the case study method in family business research: guidelines for qualitative scholarship

es

(IEE

Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 1529

e gu

case

les f

k in

sis,

sur

cha

ess

ticl

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Family B

jou r nal h o mep ag e: w ww .e1. Introduction

As family business researchers who frequently work withqualitative data, we are often asked to give seminars on how toconduct qualitative research and review qualitative papers.Through these experiences, we have deemed that there iswidespread misunderstanding about the range of roles thatqualitative data can play in research on family business andhow qualitative methods should be used to generate high-qualityand publishable research on family business.

Among qualitative methods, case studies play a particularlyimportant role, as they represent one of the most adoptedqualitative methods in organisational studies (Eisenhardt, 1989)and have been acknowledged as an approach to generating andtesting theory that has provided the mainstream managementeld with ground-breaking insights (Burgelman, 1983; Chandler,1962; Penrose, 1960; Pettigrew, 1973). Moreover, case studieshave been the most used qualitative methodology in familybusiness research to date (De Massis, Sharma, Chua, Chrisman, &Kotlar, 2012). To family business students and scholars unfamiliar

with the case study methodology, there is often a misconceptionabout what a case study is and how it can inform theory buildingand professional practice as a form of qualitative research. Forexample, in a doctoral-level introductory qualitative researchmethods course, we have listened to attendants describe their viewof case studies as a suitable methodology that should be primarilyused for descriptive purposes, mostly used in areas of nascenttheory or to exclusively study individuals or specic historicalevents.

In our view, family business is a heterogeneous eld thatencompasses multiple theoretical approaches and levels ofanalysis, and we believe that diversity can and should be reectedin the way in which case studies are used. It is often observed thatthere is no accepted boilerplate for writing case study methodsand determining quality (Amis & Silk, 2008; Bansal & Corley, 2012;Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Maxwell, 2012; Pratt, 2009). This lack ofunderstanding as to what makes quality research (Easterby-Smith, Golden-Biddle, & Locke, 2008; Gioia, Corley, & Hamilton,2012; Graebner, Martin, & Roundy, 2012) is unfortunate becausepapers that build theory from case studies are frequentlyconsidered the most interesting (Bartunek, Rynes, & Ireland,2006; Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007) and are also among the mostimpactful papers in the academic community (Eisenhardt, 1989).Consistent with the idea that case studies represent a method thatis ideally suited to generating managerially relevant knowledge(Amabile et al., 2001; Leonard-Barton, 1990), we view case studiesas a powerful methodology that can be used in a rigorous, creative

encourages scholars to engage in the case study method in high-quality family business research, and

suggests important implications for scholars, reviewers and editors of case studies in the family business

eld.

2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

* Corresponding author at: Institute for Entrepreneurship and Enterprise

Development, Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster LA1 4YX, UK.

Tel.: +44 1524594057.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. De Massis),

[email protected] (J. Kotlar).

1877-8585/$ see front matter 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2014.01.007The case study method in family businqualitative scholarship

Alfredo De Massis *, Josip Kotlar

Centre for Family Business, Institute for Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development

A R T I C L E I N F O

Keywords:

Case studies

Case study research

Qualitative methods

Family business

Validity

Reliability

A B S T R A C T

In this article, we provid

whether and how to use

work. Drawing on examp

from other case study wor

dening the unit of analy

presenting results and en

important and distinctive

the relevance and usefuln

family businesses, this ars research: Guidelines for

D), Lancaster University Management School, UK

idelines that are useful to family business researchers when deciding

studies as well as to reviewers and editors when evaluating case study

rom our published qualitative research and the complementary insights

the eld, we offer general suggestions for choosing the case study design,

selecting cases (sampling), collecting information, analysing information,

ing validity and reliability in research ndings. By outlining the most

llenges faced by qualitative researchers of family business and establishing

of the case study method for generating new and valuable insights into

e attempts to move the family business eld beyond its current state,

usiness Strategy

l sev ier . co m / loc ate / j fb s

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 152916and wide-ranging variety of ways to advance family businessresearch. When the approach is applied as we suggest and in arobust way, it becomes a valuable method for family businessscholars to describe complex phenomena, develop new theory orrene and extend existing theories. Our intended contribution inthis article is to guide novice or experienced family businessscholars who are interested in deepening their knowledge on casestudy research methods in appreciating the potential value ofqualitative methods to enrich their research and in identifying thekey elements of designing and implementing qualitative casestudy research projects. Our goal is to humbly attempt to providesome guidelines that are useful to family business researcherswhen deciding whether and how to use case studies and hopefullyto reviewers and editors when evaluating case study work. Anoverview of the case study design is provided along with generalsuggestions for choosing the type of case study approach that ismost appropriate for the research question, dening the unit ofanalysis, selecting cases (sampling), collecting information,analysing information, presenting results and ensuring validityand reliability in research ndings. To facilitate the application ofthese principles, we draw on our own published qualitative studiesand the complementary insights from other case study work in theeld to provide rich and clear examples of the types of case studydesigns, research questions, sources of information, samplingtechniques, study propositions, and data display frameworks.Specically, we offer concrete examples of articles and exemplarquotes within these studies that are particularly illustrative of theideas expressed in this article.

In this way, we hope to help move the family business eldbeyond its current state by establishing the relevance and usefulnessof this particular qualitative research method for generating a richerand deeper understanding of family businesses. We also identifysome areas in which we see special opportunities for the use of casestudy methods. A recent annotated bibliography of the 215 mostcited family business studies from 1996 to 2010 has shown that onlya scant minority of articles (18) relies on case studies or otherqualitative methodologies (De Massis et al., 2012). We hope that thisarticle will encourage an increasing number of scholars to engage inthe case study method in high-quality family business research.

