Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Building international business theory: A grounded theory approach

  • Perspective
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The field of international business (IB) is in need of more theory development. As such, the main focus of our manuscript was to provide guidance on how to build IB specific theory using grounded theory (GT). Moreover, we contribute to future theory development by identifying areas within IB where GT can be applied and the type of research issues that can be addressed using this methodology. Finally, we make a noteworthy contribution by discussing some of GT’s caveats and limitations, particularly those relevant to IB. This effort is intended to spur further interest in the development of IB theory.

Abstract

Le champ de l’international business (IB) a besoin de plus de développement théorique. En tant que tel, l'objectif principal de notre manuscrit est de fournir des conseils sur la façon de construire une théorie spécifique de l’IB en utilisant la théorie enracinée (TE). En outre, nous contribuons au développement théorique futur en identifiant les domaines de l’IB où la TE peut être appliquée et le type de questions de recherche qui peut être traité en utilisant cette méthodologie. Enfin, nous apportons une contribution significative en étudiant certaines restrictions et limites de la TE, en particulier celles qui concernent l'IB. Cette réflexion vise à stimuler plus d'intérêt dans le développement de la théorie en IB.

Abstract

El campo de los negocios internacionales necesita de un mayor desarrollo teórico. De esta manera, nuestro artículo se enfoca en plantear una guía sobre cómo construir teoría específica de los negocios internacionales a través de la teoría fundamentada. Además, contribuimos al futuro desarrollo de teoría al identificar las áreas de los negocios internacionales donde la teoría fundamentada puede ser aplicada y el tipo de temas de investigación que pueden ser abordados utilizando esta metodología. Finalmente, hacemos una notable contribución al discutir algunas de las advertencias y limitaciones de la teoría fundamentada, en particular aquellas que son relevantes para los negocios internacionales. Este esfuerzo pretende despertar el interés en el desarrollo de teoría de los negocios internacionales.

Abstract

A área de negócios internacionais (IB) necessita de mais desenvolvimento teórico. Como tal, o foco principal do nosso manuscrito era fornecer orientações sobre como construir teoria específica para IB utilizando Grounded Theory (GT). Além disso, contribuímos para o futuro desenvolvimento da teoria através da identificação de áreas de IB em que GT pode ser aplicada e do tipo de questões de pesquisa que podem ser tratadas utilizando esta metodologia. Finalmente, fazemos uma contribuição notável ao discutir algumas das advertências e limitações da GT, particularmente aquelas relevantes para IB. Este esforço destina-se a incentivar ainda mais o interesse no desenvolvimento de teoria sobre IB.

Abstract

国际商务 (IB) 领域需要更多的理论发展。因此, 我们文稿的主要焦点是为如何用扎根理论 (GT) 构建IB特定理论提供指导。此外, 通过确定IB领域中哪里GT可以被应用与使用这种方法论可以处理的研究问题类型, 我们对未来理论发展做出了贡献。最后, 通过讨论一些尤其与IB有关的GT的注意事项和局限性, 我们做出了显著的贡献。这一努力旨在激励IB理论开发的深度兴趣。

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Babchuk, W. A. 1996. Glaser or Strauss? Grounded theory and adult education. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, 1–6. Lincoln, NE.

  • Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14 (4): 496–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P. 2005. Evolving sustainably: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26 (3): 197–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barreto, I. 2010. Dynamic capabilities: A review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of Management, 36 (1): 256–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bello, D. C., & Kostova, T. 2012. From the editors: Conducting high impact international business research: The role of theory. Journal of International Business Studies, 43 (6): 537–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Brannen, M. Y., & Tung, R. L. 2011. From a distance and generalizable to up close and grounded: Reclaiming a place for qualitative methods in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (5): 573–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Björkman, I., Ehrnrooth, M., Mäkelä, K., Smale, A., & Sumelius, J. 2014. From HRM practices to the practice of HRM: Setting a research agenda. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 1 (2): 122–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brannen, M. Y., Piekkari, R., & Tietze, S. 2014. The multifaceted role of language in international business: Unpacking the forms, functions and features of a critical challenge to MNC theory and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 45 (5): 495–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. 2007. The sage handbook of grounded theory. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. J. 2002. Is the international business research agenda running out of steam? Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (2): 365–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgelman, R. A. 2011. Bridging history and reductionism: A key role for longitudinal qualitative research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (5): 591–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavusgil, S. T., & Cavusgil, E. 2012. Reflections on international marketing: Destructive regeneration and multinational firms. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40 (2): 202–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, C. M., & Makino, S. 2007. Legitimacy and multi-level institutional environments: Implications for foreign subsidiary ownership structure. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (4): 621–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C. W., Tseng, T. H., & Woodside, A. G. 2013. Configural algorithms of patient satisfaction, participation in diagnostics, and treatment decisions’ influences on hospital loyalty. Journal of Services Marketing, 27 (2): 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. 2000. Constructivist and objectivist grounded theory. In N. K. Lincoln, & Y. S. Denzin (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research, 2nd edn 509–535. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. 2008. Grounded theory as an emergent method. In S. N. Hesse-Biber, & P. Leavy (Eds), Handbook of emergent methods: Chapter 7. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. 2014. Grounded theory in global perspective: Reviews by international researchers. Qualitative Inquiry, 20 (9): 1074–1084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. 1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. 2007. Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the academy of management journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (6): 1281–1303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. 2008. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Corley, K. G. 2015. A commentary on “what grounded theory is … ”: Engaging a phenomenon from the perspective of those living it. Organizational Research Methods, 18 (4): 600–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. 2011. Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36 (1): 12–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danis, W. M., & Parkhe, A. 2002. Hungarian – Western partnerships: A grounded theoretical model of integration processes and outcomes. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (3): 423–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, A. R., Jaccard, J. J., Triandis, H. C., Morales, M. L., & Diaz-Guerrero, R. 1976. Cross-cultural model testing: Toward a solution of the etic-emic dilemma. International Journal of Psychology, 11 (1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, G. S., & Wensley, R. 1988. Assessing advantage: A framework for diagnosing competitive superiority. Journal of Marketing, 52 (2): 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Clercq, D., Thongpapanl, N., & Dimov, D. 2009. When good conflict gets better and bad conflict becomes worse: The role of social capital in the conflict – Innovation relationship. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37 (3): 283–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. 1998. The handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doz, Y. 2011. Qualitative research in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (5): 582–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubin, R. 1978. Theory development. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, C. 2011. The place of the literature review in grounded theory research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14 (1): 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. 2007. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1): 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, P., & Kovalainen, A. 2008. Qualitative methods in business research. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. 2008. Grounded theory method in management research: Users’ perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11 (3): 430–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiss, P. C. 2007. A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Academy of Management Review, 32 (4): 1180–1198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flint, D. J. 2004. Strategic marketing in global supply chains: Four challenges. Industrial Marketing Management, 33 (1): 45–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flint, D. J., Woodruff, R. B., & Gardial, S. F. 2002. Exploring the phenomenon of customers’ desired value change in a business-to-business context. Journal of Marketing, 66 (4): 102–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N. J. 2011. Invited editorial: Why micro-foundations for resource-based theory are needed and what they may look like. Journal of Management, 37 (5): 1413–1428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebhardt, G. F., Carpenter, G. S., & Sherry, Jr., J. F. 2006. Creating a market orientation: A longitudinal, multifirm, grounded analysis of cultural transformation. Journal of Marketing, 70 (4): 37–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gephart, R. P. 2004. Qualitative research and the academy of management journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (4): 462–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. 2005. The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 12 (1): 78–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gergin, K. 1982. Toward transformation in social knowledge. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. 1978. Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. 1992. Emergence vs forcing: Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. 1999. Keynote address for the fourth annual qualitative health research conference. Paper presented at Qualitative Health Research. Vancouver, British Columbia.

