IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v50y2016i2p619-636.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acquiring and developing theoretical sensitivity through undertaking a grounded preliminary literature review

Author

Listed:
  • Tony Thistoll
  • Val Hooper
  • David Pauleen

Abstract

In this article we propose that researchers can undertake a grounded preliminary literature review (GPLR) to acquire and develop their theoretical sensitivity as soon as possible in order to progress their research to the theory development stage. We utili ze principles and philosophies within the grounded theory method as it is known for its ability to develop rigorous theory through the application of systematic procedures. A GPLR helps the researcher to build up a repertoire of theoretical codes for use in the later stages of a grounded research based study. Unlike the traditional literature review, the GPLR does not extend to covering the substantive topic area of research. By conducting a GPLR, researchers (in particular graduate students) can both satisfy mandatory university requirements to conduct a substantial literature review prior to beginning formal research and also meet generally accepted standards in the grounded theory method to delay reading in the substantive topic area until after the core category emerges from the data analysis. The article advocates and demonstrates a seven step method for developing a GPLR. A case is also made for the use of computer aided analytical tools. Further benefits, implications and areas of future research are discussed. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Suggested Citation

  • Tony Thistoll & Val Hooper & David Pauleen, 2016. "Acquiring and developing theoretical sensitivity through undertaking a grounded preliminary literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 619-636, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:50:y:2016:i:2:p:619-636
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-015-0167-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-015-0167-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-015-0167-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul R. Carlile & Eric S. Rebentisch, 2003. "Into the Black Box: The Knowledge Transformation Cycle," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1180-1195, September.
    2. Paul R. Carlile, 2004. "Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 555-568, October.
    3. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 2001. "Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 198-213, April.
    4. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chakraborty, Debarun & Polisetty, Aruna & Rana, Nripendra P., 2024. "Consumers' continuance intention towards metaverse-based virtual stores: A multi-study perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    2. Lukas-Valentin Herm & Christian Janiesch & Alexander Helm & Florian Imgrund & Adrian Hofmann & Axel Winkelmann, 2023. "A framework for implementing robotic process automation projects," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 1-35, March.
    3. Gunjan Sharma & Kushagra Kulshreshtha & Naval Bajpai, 2022. "Getting over the issue of theoretical stagnation: an exploration and metamorphosis of grounded theory approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 857-884, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johannes S. Schwarz & Christine Legner, 2020. "Business model tools at the boundary: exploring communities of practice and knowledge boundaries in business model innovation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(3), pages 421-445, September.
    2. Kodama, Mitsuru & Hashimoto, Keisuke, 2024. "Research on high-end disruptive innovations - Analysis and insights from the video conferencing systems market," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Hilda Bø Lyng & Eric Christian Brun, 2018. "Knowledge Transition: A Conceptual Model of Knowledge Transfer for Cross-Industry Innovation," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(05), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Johann Piet Hausberg & Peter S. H. Leeflang, 2019. "Absorbing Integration: Empirical Evidence On The Mediating Role Of Absorptive Capacity Between Functional-/Cross-Functional Integration And Innovation Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(06), pages 1-37, August.
    5. Ann Majchrzak & Philip H. B. More & Samer Faraj, 2012. "Transcending Knowledge Differences in Cross-Functional Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 951-970, August.
    6. Johan M. Berlin & Eric D. Carlström, 2015. "Cultural camouflage—a critical study of how artefacts are camouflaged and mental health policy subverted," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 111-126, April.
    7. Dean A. Shepherd & Marc Gruber, 2021. "The Lean Startup Framework: Closing the Academic–Practitioner Divide," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 45(5), pages 967-998, September.
    8. Cacciatori, Eugenia, 2008. "Memory objects in project environments: Storing, retrieving and adapting learning in project-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1591-1601, October.
    9. Bo Zhang & Zhanwen Niu & Chaochao Liu, 2020. "Lean Tools, Knowledge Management, and Lean Sustainability: The Moderating Effects of Study Conventions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, January.
    10. Jennifer A. Howard-Grenville, 2007. "Developing Issue-Selling Effectiveness over Time: Issue Selling as Resourcing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 560-577, August.
    11. Hilda Bø Lyng & Eric Christian Brun, 2020. "Innovating with Strangers; Managing Knowledge Barriers Across Distances in Cross-Industry Innovation," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-33, February.
    12. Alberto Franco, L., 2013. "Rethinking Soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 720-733.
    13. Lantto, Anna-Maija, 2022. "Obtaining entity-specific information and dealing with uncertainty: Financial accountants' response to their changing work of financial reporting and the role of boundary objects," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    14. Guo, Jingjing & Guo, Bin & Zhou, Jianghua & Wu, Xiaobo, 2020. "How does the ambidexterity of technological learning routine affect firm innovation performance within industrial clusters? The moderating effects of knowledge attributes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    15. Paul R. Carlile, 2004. "Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 555-568, October.
    16. Meidell, Anita & Kaarbøe, Katarina, 2017. "How the enterprise risk management function influences decision-making in the organization – A field study of a large, global oil and gas company," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 39-55.
    17. Brunswicker, Sabine & Schecter, Aaron, 2019. "Coherence or flexibility? The paradox of change for developers’ digital innovation trajectory on open platforms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    18. Esther Tippmann & Pamela Sharkey Scott & Andrew Parker, 2017. "Boundary Capabilities in MNCs: Knowledge Transformation for Creative Solution Development," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 455-482, June.
    19. Karimikia, Hadi & Bradshaw, Robert & Singh, Harminder & Ojo, Adegboyega & Donnellan, Brian & Guerin, Michael, 2022. "An emergent taxonomy of boundary spanning in the smart city context – The case of smart Dublin," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    20. Tauraitė-Kavai Erika, 2021. "Dealing with Not-Knowing in Inbound Open Innovation: A High-Tech Innovation Case," Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, Sciendo, vol. 85(1), pages 127-152, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:50:y:2016:i:2:p:619-636. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.