2. Choosing the case study design

A case study is a particular strategy for qualitative empiricalresearch that allows an in-depth investigation of a contemporaryphenomenon within its real-life context (Pettigrew, 1973; Stake,1995; Yin, 2003). Case studies are particularly relevant toorganisation and management studies because they promoteunderstanding the dynamics present within single settings(Eisenhardt, 1989, p. 533) by using a variety of lenses, which allowsfor multiple facets of the phenomenon to be revealed andunderstood. This feature of case studies could be particularlyrelevant to family business research because family rms exist at theintersection of two systems the family and the business (Tagiuri &Davis, 1992) that interact in producing idiosyncratic organisa-tional outcomes. To fully understand the organisational phenomenaassociated with family involvement in and/or inuence on businessas well as their antecedents and consequences, researchers need tocombine multiple perspectives and navigate multiple levels ofanalysis. In this respect, the case study design appears to be a well-suited methodology, as it (i) copes with the situation in which thereare manifold variables of interest that are embedded in the contextof investigation and (ii) relies on multiple sources of evidence, withdata needing to converge in a triangulation fashion (Yin, 2003).

Researchers who decide to use a case study approach mustchoose what type of case study will be conducted (Yin, 2003). Theselection of a specic type of case study design will be guided bythe overall study objective. An exploratory case study should beused when the aim is to understand how a phenomenon takesplace. Typical examples of research questions that are particularlysuitable to be answered with this type of case study are, forinstance, How do the individual goals of organisational membersinuence the organisational goals pursued by family rms? or Howis the product innovation process managed and organised in small-

sized rms? Exploratory case studies are typically employed togain an understanding of how organisational dynamics or socialprocesses work:

In this study, we attempt to broaden and rene the extanttheory in the area of organizational goals and goal formulationprocesses in family rms by addressing the following researchquestion: How do the individual goals of organizationalmembers inuence the organizational goals pursued by familyrms? [. . .]. For this purpose, we conducted a theory-buildingqualitative study to better understand the unexplored dynam-ics of goal setting in family rms. (Kotlar & De Massis, 2013)

More research is needed to uncover how the role of earlyadopters changes depending on other innovation-specicfactors. This article extends prior research by examining howthe type of inuence played by early adopters is affected by theplatform vs. non-platform nature of innovations. (Frattini,Bianchi, De Massis, & Sikimic, 2013)

An explanatory case study should be used when the aim is tounderstand why a phenomenon takes place. For example, this typeof case study is particularly suitable to answer research questionssuch as, Why do some successions lead to better outcomes thanothers? or Why are family businesses more likely to engage in inter-rm collaborations? Most often, the explanatory nature of a casestudy is combined with its exploratory aim:

This paper contributes to opening up the black box oninnovation in family rms by investigating what characterizestheir product innovation process [. . .] Our objective is to gaintheoretical clarications as to how and why the productinnovation process in family rms is different from non-familyrms. (De Massis, Frattini, Pizzurno, & Cassia, 2013)

Finally, a descriptive case study should be adopted when the aimof the research is to convince someone that a phenomenon isrelevant. For example, this type of case study can be used toprovide rich evidence-supporting statements such as, Familybusinesses are very likely to fail during the succession process orIncumbent family rms are subject to organisational inertia whenthey develop radical innovations. For example, Dyck, Mauws,Starke, and Mischke (2002) offer a detailed portrait of sequence,timing, technique and communication in executive successionthrough a longitudinal case study of a failed executive successionin a small, family-owned rm.

In summary, case study research is particularly appropriate toanswer how and why questions or to describe a phenomenon and thereal-life context in which it occurred. This approach openlycontrasts, but hopefully complements, statistical empirical re-search approaches that are primarily used for conrmatoryobjectives when researchers already know how a phenomenonhappens and have a robust idea of why it happens (i.e.,hypothetical deduction is possible) and can quantitativelymeasure all the variables of interest. In fact, such a researchstrategy is usually applied to answer who, what, where, how many,and how much questions.

In addition to choosing a specic type of case study design,different philosophical traditions can be embraced in conducting acase study. It is beyond the scope of this article to provide a detailed

discussion of the philosophical assumptions of qualitative research,except to offer the note that Yin (2003) primarily bases his approachto case study on positivism (Clegg, 2008), with its root in empiricistphilosophy and a deductive research approach. Conversely, otherscholars base their approach to case study on interpretivism

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 1529 17(Bryman & Bell, 2007; Denzin, 2001; Miles & Huberman, 1994;Schwandt, 2000; Stake, 2005), which is grounded in a deductiveresearch approach.1 This alternative case study tradition assumesthat evidence is formed and shaped in the mind of the researcher(Stake, 1995, 2005). This means that knowledge is constructedrather than revealed, and the researcher works towards reconstruct-ing events and believes that humans are active in the construction ofknowledge rather than being passive recipients of knowledge. Thus,knowledge is constructed through the creation of concepts, models,and schemes to make sense of human experience and are continuallyinterpreted and modied by the researcher. This contrasts withpositivism, which assumes that the researcher nds or simplyobserves ndings and obtains knowledge in an objective way. Putdifferently, interpretative case studies seek to understand thehuman experience (Stake, 1995, p. 38). The inductive researchapproach is sometimes acknowledged as being particularly suitableto build grounded theory from case study data (Eisenhardt, 1989;Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).

Both Fletcher (2000) and Nordqvist, Hall, and Melin (2009) haveoutlined the importance of interpretivism to advancing the eld offamily business research. However, although the philosophicaltradition is very seldom explicitly stated, the vast majority of casestudy articles in the family business eld are based on thepositivistic tradition, with only few exceptions (e.g., Hall, Melin, &Nordqvist, 2001; Hall & Nordqvist, 2008; Nordqvist & Melin, 2010;Parada, Nordqvist, & Gimeno, 2010).

