case study research

CRICOS #00212KCRICOS #00212K© Raymond Young 2010

Case Study Research

Inter-University Research WorkshopUniversity of Canberra, 3 Feb 2011

Dr Raymond Young (MBA, GAICD) [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

CRICOS #00212K© Raymond Young 2010

An opening wordYin (2003, pp11,17)

“... Most people feel that they can prepare a case study, and nearly all of us believe we can understand one... Neither view is well founded...”

“Case study research is remarkably hard, even though case studies have been traditionally considered ‘soft’ research, possibly because investigators have not followed systematic procedures”


Agenda

• Introduction to case study research– Exercise 1

• Designing case studies– Exercise 2

• Deeper considerations– Conducting case studies: Preparing for data collection– Analysing case study evidence– Reporting case studies


Traditional prejudices against case study research(Yin 2003, 10-12)

• Lack of rigour– NB. Case study research <> case studies for teaching– It is true they are hard to do well

• “we have little way to screen or test an investigators ability to do good case studies”

• Little basis for generalisation– Like experiments,

• generalise to theoretical propositions [analytical generalisation]

• not to populations or universes [statistical generalisation]

• Take too long and result in massive unreadable documents– NB. not ethnography nor participant observation– Different types: explanatory, descriptive, exploratory


What is case study research?Yin (2003, 13-14)

A case study is an empirical inquiry that• Investigates contemporary phenomena

within it’s real life context, • especially when, the boundaries between phenomena and context

are not clearly evident

The case study inquiry• Copes with the technically distinctive situation in which there will be

many more variables of interest than data points, and as one result• Relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to

converge in a triangulating fashion, and as another result• Benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions to

guide data collection and analysis


The case study as a research strategyYin (2003, p5)

Strategy Form of Research Question

Control of Behavioural

Events?

Focuses on contemporary

events?

Survey Who, what, where,how many, how much?

No Yes

Archival analysis No Yes/No

Experiment

How, why?

Yes Yes

History No No

Case study No Yes


Exercise 1Yin (2003, 17)

1. Defining a case study question

2. Defining “significant” case study questions

3.

4. Examining case studies used for teaching purposes

5. Defining different types of case studies used for research purposes

1. Explanatory/causal

2. Descriptive

3. Exploratory


Designing case studies Yin (2003, chapter 2)

1. Research questions

2. Propositions if any

3. Unit(s) of analysis

4. Logic linking data to propositions

5. Criteria for quality


Designing case studies – the role of theoryYin (2003, 28-33)

• How and why questions capture what you are interested in answering

• However they do not point to what you should study• Theory development is essential

– vs ethnography & grounded theory– A hypothetical story about why acts, events, structure and

thoughts occur– Propositions: help identify relevant information vs study

everything– Needed in order to generalise from case study to theory– Exploratory (no propositions): should still have some purpose ...

[3] ships to [go west] to explore the new world. [Criteria for success]


Standish (1996)1. User involvement (19) 2. TMS (16) 3. Clear statement of requirements

(15)4. Proper planning (11) 5. realistic expectations (10) 6. smaller project milestones (9)7. Competent staff (8) 8. ownership (6)9. clear vision & objectives (3)10. hard working, focussed staff (3)

1. Project methodologies (35)– Clear statement of requirements (15), – Proper planning (11), – smaller project milestones (9)

2. User (25): – User involvement (19), – ownership (6)

3. TMS (16) 4. High level planning (13):

– realistic expectations (10), – clear vision & objectives (3)

5. Project staff (11): – Competent (8), – hard working and focussed (3)

Reference: Young and Jordan (2008) “Top Management Support: mantra or necessity”International Journal of Project Management Vol 26, pp713-725

An example of theory development Young and Jordan (2008)


AnalysisWhat is the most important CSF?

