IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Combining Grounded Theorizing and Historical Methods: A Proposal to Strengthen the Power of Qualitative Research

Listed author(s):
  • Burgelman, Robert A.

    (Stanford University)

Registered author(s):

    Qualitative research in the international business field can benefit from combining grounded theorizing with modern historical methods. Modern historical methods orient qualitative research to studying complex nonlinear organizational dynamics. This provides a basis for differentiating qualitative research from most quantitative social science research. By augmenting historical methods with grounded theorizing qualitative research can develop substantive theory that takes the form of conceptual frameworks. Conceptual frameworks can form a useful bridge between the narratives typically produced by historians and the mathematical and statistical models typically developed by high theorists. This logic, which suggests a somewhat novel role for qualitative research in the hierarchy of theory development, potentially strengthens its raison d'etre.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Stanford University, Graduate School of Business in its series Research Papers with number 2045.

    in new window

    Date of creation: Oct 2009
    Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:2045
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-5015

    Phone: (650) 723-2146
    Fax: (650)725-6750
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:2045. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.