Back to Search Start Over

Rejoinder.

Authors :
Walsh, Isabelle
Holton, Judith A.
Bailyn, Lotte
Fernandez, Walter
Levina, Natalia
Glaser, Barney
Source :
Organizational Research Methods; Oct2015, Vol. 18 Issue 4, p620-628, 9p
Publication Year :
2015

Abstract

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
10944281
Volume :
18
Issue :
4
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Organizational Research Methods
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
109386415
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115589189