The grounded theory method and case study data in IS research: issues and design - Information Systems Foundations: Constructing and Criticising - page 53

Focusing on properties of a process
My study centred on properties of a process not on properties of a unit (as a person,
group, or organisation). Properties of a unit are more relevant to descriptive qualitative
studies, while properties of a process are more relevant to studies aiming at theoretical
conceptualisation (Glaser, 1978; Glaser, 2001; Glaser, 2002).
More specifically, the study's aim was to provide a theoretical conceptualisation of a
basic social process (BSP). Basic social processes can be of two types: basic social psycho-
logical process (BSPP) and basic social structural process (BSSP). BSPPs refer to processes
such as becoming (e.g. a nurse, a leader, a system) or inspiring (e.g. followers, peers)
and are useful in understanding behaviours. BSSPs are concerned with social structures
in a process such as centralisation, organisational growth, outsourcing, or recruiting
procedures (Glaser, 1978).
BSPs are a type of core category (though not all core categories are BSPs) exhibiting the
following characteristics (Glaser, 1978):
1. BSPs 'process out' at least two emergent stages that 'differentiate and account for
variations in the problematic pattern of behaviour.'
2. BSPs may not be present in a grounded theory study (i.e. researchers may not have
two or more stages in the central concept).
3. BSPs are ideally suited to qualitative studies where the analyst observes the evolu-
tion of a process over time (i.e. influencing outcomes in a project).
4. BSPs are labelled by a ground that reflects their evolving nature and a sense of
motion (i.e. resolving, influencing, communicating, becoming).
As the second point above indicates, BSPs may or may not be present in a grounded
theory study; their presence (or lack thereof) further guides the research design and
execution. Therefore, understanding the distinction between doing unit or process based
sociological analysis, is critical to the research design, regarding the particular demands
they place on sampling, analysing and theorising (see Glaser, 1978, pp. 109-13, for a
comprehensive listing of these differences).
Theoretical sampling
A basic question in case study research is concerned with the single-case versus multiple-
case design of the study. In case study research, researchers determine a priori if the
study is going to be single-case or multiple-case based, depending on the nature of the
inquiry (Yin, 1994). Yet, under a grounded theory approach, that assumption could not
have been made at the start of the research simply because at that stage it was unknown
if the case would allow pattern detection and saturation. In grounded theory, sampling
is driven by conceptual emergence and limited by theoretical saturation, not by design.
As Glaser and Strauss (1967, p. 45) explain:
Theoretical Sampling is the process of data collection for generating theory
whereby the analyst jointly collects, codes, and analyses his data and decides
what data to collect next and where to find them, in order to develop his theory
as it emerges. This process of data collection is controlled by the emerging
theory, whether substantive or formal.
Consequently, the selection of data sources is neither a random selection nor a totally a
priori determination. For example, I decided a priori that a combination of data sources
was most appropriate for this study. However, the specific details of what data was
available and which datum was relevant depended on the emerging data.