Grounded theory is an inductive methodological approach in social sciences and other related subjects. It generates theory about social processes, which are grounded in reality. Classic grounded theory is a unique inductive research approach with language, rules of rigor, procedures, and a final achievement, which is different from other research methods. The purpose of classic grounded theory is to theorize and facilitate an understanding of an effective knowledge, which is happening on the lives of people of the society. It represents grounded theory in a pure form, which emerges from the original work of Barney Galland Glaser (1930-2022) and Anselm Leonard Strauss (1916-1996) that is developed in 1967. It is the development of a theory from data with open ideas that comes from the data. This study tries to discuss a qualitative research design following a classic grounded theory approach through ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions of grounded theory. This study explores classic grounded theory approach including strengths and challenges of development in the social science.

There is an ongoing debate regarding the nature of grounded theory, and an examination of many studies claiming to follow grounded theory indicates a wide range of approaches. In 1967 Glaser and Strauss’s ‘‘The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research’’ was published and represented a breakthrough in qualitative research; it offered methodological consensus and systematic strategies for qualitative research practice. The defining characteristics of grounded theory include: simultaneous involvement in data collection and analysis, construction of analytic codes and categories from data (not from preconceived logical hypotheses), use of the constant comparative method/analysis that involves making comparisons during all steps of the analysis, developing theory during each step of data collection and analysis, memo-writing to elaborate categories, etc., theoretical sampling aiming toward theory construction (not representativeness), and conducting a literature review after performing the analysis and developing theory. When developing a theory, identification of a core category is central for the integration of other categories into a conceptual framework or theory grounded in the data. Most grounded theories are substantive theories because they address delimited problems in specific substantive areas. (Published: 15 June 2012) Citation: Int J Qualitative Stud Health Well-being 2012, 7 : 18571 - http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v7i0.18571

Grounded theory is considered one of the most rigorous methodologies in qualitative research. Debate on its philosophical paradigm has trended toward endless over the past 50 years, as it was not clarified in its first canon. Scholars from multiple disciplines and philosophical backgrounds have contributed throughout its development, necessitating a comparison of the evolving dynamics of philosophies in the key grounded theory methodological schools. This article provides a systematic comparison at both substantive and formal levels, analyzing the philosophical approaches and methodological designs of Glaser, Strauss and Corbin, and Charmaz. The philosophical paradigms chosen by these three key schools and how they are perceived by researchers who adopted grounded theory methodology are presented. Formal grounded theory methodological design is limited in comparison to substantive grounded theory methodology. A novel Weberian approach is proposed to re-ground formal grounded theory methodology; contributing to initial grounded theory methodological design.

Grounded theory is primarily used for exploring a relatively unknown phenomenon. Grounded theory methodology attempts to discern the meaning of people's experiences which provides the depth and richness of data not acquired by other means. The central feature of grounded theory methodology that differentiates it from other research approaches is that data are collected first and analyzed with the aim of theory development rather than the usual approach, which is the development of a hypothesis first and then proving or disproving the hypothesis through testing following data collection.

Grounded theory methodology (GTM) is an extensive research methodology that is immensely active in numerous social science research fields. It is by far one of the most popular techniques applied in qualitative research. The challenge in using such methods might appear in their complexity. Several steps of coding and analysis in GTM can be fuzzy and multifaceted for novice researchers specialised in Information Systems (IS) fields, knowledge management, and broad applications of IS. The current study suggests a design framework for novices in qualitative research that presents GTM as a set of techniques characterised graphically, allowing the extraction of grounded results and a set of pragmatic analysed data classifications rather than only concentrating on implementing a grounded “theory”. Hence, the research stresses using the term “grounded techniques”, permitting the creation of grounded categories to strengthen qualitative research results' rigour. The proposed framework meticulously exemplifies how an organised set of phases in a research design can enlighten the novice researcher while conducting a study in knowledge absorptive capacity using a comprehensive GTM process to enforce the understanding of GTM techniques.

