Advertisement

European Journal of Information Systems

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 45–55 | Cite as

Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature

  • Joost F WolfswinkelEmail author
  • Elfi Furtmueller
  • Celeste P M Wilderom
Research Article

Abstract

This paper offers guidance to conducting a rigorous literature review. We present this in the form of a five-stage process in which we use Grounded Theory as a method. We first probe the guidelines explicated by Webster and Watson, and then we show the added value of Grounded Theory for rigorously analyzing a carefully chosen set of studies; it assures solidly legitimized, in-depth analyses of empirical facts and related insights. This includes, the emergence of new themes, issues and opportunities; interrelationships and dependencies in or beyond a particular area; as well as inconsistencies. If carried out meticulously, reviewing a well-carved out piece of literature by following this guide is likely to lead to more integrated and fruitful theory emergence, something that would enrich many fields in the social sciences.

Keywords

grounded theory systematic state-of-the-art literature reviews theory development theory emergence 

References

  1. Alavi M and Leidner DE (2001) Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly 25 (1), 107–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baarspul HC and Wilderom CPM (2011) Do employees behave differently in public- versus private-sector organizations? A state-of-the-art review. Public Management Review 13 (7), 967–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buchanan DA and Bryman A (2011) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Methods. Sage Publications, London.Google Scholar
  4. Cooper HM (1998) Synthesizing Research: A Guide for Literature Reviews. Sage, London.Google Scholar
  5. Creswell JW (2008) Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Prentice Hall, Pearson/Merrill.Google Scholar
  6. Dubin R (1978) Theory Development. Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14 (4), 532–550.Google Scholar
  8. Fernandez WD and Lehmann H (2011) Case studies and grounded theory method in information systems research: issues and use. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research 13 (1).Google Scholar
  9. Furtmueller E, van Dick R and Wilderom C (2011) Service behaviour of highly committed financial consultants. Journal of Service Management 22 (3), 317–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Glaser B and Strauss A (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
  11. Glynn A and Raffaelli R (2010) Uncovering mechanisms of theory development in an academic field: lessons from leadership research. The Academy of Management Annals 4 (1), 359–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hart C (1998) Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination. Sage, London.Google Scholar
  13. Hart C (2000) Doing a Literature Search: A Comprehensive Guide for the Social Sciences. Sage, London.Google Scholar
  14. Humphrey SE (2011) What does a great meta-analysis look like? Organizational Psychology Review 1 (2), 99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaplan A (1964) The Conduct of Inquiry. Harper & Row, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Merton RK (1967) On Theoretical Sociology. Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Salipante P, Notz W and Bigelow J (1982) A matrix approach to literature reviews. Research in Organizational Behavior 4, 321–348.Google Scholar
  18. Schwartz RB and Russo MC (2004) How to quickly find articles in the top IS journals. Communications of the ACM 47 (2), 98–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Suddaby R (2006) From the editors: what grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal 49 (4), 633–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sutton RI and Staw M (1995) What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (3), 371–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Strauss A and Corbin J (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage, London.Google Scholar
  22. Strauss A and Corbin J (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage, London.Google Scholar
  23. Urquhart C and Fernandez W (2006) Grounded theory method: the researcher as blank slate and other myths. Twenty-Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, Milwaukee, United States of America.Google Scholar
  24. Webster J and Watson RT (2002) Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly 26 (2), 13–23.Google Scholar
  25. Whetten DA (1989) What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review 14 (4), 490–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wolfswinkel JF, Furtmueller E and Wilderom CPM (2010) Reflecting on e-recruiting research using grounded theory. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems, Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Operational Research Society 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joost F Wolfswinkel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Elfi Furtmueller
    • 1
  • Celeste P M Wilderom
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations