I am very glad to hear that you found useful what I had to add to the debate, Jeffrey. And many thanks for the encouraging words – I have been neglecting my own blog over the past few weeks due to papers and exam, but posting is on the agenda.
Walter D Fernandez at the Australian National University describes the use of the grounded theory (GT) methods with case study data and discusses critical characteristics of GT method, bias, risks and demands involved:
He says’ utmost care must be exercised to ensure that the canons of case study data do not distort true emergence for theory generation (Glaser, 1998, pp.40-2)’. Fernandez used ‘grounded theory as the overarching methodology to study data from an exploratory case study’ and builds a strong case in favour of this combined methods by referring also to Eisenhardt (1989) who outlined 3 major strengths of using case data to build GT which are
(a) related to the production of novel theory (b) the testability derived from the close interconnection between data and theory
(c) the empirical validity in part based on (b) and the constant comparison and questioning of the data.
I imagine you find the chapter both interesting and relevant material and enjoyable to read.
Having said that, for quick reference – I am a great fan of – Bob Dick’s site which provides a very useful overview of the Grounded Theory approach as well as a considerable bibliography – which unfortunately, got lost in Walter Fernandez’s chapter, might prove useful too.