  • Glaser, B. G. 2001. The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. 2002. Constructivist grounded theory? Paper presented at Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 3(3): Art. 12.

  • Glaser, B. G. 2008. Doing quantitative grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. 1967. The discovery of gounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. 2009. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gligor, D. M., & Holcomb, M. 2013. The role of personal relationships in supply chains: An exploration of buyers and suppliers of logistics services. International Journal of Logistics Management, 24 (3): 328–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulding, C. 1998. Grounded theory: The missing methodology on the interpreivist agenda. Qualitative Marketing Research: An International Journal, 1 (1): 50–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulding, C. 2002. Grounded theory: A practical guide for management, business and market researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, D. A., Cavusgil, S. T., & Xu, S. 2008. Emerging themes in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (7): 1220–1235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosse, R., & Behrman, J. N. 1992. Theory in international business. Transnational Corporations, 1 (1): 93–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, R., Banerjee, P., & Gaur, J. 2012. Exploring the role of the spouse in expatriate failure: A grounded theory-based investigation of expatriate’spouse adjustment issues from India. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23 (17): 3559–3577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G. 1991. Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12 (S1): 83–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, H., & Cowley, S. 2004. Developing a grounded theory approach: A comparison of glaser and strauss. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 41 (2): 141–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendrick, C., & Johns, E. E. 1972. Formal aspects of theory and hypothesis testing. In C. Hendrick, & R. A. Jones (Eds), The nature of theory and research in social psychology 3–25. New York: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S. K., Stump, R. L., & Oh, C. 2009. Driving forces of coordination costs in distributor – Supplier relationships: Toward a middle-range theory. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37 (4): 384–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotabe, M., Parente, R., & Murray, J. Y. 2007. Antecedents and outcomes of modular production in the brazilian automobile industry: A grounded theory approach. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (1): 84–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanctot, A., & Swan, K. S. 2000. Technology acquisition strategy in an internationally competitive environment. Journal of International Management, 6 (3): 187–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, K. 2015. Pragmatic reflections on a conversation about grounded theory in management and organization studies. Organizational Research Methods, 18 (4): 612–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacInnis, D. J. 2011. A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 75 (4): 136–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. 2000. Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11 (5): 473–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mello, J., & Flint, D. J. 2009. A refined view of grounded theory and its application to logistics research. Journal of Business Logistics, 30 (1): 107–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morck, R., & Yeung, B. 2007. History in perspective: Comment on Khanna “bringing history (back) into international business”. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (2): 357–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. W., Williams, K. Y., Leung, K., Larrick, R., Mendoza, M. T., Bhatnagar, D., Li, J., Kondo, M., Luo, J. L., & Hu, J.-C. 1998. Conflict management style: Accounting for cross-national differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (4): 729–747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, S., Hammond, R., & Snell, S. 2014. A microfoundations approach to transnational capabilities: The role of knowledge search in an ever-changing world. Journal of International Business Studies, 45 (4): 405–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nachum, L., & Keeble, D. 2001. External networks and geographic clustering as sources of MNE advantages: Foreign and indigenous professional service firms in Central London. Cambridge: ESRC Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, M. K., Netting, F. E., & Thomas, M. L. 2008. Grounded theory managing the challenge for those facing institutional review board oversight. Qualitative Inquiry, 14 (1): 28–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, K., Paper, D., & Marx, S. 2012. Demystifying grounded theory for business research. Organizational Research Methods, 15 (2): 247–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palka, W., Pousttchi, K., & Wiedemann, D. G. 2009. Mobile word-of-mouth – A grounded theory of mobile viral marketing. Journal of Information Technology, 24 (2): 172–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paroutis, S., & Heracleous, L. 2013. Discourse revisited: Dimensions and employment of first‐order strategy discourse during institutional adoption. Strategic Management Journal, 34 (8): 935–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. G., Rockmann, K. W., & Kaufmann, J. B. 2006. Constructing professional identity: The role of work and identity learning cycles in the customization of identity among medical residents. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (2): 235–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, J. B. 1999. Strategic outsourcing: Leveraging knowledge capabilities. Sloan Management Review, 40 (4): 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. 2006. Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (3): 433–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robrecht, L. C. 1995. Grounded theory: Evolving methods. Qualitative Health Research, 5 (2): 169–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, K., & Kostova, T. 2003. The use of the multinational corporation as a research context. Journal of Management, 29 (6): 883–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenkar, O. 2004. One more time: International business in a global economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (2): 161–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, D., Meredith, J., Boyer, K., Dilts, D., Ellram, L. M., & Leong, G.K. 2015. Professional, research, and publishing trends in operations and supply chain management. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 51 (3): 87–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sousa, C. A., & Hendriks, P. H. 2006. The diving bell and the butterfly the need for grounded theory in developing a knowledge-based view of organizations. Organizational Research Methods, 9 (3): 315–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L. 1987. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strong, C. 2015. Humanizing big data: Marketing at the meeting of data, social science and consumer insight. London: Kogan Page Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R. 2006. What ground theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (4): 633–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 2014. A dynamic capabilities-based entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 45 (1): 8–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, D. C., Cuervo-Cazurra, A., & Brannen, M. Y. 2011. From the editors: Explaining theoretical relationships in international business research: Focusing on the arrows, not the boxes. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (9): 1073–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volkoff, O., Strong, D. M., & Elmes, M. B. 2007. Technological embeddedness and organizational change. Organization Science, 18 (5): 832–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, I., Holton, J. A., Bailyn, L., Fernandez, W., Levina, N., & Glaser, B. 2015. What grounded theory is … a critically reflective conversation among scholars. Organizational Research Methods, 18 (4): 581–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welch, C., & Piekkari, R. 2006. Crossing language boundaries: Qualitative interviewing in international business. Management International Review, 46 (4): 417–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westney, D. E. 1993. Institutionalization theory and the multinational corporation. In S. Ghoshal, & D. E. Westney (Eds), Organization theory and the multinational corporation: 53–76. London: Macmillan Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14 (4): 490–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodruff, R. B. 1997. Customer value: The next source for competitive advantage. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25 (2): 139–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodside, A. G. 2014. Embrace• perform• model: Complexity theory, contrarian case analysis, and multiple realities. Journal of Business Research, 67 (12): 2495–2503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E., & Peng, M. W. 2005. Strategy research in emerging economies: Challenging the conventional wisdom. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (1): 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, P. L., Yeh, S. S., & Woodside, A. G. 2014. Applying complexity theory to deepen service dominant logic: Configural analysis of customer experience-and-outcome assessments of professional services for personal transformations. Journal of Business Research, 67 (8): 1647–1670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, H. W. 1995. Qualitative personal interviews in international business research: Some lessons from a study of Hong Kong transnational corporations. International Business Review, 4 (3): 313–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. 2007. Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 22 (3): 443–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., Farh, J.-L., & Wang, H. 2012. Organizational antecedents of employee perceived organizational support in China: A grounded investigation. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23 (2): 422–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing, University of Mississippi, Oxford, USA

    David M Gligor

  2. Department of Marketing, Mississippi State University, Starkville, USA

    Carol L Esmark

  3. Norwich Business School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

    Ismail Gölgeci

Authors
  1. David M Gligor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carol L Esmark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ismail Gölgeci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David M Gligor.

Additional information

Accepted by Mary Zellmer-Bruhn, Area Editor, 7 September 2015. This perspective has been with the authors for four revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gligor, D., Esmark, C. & Gölgeci, I. Building international business theory: A grounded theory approach. J Int Bus Stud 47, 93–111 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2015.35

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2015.35

Keywords

Search

Navigation