In this research in order to answer the first research question a process of theorization was used rather than merely describing the concepts. The differences between theory and description are explained by Strauss and Corbin (1990) as the following lines:
“First, theory uses concepts. Similar data are grouped and given conceptual labels.
This means placing interpretations on the data. Second, the concepts are related by means of statements of relationships. In description, data may be organized according to themes. These themes may be conceptualizations of data, but are more likely to be precise summaries of words taken directly from the data. There is little, if any, interpretation of data. Nor is there any attempt to relate the themes to form a conceptual scheme.”
Grounded theory (GT) research method was emerged in the 1960s by Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss. Though, a ramification of grounded theory developed and two researchers were separated (Glaser, 1992; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The consequence of this ramification is two basal schools for grounded theory: “the Glaserian School and the Straussian School “(Stern, 1994). The differences between these two schools could have major effects in the running of research. For example, Strauss (1990) believes researcher should have a general opinion of the subject, while Glaser (1992) states researcher should start with an empty mind of area under research. Keith Ng and Stewart Hase (2008) state the main differences between these two schools of grounded theory relate mainly to the coding paradigms. Also they argue the differences between Strauss and Glaser as follow:
“Strauss, as he analyses the data, stops at each word to ask ‘What if?’ Glaser maintains attention on the data and asks, ‘What do we have here?’ (Stern 1994).
Strauss brings to bear each likely incident that could relate to the data, whether it emerges from the data or not (Strauss & Corbin 1998, p. 77). Glaser focuses his attention on the data to allow the data to tell their own story. Glaser argues his approach is interpretive, contextual and emergent, while Strauss and Corbin is more likely to lead to the forcing of perceived notions on the data.”
This interpretive research method is one of the most popular qualitative research methods in the world and in various area have been employed. Jones and Alony (2011) argued the benefits of using grounded theory for IS research from various point of views. Since the information system (IS) area or information communication technology (ICT) sector are multi-dimensional and complex (Skyrius & Bujauskas, 2010), a perfect perception of these subjects requires extracting all their intertwined concepts and interactions (Fernández & Lehmann, 2005). An IS /ICT research which follows the guidelines of grounded theory method presented by Strauss and Corbin (1998) could exceed wide theme to provide a substantive theory (Fernández, Martin, Gregor, Stern, &
Vitale, 2006).
Grounded theory has a bearing on theory that is developed inductively from analysis of a collection of data (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). To apply grounded theory approach a set of stages should be executed by researcher. Pursuing these steps help researcher to develop a theory as outcomes. The type of sampling that is applied in grounded theory method is purposive sampling or theoretical sampling. In this type of sampling, researchers select participants based on incipient finding or some criteria. Also the sampling process and data analyses occurred in
“alternating sequence” or in “iterative cycle of induction and deduction”. It means that early analyses of collected data lead to new findings that give researchers tips to more data collections.
(Strauss and Corbin, 1990; Miles and Huberman, 1994). In next step, the researcher will conceptualize all the concepts are generated by the participants or interviewees until no new concepts, categories or relations among these categories are generated. Strauss and Corbin nominated this situation “theoretical saturation” (Strauss and Corbin, 1998). So the main procedures in this interpretive research method are reading textual databases and extracting key themes and the relations among these themes and then grouping these themes to develop a theory. The developed theory can be illustrated in the form of conceptual model or framework.
Strauss and Corbin (1998) suggest extracting main concepts and phenomena over interviews and translate them as several codes. These codes will be categorized into more precise groups that will ultimately form the basis for developing theory.
Charmaz (2006) believes coding is the starting step of data analysis. Coding is useful to transform the collected data through interview to more precise interpretations.
As explained, The important process in grounded theory reserach method is to extract key concepts of a textual database and then categorize these concepts to codes in order to develop a theory. There are three major coding techniques for qualitative data analysis that will be used during the analysis of data.
Open coding, provides a suitable starting point to recognize initial phenomena and generate a list of categories about the concept being studied by segmenting the information. Within each group researcher finds several properties or subgroups. The next coding technique is more precise than open coding and known as focused coding or selective coding. In focused coding one category are chosen as the core category, and other categories are related to this selected category (Cresswell, 2006). The other coding method is axial coding. Strauss and Corbin (1998) defined axial coding as
"the act of relating categories to subcategories along the lines of their properties and dimensions"
The aim of axial coding is to add depness and structure to initial categories. Charmaz (2006) states that axial coding re-constructs data that has been broken up into separate codes by open coding method. Strauss and Corbin (1998) use axial coding to investigate conditions of situations described in the interview, their actions and consequences.
The general process of how to code an interview and develop a theory according to Strauss and Corbin (1998) is illustrated in figure 8.
Coding interview transcripts help researcher to determine main phenomena which are considerable for interviwees. To convert these phenomena to codes , researcher allocates conceptual label to them. The codes with similar characteristics are cooperated to make up more precise categories. Strauss and Corbin (1998) state:
“Categories can carry so-called properties and dimensions. A property is a general or specific characteristic of a category, whereas a dimension denotes the location of a property along a continuum or range”. By interconnecting these categories the basis for a theory will be originated.
In qualitative phase of this study, guidelines of Straussian School and Cresswell’s (2006 edition) suggestions about grounded theory procedure have been pursued. These suggestions are as followes:
the first suggestion is about the research question design in interviwe protocol. the researcher is suggested to design questions that help him/her to understand the interviewees’ opinion about the main process. After determining the main processes, researcher could ask more detail questions to unveil other aspects of intended issue.
The next suggestion related to data gathering phase in grounded theory research method.
The researcher is suggested to continue gathering information to saturate the model.
The last suggestion is about data analysis. The researcher is suggested to follow “open coding”, “axial coding”, or “selective coding” to proceed data analysis phase.
The result of these data gathering and data analyses process is evolving a theory with respect to research objectives.
Figure 8. Steps of developing grounded theory
Source: Gorra, A., Kornilaki, M. (2010) Grounded theory: experiences of two studies with a focus on axial) coding and the use of the NVivo qualitative analysis software. Methodology: Innovative approaches to research, 1 (spring), pp.30-32.