1. Project methodologies– Clear statement of requirements– Proper planning – smaller project milestones

2. User – User involvement– ownership

3. Top Management Support4. High level planning

– realistic expectations – clear vision & objectives

5. Project staff – Competent – hard working and focussed

CSF TechServ

Methodology

User

TMS

Strategy

Staff

TechMedia ABS The Agency

Risky Integration

Difficulties in the merger of two computer services companies


Designing case studiesYin (2003, 22-27)

1. Research questions

2. Propositions if any

3. Unit(s) of analysis– If your questions do not lead to the favouring of one unit of analysis

over another, your questions are probably either to vague or numerous– To compare findings – definitions should not be too idiosyncratic– Do not consider closure permanent – Technique: discuss with colleague

4. Logic linking data to propositions– Currently there is no precise way of setting the criteria for interpretation

5. Criteria for quality


Positivist criteria for judging qualityYin (2003, 34)

Tests Case study tactic Phase of research

Construct validity • multiple sources of evidence• establish chain of evidence•Have key informants review draft case study reports

Data collection

Composition

Internal validity • do pattern matching• do explanation-building• address rival explanations• use logic models

Data analysis

External validity • use theory in single case designs• use replication logic in multiple-case designs

Research design

Reliability • use case study protocol• develop case study database

Data collection


Interpretivist criteria for judging quality / credibilityKlein and Myers (1999):

Principles Case study tactic Phase of research

Hermeneutic • long periods of time between conducting cases, preparing drafts and drawing conclusions

• sufficient time to reconsider the context, check alternative interpretations and maintain an overall suspicion of the findings

Data collection

Contextualization

Interaction

Suspicion

pragmatic research synthesises and transcends quantitative concepts (internal validity and external validity) and qualitative concepts (credibility and transferability).

Design quality should meet both qualitative and quantitative criteriae.g. sampling criteria and length of engagement.

Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003)


Case study designsYin (2003, 40)

• Figure 2.4• Figure 2.5


Case study methodYin (2003, 50)


Exercise 2Yin (2003, 55)

1. Defining the boundaries of a case study

2. Defining the unit of analysis of a case study

3. Defining the criteria for judging the quality of research designs

4. Defining a case study research design

5. Establishing the rationale for single- and multiple-case studies


Preparing for data collectionYin (2003, 58-62, 67-80)

• The case study investigator– Ask good questions– Be a good listener– Adaptive and flexible– A firm grasp of the issues being studied– Unbiased by preconceived notions

• Case study protocol– Overview– Field procedures– Case study questions– Guide for the report– Pilot

The demands of a case study on your intellect, ego and emotions are far greater than those of any other research strategy ... continuous interaction between the theoretical issues being studied and the data being collected ... [must be able to] take advantage of unexpected opportunities [and] guard against biases


Chapter 4 - Methodology ............................................................................. 79

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 79

4.2 The research question and the research purpose ......................................................... 80

4.3 Justification of the case study methodology ............................................................... 82

4.4 Case study procedures................................................................................................. 85

4.4.1 The case study investigator .............................................................................. 85

4.4.2 Case study protocol .......................................................................................... 88

4.4.3 Criteria for case selection and their number .................................................... 91

4.4.4 Field procedures ............................................................................................... 94

4.4.5 The Interview Instrument ............................................................................... 100

4.4.6 Guide for the case study report ...................................................................... 103

4.4.7 Case study analysis procedures ...................................................................... 104

4.4.8 Limitations of case study research and how they were handled .................... 105

4.5 Justification of the paradigm ..................................................................................... 107

4.5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 107

4.5.2 Pre-paradigmatic or alternative methodologies needed? ............................... 109

4.5.3 Historical Analysis of Research Paradigms ................................................... 110

4.5.4 Critical Realism ............................................................................................. 111

4.5.5 Pragmatism .................................................................................................... 114

4.5.6 Justification of the pragmatic paradigm ......................................................... 117

4.6 Ethical considerations ............................................................................................... 120 4.7 Conclusion 121


Analysing case study evidenceYin (2003 Chapter 5)

• Three general strategies– Rely on theoretical propositions– Thinking about rival explanations– Developing a case description