The purpose of this paper is to review the crucial debate about undertaking a literature review and adopting an epistemological position in doing a grounded theory study. By relying on existing knowledge about the subject, three main Grounded Theory Approaches are discussed: Glaserian, Straussian, and Constructivist Grounded Theory Methodology. All of them differ somewhat both in adopting an epistemological stance that fits well with their research strategy and conducting a literature review at the earlier stages of the research process. The paper contributes to enhancing knowledge about Glaser’s dictum of ‘getting started’ which seems to be misunderstood by those who still misunderstand the Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) orthodoxy version.

Grounded theory (GT) has appeared as a popular research approach in many branches of social science that acts for the well-being of the society. It is an inductive methodology, and focuses on the discovery of theory from data. Overtimes original grounded theory of Barney Galland Glaser (1930-2022) and Anselm Leonard Strauss (1916-1996) has evolved, and two grounded theory variants: Glaserian grounded theory and Straussian grounded theory have been emerged as qualitative approaches. When a novice qualitative researcher starts data collection on grounded theory; s/he cannot identify the differences between the two approaches. In this paper some of the key differences and similarities of the two methods are illustrated. So that, a confused researcher can easily selects the desired grounded theory for his/her research version. In this study an attempt has been taken to continue the grounded theory research smoothly when the novice researchers face uncertainty during the research procedure.

Grounded Theory approach is most applicable in social issues that have limited data and literature. It is popularly used among social science practitioners since it is responsive to societal concerns. However, given its unique features, it was perceived as complicated and confusing especially for a beginner researcher. The current study was conducted to present the proper steps and procedures of grounded theory approach in qualitative research. The focus of this study is on the systematic application of the components of grounded theory in a scientific study that has limited literature and data. It aimed to determine the trustworthiness of using its method in explaining an existing social concern without bias on preconceived ideas. The combined use of purposive sampling, triangulation method, gap analysis and the elements of grounded theory approach led to theory generation after a rigorous iteration of comparative data analysis. Following the complicated process of its methodology, resulted to a conclusive finding that grounded theory approach has its dimension of difficulty, level of trustworthiness and distinctive features that would qualify as scientific study unique of its quality. Thus, the level of complication and rigor has contributed to the strength of Grounded theory approach.

Grounded theory is a methodological approach that aims to generate a theory that is grounded in systematically gathered data and its analysis through an inductive process. Annells (1997) defined grounded theory methodology as a qualitative approach to an inquiry that is embedded in relativist ontology and subjectivist epistemology. The purpose of grounded theory is to generate a theory that is rooted in the participant's perspective involved in the study. This paper aims to explicate the ontological and epistemological points of view of the constructivist paradigm. The constructivist paradigm has a relativist ontology and a subjective epistemology (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). A critique of grounded theory methodology is discussed inconsideration of diverse factors such as health and power-related inequalities, environment, social context, culture, gender, and social status. In nursing research, grounded theory is increasingly used by researchers. This paper will highlight the importance of grounded theory research for nursing practice and the generation of theories that are rooted in real clinical practices (Lazenbatt & Elliott, 2005).

PurposeDevelopment of theory remains an essential step in the evolution of supply chain management as an integrative business discipline. Supply chain research often involves phenomena possessing complex behavioral dimensions at both the individual and organizational levels. Such complexity can require the utilization of holistic and inductive approaches in order to more fully understand the behaviors associated with the phenomena. This paper aims to provide a step‐by‐step guide intended to increase researchers' understanding of the use of grounded theory (GT) methodology in supply chain contexts.Design/methodology/approachThe paper argues for GT as an appropriate method for studying emerging supply chain phenomena using an inductive, holistic approach.FindingsGT is positioned in a holistic framework of research methodologies. Next a step‐by‐step explanation of the grounded theory process is offered, illustrated by examples from the authors' own research.Originality/valueThis paper links the complex “system of systems” nature characteristic of supply chains to the need for a holistic research approach such as grounded theory. It also provides a guide for researchers, reviewers, and editors to judge sound GT. Moreover, from a practical perspective, the in‐vivo nature of GT provides recognizable solutions to managerial problems.