Your approach to structuring the literature review in your PhD thesis using Grounded Theory is quite thoughtful and can indeed be effective. Prelim Lit Review: Placing an initial literature review at the beginning of your thesis that focuses on the main concepts and initial questions is a good strategy. This serves to establish the foundation of your study, outlines the theoretical landscape, and helps identify gaps that your research aims to fill. It sets the stage for your data collection and analysis without biasing the outcomes, which is crucial in Grounded Theory. Iterative Analysis: As you proceed with your data analysis in an iterative manner typical of Grounded Theory, you allow your findings to emerge from the data itself rather than being strictly guided by pre-existing theories. This iterative process helps in refining your data collection and enhancing the depth of your analysis. Final Lit Review: Positioning a comprehensive literature review towards the end of your thesis to discuss how your emergent findings fit within or challenge the existing body of knowledge is a strategic move. This allows you to integrate your findings with the literature more effectively, demonstrating novelty and contributing to the field. This review can critically engage with the literature based on the robust analysis you've conducted, potentially offering new insights or extending current understanding. This structure supports the essence of Grounded Theory, where theory emerges through the process of constant comparison and is not tightly bound by initial hypotheses or frameworks. It also enables a more dynamic engagement with your data and theory, potentially leading to a richer, more nuanced contribution to your field. However, it's essential to ensure that your examination committee is on board with this structure, as it may differ from traditional formats. Discussing this approach with your supervisor and clarifying how it enhances the integrity and depth of your research could be beneficial. Good luck and let us know how you get on.

Thank you for replying in such detail. It is most insightful and helpful to know this is novel, strategic and still incorporating the necessary elements of CGT. I have been searching for a GT sounding board, South African academics are limited in this area. So thank you. My supervisor is on board, however it may not be as easy with external examiners. Let’s hope they embrace the growth of thinking outside the box CGT embraces. Updates to follow. Many thanks. Warm regards.

It's a fair point!