Barney G. Glaser

The Future of Grounded Theory

This keynote address does not detail a “wish list”; it is not an ideology. Rather, it is a grounded analysis of data from the author’s travels that indicates what the future of grounded theory is likely to be. The author discusses in whose hands the future of grounded theory appears to be as well as what accounts for its spread, its use, and its misuse.

Discovery of Substantive Theory: A Basic Strategy Underlying Qualitative Research

The authors contend that qualitative research should be scrutinized for its usefulness in the discovery of substantive theory. They try to present generic elements of the process of generating substantive theory from qualitative data, and consider how the researcher collects and analyzes qualitative data, max imizes the theorys credibility, puts trust in his theory, and conveys the theory to others. Drs. Glaser and Strauss are affiliated with the University of California Medical Center in San Francisco.

The Local-Cosmopolitan Scientist

In Contrast to previous discussions in the literature treating cosmopolitan and local as two distinct groups of scientists, this paper demonstrates the notion of cosmopolitan and local as a dual orientation of highly motivated scientists. This dual orientation is derived from institutional motivation, which is a determinant of both high quality basic research and accomplishment of non-research organizational activities. The dual orientation arises in a context of similarity of the institutional goal of science with the goal of the organization; the distinction between groups of locals and cosmopolitans derives from a conflict between the two goals.

Temporal Aspects of Dying as a Non-Scheduled Status Passage

In this paper we conceptualize dying as a non-scheduled status passage, which has led us to consider problems of how the people involved handle its timing. The analysis focuses on temporal aspects of the central issues of (1) legitimating when the passage occurs, (2) announcing the passage to others, and (3) co-ordinating the passage.

Retreading Research Materials: The Use of Secondary Analysis by the Independent Researcher:

Attn1ysi.s of existing data originally collected for other purposes is A renicrly for many of the aflictions that beset the inquiring sociologist. It fills the research tiecds of persons with niacrointerest and niicro-resorirces, resolocs the strrdcnt’s “all but finished dissertation” probleni, palliates the rcsenrch-team member’s occasional eiinrii aad alienation, and far from least can letid new strength to the body of frindanmital social knotcletlge. The prescriptiom of Dr. Glaser, of the Uniccrsity of California Afedical Center at Sati Francisco, appcor toidely applicable.

What Grounded Theory Is…A Critically Reflective Conversation Among Scholars:

Grounded theory (GT) is taught in many doctoral schools across the world and exemplified in most methodological books and publications in top-tier journals as a qualitative research method. This limited view of GT does not allow full use of possible resources and restrains researchers’ creativity and capabilities. Thus, it blocks some innovative possibilities and the emergence of valuable theories, which are badly needed. Therefore, understanding the full reach and scope of GT is becoming urgent, and we brought together a panel of established grounded theory scholars to help us in this endeavor through a reflective conversation.

SECONDARY ANALYSIS: A STRATEGY FOR THE USE OF KNOWLEDGE FROM RESEARCH ELSEWHERE

out too much chance of the perpetrators being caught. The boys reacted accordingly. Direct observation of the antiSemitic children in the New York sample (not the youths over 16) indicated that, by and large, they were not arrogant, swashbuckling personalities. Even the most aggressively antiSemitic among them tended rather to be beset with feelings of weakness and ineffectiveness, frustrated in their capacity to achieve and unable or unwilling to assert themselves openly. These children were inclined to be

Rejoinder Moving the Management Field Forward

It has become essential and urgent that significant actors in the management field of research become aware of the current rejection of previously accepted philosophical caricatures. The unrealistic though “tidy” paradigmatic dichotomy, positivism/quantitative/deduction versus interpretivism/qualitative/induction, is being rejected. Instead, a growing and “untidy” consensus is emerging that helps to position grounded theory (GT) in the research landscape. This growing consensus includes perspectives that range from nomothetic to idiographic and highlights data-driven exploratory approaches in opposition to theory-driven confirmatory approaches. While the foundational pillars of GT (emergence, theoretical sampling, and constant comparison) have to be respected when conducting a GT study, there certainly is plenty of room for creativity in the implementation of a data-driven exploratory GT approach. GT is not limited to an all-encompassing method for qualitative or interpretive research: It is much broader ...It has become essential and urgent that significant actors in the management field of research become aware of the current rejection of previously accepted philosophical caricatures. The unrealistic though “tidy” paradigmatic dichotomy, positivism/quantitative/deduction versus interpretivism/qualitative/induction, is being rejected. Instead, a growing and “untidy” consensus is emerging that helps to position grounded theory (GT) in the research landscape. This growing consensus includes perspectives that range from nomothetic to idiographic and highlights data-driven exploratory approaches in opposition to theory-driven confirmatory approaches. While the foundational pillars of GT (emergence, theoretical sampling, and constant comparison) have to be respected when conducting a GT study, there certainly is plenty of room for creativity in the implementation of a data-driven exploratory GT approach. GT is not limited to an all-encompassing method for qualitative or interpretive research: It is much broader and may be applied from various philosophical perspectives that range from nomothetic to idiographic.

The impact of differential promotion systems on careers

Two promotion systems are shown to differ in two steps of procedure: noticeability and merit. In one system the scientist must depend completely on being noticeable to be recommended and worthy to be promoted. In the other system these two steps are buttressed by periodic consideration and routine promotion for length of service. The general impact of this difference is that the former system results in more discrepancies between rank and responsibility or competence and is appraised as less satisfactory. The impact on careers shows less satisfaction with promotion chances and job security and a longer wait for promotion in the former system. Professional recognition is shown to be a way of coping with the system demands of being both noticeable and worthy. Some practical implications of this type analysis of reward systems are discussed.