Hi all,

I agree with the need for a next generation use of GT. I also see it as a framework and I appreciate the setting in which it was developed originally.

While I try to stick to the classic version of GT (as apposed to Strauss’ more formal procedures), the researcher has to introduce his/her own theoretical assumptions or paradigmatic perspective.

I am a PhD student in South Africa who used GT at Masters level as well. My study in an emerging engineering field continues at doctorate level (telecoms field). I am also an Industrial Psychologist. This background and interest influence the study and will necessarily lead to how I introduce meaning into a traditionally quantitative research field.

True, one can be “unemotional” and free from own needs and desires. We must guard against it and that is how I interpret Glaser’s approach to objectivism and emergence (codes jumping out from the data).

Give Glaser the recognition due to him, but we need to move on if this gem is to be valuable to other disciplines.

Güera