BUSI 815 Week 6 Grounded Theory and Ethnography Assignment Example

Building a Theory or Describing a Culture: Grounded Theory and Ethnographic Designs for Family Business Succession

Introduction

The earlier assignments in this course designed narrative, phenomenological and case study approaches to a single problem, the handover of small family factories from parents to their children. This assignment completes the five approaches of Creswell and Poth (2018) by designing a grounded theory study and an ethnography. The two make a useful pair. Grounded theory aims to generate an explanation of a process, grounded in the views of participants who have experienced it. Ethnography aims to describe and interpret the shared and learned patterns of a culture-sharing group. Applied to succession, the first asks how authority passes from parent to child as a process across many firms; the second asks what succession looks like within the daily culture of a single workplace.

Part 1: A Grounded Theory Design

Aim and Version

The grounded theory study would aim to generate a theory of how successors in family manufacturing firms come to hold authority after taking over from a parent. Creswell and Poth (2018) describe two prominent versions of grounded theory. The systematic approach of Corbin and Strauss (2015) uses defined procedures, including open, axial and selective coding, to build a theory with specified conditions, strategies and consequences. The constructivist approach of Charmaz (2014) treats the theory as constructed by the researcher with participants, emphasizes the meanings and assumptions behind actions and favors flexible guidelines over fixed procedures. This design adopts Charmaz's version, because authority in family firms is bound up with meanings, such as loyalty and earned respect, that a constructivist approach is designed to capture.

Sampling and Data Collection

The study would begin with an initial sample of eight successors who took over a parent's manufacturing firm within the past five years, interviewed for about 90 minutes each. Data collection and analysis would alternate. As categories emerge, theoretical sampling would guide who is interviewed next. Charmaz (2014) describes theoretical sampling as seeking data to develop the properties of emerging categories, not to represent a population. If early interviews suggest that employees' acceptance is central, for example, the next round would include long-serving employees and founders. Sampling would continue until the main categories are saturated, meaning that new data no longer add new properties to them, a point Creswell and Poth (2018) note is often reached with 20 to 30 interviews.

Analysis and Memoing

Analysis would follow the sequence Charmaz (2014) describes. Initial coding would stay close to the data, coding line by line with gerunds that capture action, such as deferring to Dad, being tested by the floor and taking the bank call. Focused coding would then select the most significant and frequent initial codes to organize larger segments of data. Constant comparison of data with data, codes with codes and categories with categories would refine the analysis. Memos written throughout would develop categories and their relationships. A composite early memo illustrates the process:

Memo, after interview 5: Three successors used almost the same phrase, that for months they were "borrowing Dad's authority." Each described making a decision, then telling employees that their father agreed, whether or not he had been asked. Borrowed authority seems to be a stage, not a failure. It may end when an event forces the successor to act without the parent's name, as with the plant fire in interview 3. Next: ask founders whether they knew their names were being used, and ask employees when they stopped hearing it.

The theory that emerges would explain not who succeeds but how authority moves from a borrowed name to an earned one. Such a theory could tell families what kinds of events help or hinder that movement.

Part 2: An Ethnographic Design

The Culture-Sharing Group

The ethnography would study a single culture-sharing group: the 55 employees of one family-owned precision machining company during the first year after the founder's daughter became president. Creswell and Poth (2018) describe ethnography as focused on an entire culture-sharing group whose members have interacted long enough to develop shared patterns of behavior, language and belief. A shop where some machinists have worked for the founder for 30 years has exactly such patterns, including the stories told about the founder, the unwritten rules about who may question a decision and the language used for good work.

Fieldwork and Role

The study would adopt a realist ethnographic stance, reporting the culture in the third person as objectively as possible, while acknowledging the researcher's presence. Fieldwork would last six months, with two days a week on site. Fetterman (2010) describes participant observation as the core of ethnographic fieldwork, combining participation in the lives of the people studied with professional distance. The researcher would observe production meetings, shift changes, break rooms and management meetings, keep detailed field notes and conduct informal and formal interviews with employees at every level. Artifacts would include the bulletin board, safety records and the founder's photographs that still hang in the lobby. Gaining access would require the president's permission and, separately, the trust of the floor, which a gatekeeper such as the long-time shop foreman could help build.

Analysis and Ethics

Analysis would develop a description of the culture, identify themes such as how authority is spoken about and enacted, and interpret what the culture reveals about succession. Ethical concerns are sharper than in interview studies: employees observed in meetings did not volunteer for interviews, and the president controls access. The design would require informed consent from all employees observed, the right to withdraw from observation and reports that protect individuals from being identified by management.

Part 3: Comparing the Approaches

Across the five approaches, each answers a different version of the research problem. Narrative would tell one or two successors' stories in depth. Phenomenology would describe the shared essence of taking over. A case study would explain how successors gain legitimacy across firms with different founder exits. Grounded theory would generate a theory of how authority moves from parent to child. Ethnography would show succession within one workplace's culture. For a DBA dissertation, whose findings must help practitioners, the strongest choice is a multiple-case study that uses grounded theory coding in its analysis, combining the case study's attention to organizational context with grounded theory's ability to explain a process. The narrative and ethnographic designs remain valuable for future research but are less suited to a dissertation's timeline and applied aims.

References

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Fetterman, D. M. (2010). Ethnography: Step-by-step (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.