3. Dening the unit of analysis

Once the case study method has been chosen, a very importantstep in its application is choosing the unit of analysis (case). Theunit of analysis can be dened as a phenomenon of some sortoccurring in a bounded context (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 25).Family business scholars should start by asking themselves whattheir unit of analysis is; do they want to analyse the individual? Agroup of individuals? A process? A programme? A project withinthe rm? Differences between rms? Answering these questionscan be an appropriate strategy to outline the unit of analysis, and acase study needs to be explicit about the underlying unit ofanalysis. For example, the research objective may be to understandHow and why the anatomy of the product innovation process differsbetween [small] family and non-family rms (De Massis, Frattini,Pizzurno, et al., 2013). In this example, the unit of analysis is theproduct innovation process of small-sized family and non-familyrms. However, it may be that researchers are less interested in theprocess of product innovation and more interested in focusingspecically on the experiences of R&D and innovation managers ofsmall rms. In this case, the research objective may be tounderstand How R&D and innovation managers of small-sizedrms describe their experiences in managing and organising product

innovation, and how these descriptions differ in family versus non-

family rms. In the rst example, the unit of analysis would be themanagement and organisation of product innovation in this groupof rms, and it would be a process to be analysed, but in the second

1 Although it is not the aim of this article to provide a detailed discussion of the

philosophical traditions in qualitative research, it is important to note that beyond

positivism and interpretivism, a range of philosophical traditions such as

hermeneutics and social constructionism (Schwandt, 2000) or critical realism

(Welch, Piekkari, Plakoyiannaki, & Paavilainen-tymaki, 2011) inform qualitative

research.example, the unit of analysis would be the individuals or theexperiences of R&D and innovation managers of small-sized rms.

In some cases, researchers may be interested in phenomenathat occur at multiple levels. In these circumstances, multiple unitsof analysis can coexist in the same study, and the researchersability to navigate the different units of analysis becomes essential.For example, in our study of organisational goal-setting processesof family rms, we initially noted that the formation oforganisational goals involves individuals, groups, and the rm asa whole. Thus, we started with an individual level analysis, we thenshifted to the analysis of social interactions between groups ofindividuals (dyads), and nally, we shifted to the analysis oforganisational-level phenomena, i.e., organisational goal diversityand the collective commitment to family-centred goals:

Goal setting involves individuals, groups and rms; nevertheless,the relatively scarce studies available are limited to the rm level,typically relying on single informants [. . .] and overlooking theindividual organizational members role in the process. [. . .] Indescribing this process, we begin with an analysis of the goalspursued by organizational members in family rms, which helpsinform on the individual-level antecedents of goal setting infamily rms and, ultimately, on how goal diversity and goalconicts arise therein. We continue by analysing the socialinteraction processes through which goal diversity is managed aswell as their implications for [organizational goal diversity] andorganizational member commitment to family-centered goals.(Kotlar & De Massis, 2013)

4. Selecting the cases (sampling)

With the case study method, a very critical decision is theselection of cases. Contrary to the sampling approaches typicallyadopted in quantitative research (e.g., random, stratied, orstatistical sampling), cases are selected because they are particularlysuitable for illuminating a phenomenon and for extending relation-

ships and logic among variables, i.e., theoretical sampling (Eisenhardt,1989; Graebner & Eisenhardt, 2004).

A rst, critical choice for researchers is whether it is prudent toconduct a single-case study or if a better understanding of thephenomenon will be gained through conducting a multiple-casestudy. The theoretical sampling of single cases is straightforward.Single cases are chosen because they are unusually revelatory orextreme exemplars or because they offer opportunities for unusualresearch access. As an illustration, this is how Karra, Tracey, andPhillips (2006) report the reasons behind the choice of their singlecase:

We chose to study Neroli for three reasons. First, the case hasrare or unique qualities that make it a logical candidate fortheoretical sampling [. . .]. Preliminary research revealed thatthe rm had grown rapidly over a relatively short period of timeand relied upon a high level of family involvement. Theorganization of the rm remained family-based, and mostemployees were either relatives or shared the same ethnicbackground as the owner. In addition, the entrepreneursmotivation for founding the rm was the betterment of thefamily, and the dynamics of the family were therefore central tothe rm. Second, Karov provided a very high level of access to therm. We were able to interview him and other importantmembers of the rm on multiple occasions during the period ofthe study, and he provided us with extensive archival datarelating to the history of the rm. In addition, one of thecoauthors was able to travel with him to attend key meetingswith distributors and retailers in Russia and Eastern Europe andto attend trade shows and visit important suppliers in Italy. She

was also able to interview all of the family members and otherkey individuals, including manufacturing partners and employ-ees. Third, the rm was only slightly more than a decade old atthe time of the study, and the founder was still the CEO of thecompany. This was signicant because it increased thelikelihood that the details of the founding of the rm and its

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 152918early development remained fresh in the minds of the founder and

other interviewees. We therefore consider Neroli a strategicresearch site [. . .] for studying altruism in family business.(Karra et al., 2006, p. 865)

As explained in detail by the authors, the case was chosenbecause the authors had deep access to the rm and because the caseoffered a distinctive and extraordinary setting in which to observethe phenomenon under investigation (i.e., the inuences of family,kinship, and ethnicity on altruism and agency in family rms). Insum, a single holistic case study typically exploits opportunities toexplore a signicant phenomenon under rare, unique or extremecircumstances. The studies by DeAngelo and DeAngelo (2000), Dycket al. (2002) and Salvato, Chirico, and Sharma (2010) are otherexamples of single-case studies in the family business eld.

However, although single case studies can richly and persua-sively describe a phenomenon (Siggelkow, 2007), this approachalso suffers from serious limitations, especially related to theexternal validity of results.2 In this regard, multiple-case studiestypically provide a stronger base for theory building or explanation.Multiple cases enable comparisons that clarify whether anemergent nding is simply idiosyncratic to a single case orconsistently replicated by several cases. Thus, a multiple-casestudy will allow the family business researcher to analyse withineach setting and across settings. Overall, the theory created frommultiple cases is considered more robust because the argumentsare more deeply grounded in varied empirical evidence. However,the theoretical sampling of a multiple-case study is more difcultand complex. Indeed, the sample cases must be selected fortheoretical reasons, i.e., because they allow the prediction ofsimilar results (literal replication) or contrasting results but forpredictable reasons (theoretical replication) or because they allowthe elimination of alternative explanations (Yin, 2003). Aparticularly important theoretical sampling approach that iswidely used in the family business eld is polar types sampling(Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007) in which a researcher samplesextreme cases (e.g., along dimensions of structure, behaviour, orperformance) in order to more easily observe contrasting patternsin the data. Such an approach can positively impress reviewers andprospective readers because the resulting theory is likely to be veryconsistently supported by the empirical evidence and thus allowsvery clear pattern recognition of the central constructs, relationships,and logic of the focal phenomenon (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007, p.27). Our two studies of product innovation in family versus non-family rms and goal-setting processes in family rms provideexamples of polar sampling:

