In the current context of scientific information overload, we propose a method combining bibliometrics and grounded theory to conduct literature reviews that have a descriptive, understanding or explanatory purpose. This overall inductive combined method, which we name BIBGT (BIB = Bibliometrics; GT = Grounded Theory) provides a powerful instrument for researchers. This instrument has been made more readily accessible by recent technological developments, and scientific advances in the field of bibliometrics. Notably, BIBGT helps grounded theorists identify colleges of thought of the field being reviewed, and representative texts to be reviewed in depth, in each college; it improves the trustworthiness and efficiency of reviews. BIBGT helps bibliometricians achieve in-depth analysis and interpretation of their findings. For all researchers, BIBGT can nurture the emergence of novel insights towards in-depth description, understanding or explanation of a core concept, theme, or research domain.We detail the four steps of this flexible method, providing essential elements and some guidelines as well as an illustration, to help other researchers who wish to apply it.

A substantial body of literature shows that in addition to increased convenience, mobile payments may result in greater efficiency and contribute to digital and financial inclusion. Although researchers have paid a lot of attention to individual adoption of mobile payment, few studies investigate mobile adoption by businesses, especially unorganised businesses in developing countries. To address this research gap, we use an exploratory grounded theory approach to examine unorganised retailers in urban India. Using 56 semi-structured interviews with merchants, we highlight an emerging mobile payment ecosystem that includes technology value, regulatory bodies, non-regulatory bodies, and merchant dispositions. The data highlight power asymmetry in this ecosystem and show that time-varying interactions among its components determine merchants’ behaviour and resulting (non-) adoption. We find that not only are Indian regulatory bodies the most powerful influencers in the diffusion of this technology; they are also important market actors. This study provides insights into the process of technology adoption by unorganised businesses in India. Moreover, this study sheds light on the important link unorganised retailers create between businesses and bottom-of-the-pyramid consumers, as well as between the state and its marginalised citizens, thereby confirming that such retailers are indispensable partners in economic growth and technology-driven inclusion.

This article discusses a key development in the use of grounded theory (GT) in information systems (IS) – the use of quantitative data in mixed studies to build on and elaborate theories. We examine the design of one of our research projects and describe how this mixed-design GT project helped elaborate emerging theories using slices of qualitative and quantitative data. Our contributions are threefold: (i) we show that the use of mixed data and techniques can be leveraged to help build credible theories in IS because it allows researchers to build theories of greater abstraction and scope: it helps sense-making in the drive from substantive to parsimonious formal theories; (ii) in line with classic GT, we propose a mixed typological design to help build a pathway to formal grounded theories in rupture with existing literature; and (iii) we highlight GT as a meta-theory of research design and revisit some of its main principles in a mixed-design perspective.

In order to explore scientific writing in Information Systems (IS) journals, we adopt a combination of historical and rhetorical approaches. We first investigate the history of universities, business schools, learned societies and scientific articles. This perspective allows us to capture the legacy of scientific writing standards, which emerged in the 18th and 19th centuries. Then, we focus on two leading IS journals (EJIS and MISQ). An historical analysis of both outlets is carried out, based on data related to their creation, evolution of editorial statements, and key epistemological and methodological aspects. We also focus on argumentative strategies found in a sample of 436 abstracts from both journals. Three main logical anchorages (sometimes combined) are identified, and related to three argumentative strategies: ‘deepening of knowledge’, ‘solving an enigma’ and ‘addressing a practical managerial issue’. We relate these writing norms to historical imprints of management and business studies, in particular: enigma-focused rhetorics, interest in institutionalized literature, neglect for managerially grounded rhetoric and lack of reflexivity in scientific writing. We explain this relation as a quest for academic legitimacy. Lastly, some suggestions are offered to address the discrepancies between these writing norms and more recent epistemological and theoretical stances adopted by IS researchers.