Reconciling perspectives: A grounded theory of how people manage the process of software development
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Grounded theory is suitable for investigating questions such as what's going on here?
“GT is suitable for investigating questions such as what's going on here? [2].”
From Grounded theory in software engineering research: a critical review and guidelines (2016) · cites this paper as [2]
Sixteen articles provide a comprehensive presentation of their research method, of which five articles present extensive documentation about the GT research process.
“Sixteen articles (Boxes 2.3.1, 2.3.2) provide a comprehensive presentation of their research method, of which five articles present extensive documentation about the GT research process [2, 18, 45, 47, 49].”
From Grounded theory in software engineering research: a critical review and guidelines (2016) · cites this paper as [2]
Cites
Dilemmas in a general theory of planning
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf01405730 · Cited by 16,338 · see citing works
In the field: Notes on observation in qualitative research
Mulhall, A. (2003) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02514.x · Cited by 838 · see citing works
Glaser, B. G., & Holton, J. (2004) · Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research · doi:10.17169/fqs-5.2.607 · Cited by 783 · see citing works
Using grounded theory to study the experience of software development
Adolph, S., Hall, W., & Kruchten, P. (2011) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-010-9152-6 · Cited by 235 · cited 4× · see citing works
“5 provides some escription of how we applied grounded theory in our study; we escribe our experience with classical grounded theory more thorughly in Adolph et al. (2011).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Grounded theory in software engineering research: a critical review and guidelines
Stol, K.-J., Ralph, P., & Fitzgerald, B. (2016) · Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/2884781.2884833 · Cited by 470 · see citing works
Schloegel, U., Stegmann, S., Maedche, A., & van Dick, R. (2016) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2016.07.041 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Codepori: Large-Scale System for Autonomous Software Development Using Multi-Agent Technology
Rasheed, Z., Malik, S., Kemell, K.-K., Muhammad, W., Saari, M., Systä, K., & Abrahamsson, P. (2024) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4979510 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
- Authors
- Adolph, S., Kruchten, P., & Hall, W.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Adolph, Steve
- Venue
- Journal of Systems and Software
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-06
- Volume
- 85
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1269-1286
- ISSN
- 0164-1212 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2137035040
- Cited by
- 103
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 28.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Systems and Software (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Keywords
- software process management, software developers, negotiation, environmental noise, software project success
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