Our study involved 10 Italian rms, ve of which are family andve non-family businesses, according to a polar typesampling logic [. . .] We decided to focus on rms which arewell respected for their prowess and success in the area ofproduct innovation. Having selected companies that considerproduct innovation a critical determinant of their competitiveadvantage, we could not misinterpret differences in the

2 It should be noted the existence of a trade-off between researching a single case

and comparing multiple cases. Although in single cases the external validity of

results is threatened and it may also be difcult to convey the specicity of the case

to other researchers, single cases, if compared to multiple cases, generally allow for

ticker, that is, more detailed descriptions and involve more in-depth (often

longitudinal) understanding of the specics of the broader context of the case.anatomy of the product innovation process due to heterogene-ity in the strategic relevance assigned to this activity [. . .] Weadopted this convenience, theoretical sampling approachbecause we needed to create an experimental empirical basisthat allowed us to study the phenomenon under particularlyinsightful and illuminating circumstances. (De Massis, Frattini,Pizzurno, et al., 2013)We represent the segmentation of the family rms organiza-tional members by examining Chief Executive Ofcers,professional (non-family) top executives, young generationfamily members, family CEO spouses and old generation familymembers. This set of organizational members maximized thedifferences along four dimensions that were consideredparticularly relevant to our study. First, we selected individualsthat own equity shares of the rm and others that do not, sinceownership is likely to affect the incentives and priorities oforganizational members [. . .]. Second, we selected familymembers as well as non-family members because the lattercould be expected to follow a self-serving attitude, whereasfamily members are possibly more oriented towards the familyrms collectivistic goals [. . .]. Third, we selected familymembers who are actively involved in the business and thosewho are not, since they may differ in terms of their power in theorganization and how they perceive the family and businesspriorities [. . .]. Fourth, we selected family members that belongto the current CEOs generation, to the younger generation andto the older generation, since research has pointed to relevantdifferences between incumbents and descendants [. . .]. Giventhese differences among the types of family rms andorganizational members, we felt that this combination wouldprovide enough distinct windows through which to vieworganizational member individual goals. Taken together, thissample and context provide an excellent opportunity toexamine goal setting in family rms. (Kotlar & De Massis, 2013)

As reported in the quotes taken from the two exemplars above,the selected cases should offer enough distinct windows throughwhich to observe an investigated phenomenon in a unique andextraordinary way. In a case study, researchers should notunderestimate the importance of explaining the sampling ap-proach adopted for the selection of cases. We encourage familybusiness scholars to provide a clear rationale for the case studyselection and ample details on the case study context (e.g.,competitive dynamics, nancial data, the business lifecycle, andthe generation of family control) to allow the reader to appreciatethe researchers sampling choices. The studies by Howorth,Westhead, and Wright (2004) and Johannisson and Huse (2000)are other examples of multiple-case studies in the family businesseld where the authors explicitly state and explain the theoreticalsampling approach. In addition, robust case study articles not onlyconvey the rationale for case selection to the reader but alsoactually seek to convince the reader of its appropriateness for a givenresearch question. Continuing with the example of productinnovation in family versus non-family rms, this is how wejustify to the reader why the characteristics of the selected rms interms of importance attached to product innovation and small sizeare particularly suitable for their research objective:

We decided to focus on rms which are well respected for theirprowess and success in the area of product innovation. Havingselected companies that consider product innovation a criticaldeterminant of their competitive advantage, we could notmisinterpret differences in the anatomy of the productinnovation process due to heterogeneity in the strategicrelevance assigned to this activity. Finally, we decided toinclude in our sample only small companies [. . .]. First, thischoice was suggested by the fact that product innovation is

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 1529 19considered one of the most critical determinants of sustainedcompetitive advantage for this category of rms [. . .]. Second,innovation in small rms has several peculiarities whichdifferentiate it from large companies [. . .]. What is more,scholarly research has thus far focused in particular on largerms and only to a lesser extent on small rms [. . .]. By focusingon small companies only, we also reduced the risk ofunobserved heterogeneity due to differences in the size ofthe family and non-family rms in our sample. (De Massis,Frattini, Pizzurno et al., 2013)

Instead of conducting and analysing multiple case studies ofdifferent organisations, researchers might also want to conductdifferent case studies within one organisation (a nested approach,e.g., Yin, 2003). This occurs, for example, in project-level casestudies where the unit of analysis is a specic type of project that isconducted within an existing organisation.

5. Collecting information

Very often, researchers assume that case studies should onlyrely on qualitative data. This is clearly a misconception, as there areno empirical research methods that only use qualitative orquantitative data. Data in the case study method are collectedby multiple means that may consist of potential qualitative datasources, such as interviews, direct observations, includingethnographical and anthropological data collection techniques,documentation, and historical records, as well as quantitative datasources (e.g., surveys). Case study data often provide advantages inbeing able to integrate both objective and perceptual data. Thisintegration is particularly important in family business researchwhere family relationships and business issues are typicallyinseparable in decision-making; thus, the use of a variety ofdifferent data, including the combination of subjective orinterpretative and more objective factual information, can addmuch to our understanding of organisational processes andoutcomes. The use of multiple data sources enhances datacredibility (Patton, 1990). Each data source is one piece of thepuzzle, with each piece contributing to the researchersunderstanding of the whole phenomenon. This convergence addsstrength to the ndings, as the various components of data areinterweaved together to promote a wide-ranging understanding ofthe case. The two examples from our studies already discussed inthe previous section offer an illustration of the use of multiplesources of data in a case study:

We undertook interviews and gathered non-participant obser-vations and archival documents from 19 family rms, thereafteranalysing these qualitative data to disclose the unexploreddynamics of goal setting in family rms. (Kotlar & De Massis,2013)

