context are not clearly evident (Yin, 2003: 13).
• Includes single & multiple cases; relies on comparative method.
• Relies on quantitative & qualitative data using multiple sources.
• Ideal for problem formulation and grounded theory building.
• Relies on analytical generalization to theories
– not recommended for statistical generalization to population
• Geared to “how” and “why” questions.

• Principle source: Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research

• Supplementary sources: Barley (1990), Dougerty (2001), Eisenhardt (1989),
Miles & Huberman (1994), Strauss (1987), Tsoukas (1989).

3
 Case Study as a Research Strategy

Statistical Generalization – Making inferences to population based on sample data

as done in sampling units in survey research (level 1)
Analytical Generalization – Making inferences to a theory or rival theory (level 2)
Like experiments, case studies should be used
to generalize to plausible alternative theories.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Kinds of Plausible Alternative Rival Explanations

The more rivals that your analysis (diagnosis) addresses and rejects,
the more confidence you can place in your findings (Yin, 2003: 113)
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, p. 113.

4
5
Eisenhardt: Building Theory from Case Study
Step Activity

Getting Started Situate problem/phenomenon: perspective, focus, level, scope

Define research question; start with journalist’s questions
Selecting Cases Use theoretical/analytical, not statistical population sampling

Instruments Triangulate; use multiple data collection methods

Entering field Overlap data collection and analysis to sharpen concepts

-- If foggy at first, they will defog with field work
Analyzing data Within-case for up-close particulars; Cross-case for patterns

Enfolding literature Compare similar and conflicting literature

Shaping Iterate above three steps; search for “why?” and “how?”
hypotheses Use abductive logic to develop alternative conjectures
Reaching Closure Theoretical saturation on research question
Go beyond the information given (Bruner)
Adapted from Kathleen Eisenhardt, Building Theories from Case Study Research, AMR, 14, 4 (1989), p. 533.

6
 Yin, R. K. (2003) p. 86

Triangulation:
Multiple sources
aimed at corroborating
the same fact or
phenomenon

Multi-method:
Multiple sources
each aimed at a
different fact or
phenomenon.

Types of Triangulation
1. Of data sources (shown above)
2. Of different investigators on same research question
3. Of perspectives on the same data set (theory triangulation)
4. Of methods on same perspective (e.g., case, survey, experiment)
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, p. 100

7
 Iterative Activities in Case Data Analysis
• Data Reduction – selecting, abstracting, & transforming
“raw” data (words, sentences, field notes, records) into
meaningful units of observation.
– Classifying data into concepts “that carve at the joints” (Plato)
• Data Display – an organized assembly of information that
permits conclusion drawing and action.
– You know what you display.
• Conclusion drawing/inferences – identifying relations
among concepts
– Regularities, patterns, configurations, causal flows, propositions
• Useful Source:
– Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis:
An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Criteria for Judging the Quality of Research Design

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, p. 34.

8
 Problem Formulation is a GTB Process
Situating Problem
(perspective, focus,
level & scope)

Grounding Problem
(up close & from afar)

Diagnosing Problem
(Heuristic matching
of data & theory)

Resolving Problem
(research question)
Activities and their relations over time

Mgmt 8101 Research Problem Formulation Report Evaluation Form

Revised Version
Criteria for evaluating the problem formulation report:

1. The problem/phenomenon is clearly situated

• In terms of perspective, focus, level, and scope

2. The problem/phenomenon is clearly grounded in reality

• It states who, what, where, when, why & how the problem exists
• in particular (up close) with example, experience or observations
• in general (from afar) with data on prevalence and context of problem

3. The problem is clearly diagnosed

• data elements are defined and classified into key categories or concepts
• patterns or relationships among categories are analyzed and aggregated
• A heuristic inference (a claim with reasons) is made for the problem
• The problem is refined to fit the particular case

4. The research question:

• is stated in analytical and researchable terms.
• permits more than one plausible answer.