theory (Elliot & Lazenbatt, 2005). The researcher used the qualitative data analysis application MAXQDA, recommended by Corbin and Straus in their research guide, to import transcripts, write memos, code conceptual categories, properties, and dimensions from the data, conduct data analysis, and refine conceptual theory. To complement the constant comparative analysis used, the researcher used theoretical comparisons to help him deal with unexplained incidents in the data that required wrestling with the data to identify the significance and meaning of the unexplained (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Theoretical comparisons are an analytical tool to stimulate logical thinking by comparing the properties and dimensions of concepts (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). In order to deal with surprising phenomenon, the methodology counts on abductive reasoning to explain the unexplained (Reichertz, 2007). Abductive reasoningtechno-cultural emergence. The researchers conducted a qualitative 31 case study of public and private sector organizations, using multiple methods including interviews, analysis of documents, and observations (Jackson & Philip, 2010). The construct of cultural determinism for the study was similar to social determinism (see Introduction section), and the researchers defined cultural determinism as the perspective that neglect of human and cultural factors is the primary cause of failed technological change (Jackson & Philip, 2010). Jackson and Philip (2010) found that a college proceeded from assumptions characterized by technological determinism, and a university proceeded from cultural determinism, and in neither case were the technological change outcomes successfully implemented. In these two cases, the college and university were not successful in managing the unanticipated improvisations to technology, and cultural issues