As regards data collection, we gathered information mainlythrough direct interviews, undertaken between October 2009and December 2010. Specically, the following steps weretaken: At the outset of each case, a relationship was establishedwith a senior manager from the selected rm. This person wasbriefed about the research project through a written projectsummary and a telephone meeting. During this meeting, weasked the respondent to introduce us to the entire top-management team and the staff in charge of product innova-tion. Then we personally interviewed at least two informantsfor each company. We undertook two semi-structured inter-views for each respondent (each lasting on average one and ahalf hours), for a total of more than 35 hours of personalinterviews. Direct interviews followed a semi-structuredreplicable guide that comprised a set of open questions foreach area of the product innovation process included in thetheoretical framework. Secondary information was collected inthe form of company reports and project documentation. Inparticular, we gathered and analyzed all the available companydocuments, catalogs, family information and reports of productinnovation projects. This informed the researchers withbackground information about the selected rms, the type ofproduct innovation they undertake and the approaches theyuse to administer product innovation activities. Above all, thesesecondary information sources were integrated, in a triangula-tion process, with data drawn from the direct interviews, inorder to avoid post hoc rationalization and to ensure constructvalidity. (De Massis, Frattini, Pizzurno, et al., 2013)

Another remarkable example of use of multiple data sources ina single-case study in the family business eld is the article byAstrachan (1988), where the author integrates data collected froma wide range of sources (interviews, historical records, nancialdata, production data, observation, and media accounts) to providea thorough exploration of how the culture of a parent companyaffects the culture and performance of the family rm when afamily rm is acquired. The studies by Steier (2001), Steier andMiller (2010), and Lambrecht (2005) are other illustrativeexamples of family business case studies combining multiplesources of data.

Interviews are often the primary data source in case studies(Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). They are a targeted, insightful andhighly efcient means by which to collect rich, empirical data,especially when the phenomenon of interest is highly episodic anduncommon. However, interviews are often characterised byseveral weaknesses, such as bias due to poorly articulatedquestions, response or personal interpretation bias. In addition,other sources of error may contaminate interviewee reports,especially retrospective accounts (Golden, 1992; Huber & Power,1985; Schwenk, 1985). Interviewee reports may suffer frominformants memory failure or inaccurate recall of past events(Golden, 1992) as well as from memory distortion (Nutt, 1986). Thelatter can result from hindsight bias, attributional bias, subcon-scious attempts to maintain self-esteem, or impression manage-ment (Huber & Power, 1985; Salancik & Meindl, 1984). Thechallenge presented by interview data is best mitigated by datacollection approaches that limit bias. A key approach is using manydifferent and well-informed interviewees who view the focalphenomenon from different perspectives. These intervieweescan include family and non-family members, organisational actorsfrom different hierarchical levels, generations, organisationalfunctions, and geographies, as well as actors from other relevantorganisations and outside observers such as management con-sultants. It is unlikely that these varied interviewees will engage inconvergent retrospective sensemaking and/or impression man-agement. Table 1 illustrates the demography of interviewees in ourtwo studies on product innovation in family versus non-familyrms and on the role of early adopters in the diffusion of newproducts in platform versus non-platform innovations.

Another key approach to mitigating bias is to combine interviewswith direct observations. For example, in the study on goal-settingprocesses in family rms (Kotlar & De Massis, 2013), directinterviews were combined with non-participant observations.Specically, informants were followed during family and businessmeetings (e.g., meetings of the board of directors, family meetings,and casual meetings such as family dinners), formulating generalobservations of how goals form part of everyday family and businesslife. Interviews are appropriate when family business scholars seekto gain a broad understanding of what interviewees considerimportant or when the research topic focuses on deeply held valuesor beliefs and complex dynamics of family and business that require

er

(so

n-

er

(fa

on

(so

ro

ep

er

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 152920Table 1Examples of the demography of interviewees in case studies.

Firm Interviewees

A:

Firm A CEO (father)

Chief Commercial Ofc

Chief Technical Ofcer

Firm B CEO (father)

Head of R&D (brother-i


Firm C CEO (son)


HR Executive Ofcer (n

Firm D CEO (father)


Firm E CEO (father)

Head of R&D (fathers b

Firm F CEO

Director of Technical D

Firm G CEO

Head of R&D


Firm H CEO


Firm I CEO potentially unexpected, thoughtful responses from interviewees.For example, we relied extensively on interviews with familybusiness CEOs in our multiple-case study on social capital in familyrms (De Massis, Kotlar, & Frattini, 2013) because our aim was tounderstand CEO perceptions of competitive advantages anddisadvantages deriving from social capital resources.

Direct observations require that researchers spend timeobserving and experiencing organisational life in a rm or in asample of rms. Thus, these observations are very time-consumingand costly, but they allow researchers to obtain rich insights intothe human, social and organisational aspects of business organiza-tions (Myers, 2013, p. 92). This data source is particularly suited tostudying aspects of organisational culture because it is only byexperiencing organisational life that the underlying values andphilosophies commonly held by organisational members can evenbegin to be understood. Researchers must spend protracted periodsof time immersed in the organisation (e.g., attending businessmeetings, family councils or boards of directors meetings orobserving R&D work or corporate classrooms) and are typicallyoverwhelmed by very large volumes of data. For example, in ourstudy on goal-setting processes in family rms (Kotlar & De Massis,2013), we observed at least three meetings in each of the 19 family

Head of R&D

Chief Designer

Firm L CEO

Director of Innovation

HR Executive Ofcer

Company Key informants in the innovating rms Key informants in ear

B:

Company A Marketing manager Sales agent

Facility manager of

Company B Product manager General manager

Scientic director ofresearch institution

Company C Chairman and chief marketingmanager

General manager

General manager ofwell-respected and

wool producers

Company D Product development manager Product manager

Head of the engineemedium-sized biscu

Company E Marketing developer Sales agent

General manager ofproducer from the N

Company F Business team manager Marketing manager

Head of the purchaslarge Italian bank

Company G General manager Marketing manager

It was not possible tadopter

Company H Product manager Head of clinic enginItalian hospital

A: Adapted from De Massis, Frattini, Pizzurno, et al. (2013); B: Adapted from Frattini, Age range