• High quality analysis– Attend to all the evidence– Address all major rival interpretations– Address the most significant aspect of your case study– Use your own prior, expert knowledge


An example of case study analysis

Critical Success Factor

Case Top Management Support User Involvement Project Methodology High level planning ProjectStaff

Failure TechServ no sponsor, no CEO involvement, no top manager interest

no user involvement,low ownership informal methodology,"jam it in & fix it later"

realistic expectations,clear strategy competent staff,motivated to succeed

Partial success

TechMediastrong sponsor,CEO not involved

enough,some top managers involved but one very passive

users very involved,some ownership followed consultant methodology realistic expectations,detailed vision and objectives

best staff picked for project,highly motivated

ABS sponsor resigned,CEO passive,top managers passive

some user involvement,some ownership

no information realistic expectations,evolving vision and objectives

competent staff,

Agency v strong sponsor,CEO not interested,no top manager interest

little user involvement,low ownershiptried to follow consultant

methodology but Agency lacked resources

realistic expectations,detailed vision and objectives

junior staff(described as 2nd eleven),highly motivated

Success SkyHigh strong sponsor,strong CEO involvement,top managers involved

users very involved,high ownership,unreasonable demands

detailed consideration of organisation to customise vendor

methodology

realistic expectations,clear vision and objectives

v. competent staff,highly motivated

Fuzzy-set scores of relative success and adequacy of each CSF.Criteria: Very weak=0.1, Weak=0.3, Medium=0.5, Good=0.7, Strong=0.9)

CaseTop

Management Support

User involvement

Project Methodology

High Level Planning Staff Relative Success

Tech-Serv 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.7 0.1

Tech-Media 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.3

ABS 0.5 0.3 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.5

Agency 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.7

SkyHigh 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9

ATO Change Program 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9

AusService 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.7 0.2

DAFF Grants Mngt system 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8

Edge: Centrelink & FaCS 0.1 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.1

GovWEB 0.1 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.6

JCA-DEEWR 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.5

SolarCo 0.3 0.9 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.3

SpeedyISP 0.8 0.9 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.8

Web hosting comp merger

Web hosting: Billing system merger 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9

Web hosting: Support centre merger 0.2 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.5

0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700 0.800 0.900 1.0000.400

0.500

0.600

0.700

0.800

0.900

1.000

TMS

User InvolvementProject Methodology

High level plan

Staff

Relative Importance

Relevance (Average)

non-Trivialness (Average)


Reporting case studiesYin (2003 Chapter 6)

ISWORLD (Re: information overload while conducting case studies) "Its a good thing to have too much written up on a case. That way, when you go back to the article, you can figure out what to cut."

Chapter 4 - Methodology ............................................................................. 79

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 79

4.2 The research question and the research purpose ......................................................... 80

4.3 Justification of the case study methodology ............................................................... 82

4.4 Case study procedures................................................................................................. 85

4.4.1 The case study investigator .............................................................................. 85

4.4.2 Case study protocol .......................................................................................... 88

4.4.3 Criteria for case selection and their number .................................................... 91

4.4.4 Field procedures ............................................................................................... 94

4.4.5 The Interview Instrument ............................................................................... 100

4.4.6 Guide for the case study report ...................................................................... 103

4.4.7 Case study analysis procedures ...................................................................... 104

4.4.8 Limitations of case study research and how they were handled .................... 105

4.5 Justification of the paradigm ..................................................................................... 107

4.5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 107

4.5.2 Pre-paradigmatic or alternative methodologies needed? ............................... 109

4.5.3 Historical Analysis of Research Paradigms ................................................... 110

4.5.4 Critical Realism ............................................................................................. 111

4.5.5 Pragmatism .................................................................................................... 114

4.5.6 Justification of the pragmatic paradigm ......................................................... 117

4.6 Ethical considerations ............................................................................................... 120

4.7 Conclusion 121

case study research

Education

case study researchexercise

case study researchyin

case studiesyin

designing case studiesexercise

good case studieslittle

research questionspropositions

research strategyyin

soft research