Lincoln and Guba (1985) originally proposed transferability to capture the relevance of results for other settings. Do can what you learned be “transferred“ elsewhere?

In contrast, generalizabilty goes from a sample to the larger population that was the source from which that sample was drawn. It is almost entirely a statistical concept.

It is usually not a good idea to claim generalizabilty for any kind of qualitative analysis, and especially not for something as subjective as Grounded Theory.

One common alternative is to talk about transferability instead of generalizability.

Lincoln and Guba (1985) originally proposed transferability to capture the relevance of results for other settings. Do can what you learned be “transferred“ elsewhere?

In contrast, generalizabilty goes from a sample to the larger population that was the source from which that sample was drawn. It is almost entirely a statistical concept.

Since the process of eliciting a Grounded Theory is data-driven, there can be no pre-determined sample size; thus to "...explore certain factors in retailing." an adequate sample would be that which exhausts (or saturates) the data pertaining to those "..certain factors."

In 'doing' GT, when you are getting no new data, you stop sampling.