6180

(son) 2540

n) 2540

6180

law) 4160

(son) 2540

4160

ther) 6180

-family manager) 2540

6180

n) 4160

6180

ther) 4160

4160

artment 4160

6180

4160

2540

6180

4160

4160rms. These observations provided a large volume of data thatallowed the conrmation of informant descriptions of theirorganisational roles, an assessment the general family businessenvironment, and observation of the processes through whichorganisational goals are set as closely as possible. Both participantand non-participant observations can be used in a case study. Theformer occurs when the observers take a role and involvethemselves in the group or process being studied. The mainproblem associated with participant observations is the risk thatthe researcher becomes too closely involved and loses detachment,which deteriorates the impartial reporting of collected evidence.On the other hand, a non-participant observer is detached from thegroup or process being investigated, so the potential for bias ismitigated. In addition to observing, it is important that researchersmake eld notes to record their observations. This data source canbe particularly useful to answer research questions about familyrms that relate to their organisational culture, such as How dofamily values and the family tradition play a role in shaping the

innovation process of family rms? or How do family values andgoals are transferred over generations?

Every rm records a substantial amount of information aboutitself, and there is often a large amount of information about an

2540

2540

6180

4160

4160

ly adopters Key informants in late adopters

a large bank Facility manager of an industrial rm

a large public Professor with responsibility for managinga university laboratory

one of the most

high-quality Italian

Director of operations of a textile manufacturer

ring department of a

it producer

Director of operations of an Italian pastamanufacturer

a well-respected wine

orth of Italy

Owner of a winery

ing department of a It was not possible to interview any late adopter

o interview any early Technical director of a large manufacturer ofplastic components

eering of a large public General manager of a private hospital

Bianchi, De Massis, and Sikimic (2013).

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 1529 21organisation that is recorded by others. Documentation is a stable,unobtrusive and exact source of data, but its weakness stemsfrom low retrievability, biased selectivity and potentiallydifcult access to such documents. This difculty in accessingdocuments can be exacerbated in family rms that are known tobe protective of their privacy (Gersick, Davis, Hampton, &Lansberg, 1997; Tagiuri & Davis, 1996). For example, in our studyof goal setting in family business, we made use of different typesof documentation:

We gathered archival documents from various sources in allrms, including contracts, historical books about the organiza-tion and the family, corporate websites, news articles about therm and the family, and rm pamphlets. (Kotlar & De Massis,2013)

In case study research, documents are typically used tocorroborate and augment evidence from additional sources, aswe did in the example mentioned previously: Taken together,these secondary sources of data provided a richer context to

understand goal setting in family rms [. . .] and corroborate the

collected evidence (Kotlar & De Massis, 2013).Historical records are documents that have been amassed over

time in the span of an individuals or organisations existence.Historical analysis is the process of assembling, critically examining,and summarising these records of the past (e.g., articles, books,business reports, and periodicals) that are typically gatheredthrough publicly available, published sources of information. It isworth noting that historical analysis does not only mean digging intothe past to recover data but also frame the evidence collected intothe proper context, which may be extremely different from thepresent (Colli, 2012; Colli, Howorth, & Rose, 2013). This datacollection technique is characterised by several advantages. First, itfocuses on information collected at the time in which the eventsoccurred (not retrospective). It uses information gathered frommultiple sources (i.e., different reporters, scholars, and marketexperts), allowing the collection of primarily factual data (notinterpretative). It is particularly well suited for studying thechronological dimensions of past events. More specically, historicalrecords allow family business scholars to consider time horizonsthat are longer than a standard research project and even longer thana particular individuals lifespan. In addition, the analysis ofhistorical records is increasingly considered to be relevant not onlybecause it provides longitudinal evidence but also because it has thepotential to develop and extend existing theory and to build newtheory thanks to the mastery of two key comparators time andspace (Buckley, 2009). As such, historical records can be very usefulfor family business researchers who are interested in long-termtrends (e.g., generational transitions over lengthy periods of time) ormultiple generations of family involvement and prove to beparticularly useful in some critical areas of family business researchthat directly deal with the long run, such as intra-familysuccession, knowledge transfer and accumulation, and corporatevalues. Ibrahim, Soufani, and Lam (2001), for example, use historicalrecords to study how intra-family succession occurred throughmultiple generations:

First, a study of public documents was conducted. Second, toreduce the amount of data to a manageable form, criticaldecisions, actions, and incidents were identied in chronologi-cal order. Third, investigation of each generational period wascarried out and a case history was developed. Finally, criticalactions and incidents were triangulated to establish validity.

Miller, Steier, and Le Breton-Miller (2003) offer anotherexample of exploratory inductive study based on historical bookaccounts of thirteen major family rms as well as a series ofnewspaper and journal articles that the authors compiled on whathappened to the strategy and organisation of these family rmsduring 510 years after succession.

In sum, the use of multiple sources of data is a strength of a casestudy. By using different data sources, researchers can triangulate,that is, adopt, different angles from which to observe the samephenomenon (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Jick, 1979; Pettigrew, 1990;Stake, 2013; Yin, 1984), thus making their ndings moreconvincing and accurate (Tracy, 2010). The triangulation ofevidence from multiple data sources is especially important inthe family business setting, where it is particularly difcult toseparate family relationships and aspects related to the familysphere from business decision making. However, the prerequisitesfor using multiple sources include the availability of resources andsufcient knowledge in different data collection techniques.Moreover, the views of different types of organisational membersin the family business may be very heterogeneous. For example,the views of family members may systematically vary from thoseof non-family members because the family status or organisationalroles of both inuence their interpretations. Two practicalproblems that are typical of multiple-informant studies maytherefore occur (Kumar, Stern, & Anderson, 1993): (i) the selectionproblem, that is, the challenge of identifying two or moreinformants competent to report on a particular dyadic relationshipand (ii) the perceptual agreement problem, that is, the frequentdissimilarity of the reports of competent multiple informants. Aconsensual approach to reconciling multiple informant reports canthus be important in order to ensure correspondence betweeninformant reports and actual events (Glick, Huber, Miller, Doty, &Sutcliffe, 1990) even though to our best knowledge, this approachhas never been applied in family business research.

A useful way to organise and document the data collectedthrough multiple sources is the creation of a case study database.Using a database increases the reliability of the research because itenables the researcher to track and organise data sources includingnotes (e.g., results of interviews, observations), key case studydocuments, tabular materials (e.g., quantitative data), narratives(e.g., open-ended answers to the questions), photographs and audioles so that they can be easily retrieved at a later date. Doing somakes the process through which ndings are obtained extremelyexplicit and replicable, thereby permitting the constant replicationof the study across time, researchers, and analysis techniques. Forexample, while collecting the data about goals and goal formulationprocesses in family rms (see Kotlar & De Massis, 2013), we trackedthe emerging research design and kept an audit trail, that is, anexhaustive chronology of research activities and processes as well asthe emerging themes, categories, models, and analytic memos. Inthe nal article, we then followed the graphic approach proposed byGioia and Thomas (1996) to show key aspects of the process throughwhich the main constructs and relationships in our study werederived. As another example, Karra et al. (2006) organised case studydata into an event history database [. . .] by chronologicallyordering descriptions of events taken from the raw datainterviewtranscripts, interview and eld notes, and secondary sources such asjournalists accounts of the political and economic contextand byjuxtaposing multiple accounts against each other to ascertain thedegree of convergence (pp. 865-866).

Atypical pitfall thatqualitative researchers fall intois thattheyfailto establish a chain of evidence in their studies. This is unfortunatebecause we strongly believe that case study research shouldunambiguously allow an external observer to follow the derivationof any evidence from the initial research questions to the ultimateconclusion. We therefore encourage family business researchers topayparticularattentiontothisaspect,clearlyexplainingandshowinghow the empirical evidence is obtained, linking such empiricalevidence to the data sources from which it is derived, andunequivocally clarifying the circumstances of data collection.

6. Analysing information

In addition to following ordered and transparent data collectionprocedures, it is also important to analyse qualitative datasystematically and explain the data analysis process. As for otherqualitative methods, data collection and analysis often occur

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 152922concurrently. An illustration is provided by our study of goal-setting processes in family rms:

We iteratively analysed the qualitative data by moving backand forth between the data and an emerging structure of[empirical evidence and] theoretical arguments that respondedto the theory questions presented above, according to three keysteps. (Kotlar & De Massis, 2013)

While the overlap between data collection and analysis allowsresearchers to make on-going changes to some aspects of theresearch design and to identify new issues that are relevant for theresearch objective, it also involves potential risks related to datamanipulation.

There is a vast array of techniques for analysing qualitativeinformation: explanation building and within-case analysis, cross-case analysis, and pattern matching.3 Very often, qualitative familybusiness researchers devote substantial space to report that theycollected multiple sources of data, but forget to explain how theyanalysed anything other than the interview data. This is unfortu-nate because a clear and detailed explanation of how the collecteddata have systematically been analysed is very important forreviewers to better evaluate the strengths of a case study method.One further risk associated with the data analysis phase is thateach data source would be treated independently and the ndingsreported separately. This is not the purpose of a case study. Rather,the researcher must ensure that the data are converged in an attemptto understand the overall case, not the various parts of the case, or the

contributing factors that inuence the case. To this aim, a potentiallyuseful strategy may include involving other research teammembers in the data analysis phase and asking them for feedbackon the ability to integrate different data sources and link them tothe research ndings. A hallmark of high-quality case studyresearch is a clear and unambiguous explanation of how theresearcher evolved from the data to the ndings of their study. Westrongly believe that the more systematically qualitative research-ers are able to perform the data analysis phase, the more successfulthey will be in developing high-quality case study papers.

Before being analysed, information collected through a casestudy method must be prepared by relying on data reduction,data display, data categorisation and data contextualisation techni-ques.4 Data reduction involves selecting, focusing, condensing, andsimplifying the collected material in order to ease the analysis ofthe case study evidence. The process should be guided by thinkingabout which data best answer the research questions. Data displayinvolves creating an organised, compressed way of arranging data(such as through diagrams, charts, matrixes, images or texts). Theaim is to make the information as accessible as possible in order tofacilitate the identication of themes and conclusions. This stepusually involves data coding, where the researchers mark passagesof text (or parts of images or sections of a video, etc.) that have thesame message or are connected in some way and then write anaccompanying explanation of what the selected passages have incommon. Data categorisation involves distinguishing and grouping

3 Explaining each of these techniques is beyond the scope of this article, but the

most used references are Eisenhardt (1989), Yin (2003), and Stake (1995). All of

them provide useful support, and we encourage qualitative family business scholars

to reference these sources in order to justify the data analysis procedures that have

been followed.4 Commonly used references for qualitative data preparation are Miles and

Huberman (1994) and Tesch (1990).different categories of information. The aim is to decomposeinformation, aggregating them into categories that allow compar-isons and distinctions. Finally, data contextualisation involvesassembling the collected information and the external contingen-cies and identifying links and connections. The aim is to enlightenthe likely relationships with events and contextual conditions.Here follows a brief illustration of the data manipulation andanalysis procedures that we followed in our study on the productinnovation process of family versus non-family rms:

Before being analyzed, information gathered through the casestudies was manipulated by applying data categorization andcontextualization techniques [. . .]. We then followed a struc-tured process for data analysis, made up of a preliminarywithin-case study, an explanation-building investigation,followed up by a cross-case comparison. These structuredprocedures for data collection and analysis, as well as the use ofthe semi-structured interview guide, helped enhance thereliability of the research [. . .]. (De Massis, Frattini, Pizzurno,et al., 2013)

The following is how we analysed information in another studyon the role of early adopters in the diffusion of new products inplatform versus non-platform innovations:

The collected information was manipulated before beinganalysed by applying data categorisation and contextualizationtechniques [. . .]. We then followed a structured data analysisprocess consisting of a preliminary within-case study and anexplanation building investigation, followed by a cross-casecomparison. We used different categorizations to search forsimilarities and differences between the cases by creatingseveral partially ordered matrices (Miles & Huberman, 1999).We then interpreted the observed differences regarding the roleof early adopters and launched decisions in light of thedistinctive characteristics of platform and non-platform inno-vations. We decided to consider as reliable a piece ofinformation only if it was reported in at least two interviewswith key informants from different classes of rms (i.e.innovating rm, early adopter and late adopter) or it foundconrmation in the data collected through secondary sources,such as company reports and product literature. The integrationof these different data sources in a triangulation process [. . .]was done to reduce post hoc rationalization and personalinterpretation biases from the interviewed people. Thesestructured procedures for data collection and analysis, as wellas the use of the semi-structured interview guide, helpedenhance the construct validity, internal validity and reliabilityof our research approach. (Frattini et al., 2013)

The use of qualitative data analysis software (NVIVO, Hyper-RESEARCH and ATLAS.ti are only some examples) can be veryuseful to bring rigour to the data analysis phase, as it supportsresearchers in systematically coding and organising voluminousamounts of data and in managing the analysis work of developingcategories, tracing linkages between concepts, and understandingrelationships among categories, which is what we did, for example,in our study of goal setting in family rms:

In order to understand the goal formulation processes in familyrms, we independently read interviews, observations andarchival data, applying open in vivo coding using the qualitativedata analysis program NVIVO (QSR International, version 9),which also enabled exchanging memos to capture themes andbroad observations. (Kotlar & De Massis, 2013)

The studies by Graves and Thomas (2008) and Irava and Moores(2010) are further examples of family business case studies usingNVIVO software for coding and for exploring patterns across cases.

tion

ctio

onal

l

ctio

l

l an

l

ctio

ctio

ctio

ctio

ctio

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 1529 23Nevertheless, there are also some potential concerns associatedwith the use of qualitative data analysis software (Barry, 1998).These include progressively deterministic and rigid processes,privileging of coding and retrieval techniques, increased pressureon researchers to focus on volume and breadth rather than ondepth and meaning, time and energy spent on learning to usecomputer packages, and distraction from the real work ofanalysis. In our experience, qualitative data analysis software isparticularly useful for coding when dealing with massiveamounts of data. A useful feature of many software programmesis also the possibility to export data after the coding procedurein order to take advantage of other software for data analysisand presentation.

7. Presenting results

A critical aspect of case study research is presenting the richbody of empirical evidence and results of the study. Thepresentation of results is a key challenge for qualitative familybusiness scholars (Chenail, 2009), who too often produce manu-scripts that are excessively long and result in massive, unreadabledocuments.

It is important to distinguish between two types of data to bedisplayed: the raw material and the synthetic evidence. Thechallenge of presenting the rich body of qualitative raw materialcan be addressed by presenting a relatively complete rendering ofthe story within the text. The story typically consists of a narrativedescription of the case studies that is interspersed with quotationsfrom key informants and other supporting evidence. The followingquote, extracted from our study on goal setting processes of familyrms, is illustrative of how we accounted for a piece of the storyabout how bargaining emerged from social interactions amongorganisational members:

Table 2Synoptic representation of the case study evidence.

Company Family

business

Strategy Organisa

Radical vs. incremental Closed vs.

open approach

Cross-fun

vs. functi

Firm A Yes Incremental Open Functiona

Firm B Yes Incremental Open Cross-fun

Firm C Yes Incremental Open Functiona

Firm D Yes Incremental Open Functiona

Firm E Yes Incremental Closed Functiona

Firm F No Radical and incremental Closed Cross-fun

Firm G No Radical and incremental Closed Cross-fun

Firm H No Radical and incremental Closed Cross-fun

Firm I No Radical and incremental Closed Cross-fun

Firm L No Radical Closed Cross-fun

From De Massis, Frattini, Pizzurno, et al. (2013).[Our data allowed us to] observe two major stages thatcharacterize the practical patterns through which organiza-tional members interacted: the bargaining mode [. . .], andstabilization of their goals [. . .]. Bargaining was observed whenorganizational members conveyed interpersonal interactions inthe form of either settlements or disputes. Settlementsconsisted in negotiations of goals among two or moreorganizational members with symmetrical inuences. Forinstance, a settlement episode was observed during a meetingbetween a CEO and a minority owner who also serves as aprofessional manager. The parties were discussing an issuerelated to next years budget and, when the professionalmanager expressed some concerns relating to the dividendpolicy, the two started negotiating until the percentage ofprots to be reinvested in the rm was increased. After themeeting, the professional manager commented: This is not therst time our views have differed, but after all, we respect eachother and both believe we can always nd a compromise as longas we want it (Professional Manager). (Kotlar & De Massis,2013)

Sometimes, extensive tables that report the raw material arealso included in the text. Even if these tables are not shown in thenal submission, the use of tables is an effective way to show that arich body of evidence supports the ndings. Qualitative familybusiness scholars should pay particular attention then to interlacetheir story with the emerging theory to prove a close connectionbetween empirical evidence and emergent theory. This interlacingis extremely important in order to come up with a high-qualitycase study paper.

The challenge of presenting the synthetic evidence can beaddressed by using synthetic tables or gures to organise thendings. A separate table that provides a synoptic representationof the collected evidence is usually an effective way to presentthe case study evidence. For example, Table 2 summarises theevidence that we collected in our study on the differences in theproduct innovation process between family and non-family rms.

A table indicating the scope and types of the focal topic underinvestigation and how it is measured can sometimes be reported.Continuing with the same example, we reported Table 3 as followsin order to display an excerpt of comprehensive informationregarding the scope and type of product innovation activitiescarried out in the 10 sampled rms.

To provide additional illustration, Table 4ac displays asynthetic view of some of the ndings that emerged from ourstudy on goal-setting processes in family rms.

Often, the ndings of a case study take the form of theoreticalpropositions. For example, in our study on goal-setting processes infamily rms, we inductively developed seven theoretical proposi-tions that are reported in Table 5. The use of propositions that

Climate

nal team

organisation

High vs. low decisional

autonomy

Risk-taking

vs. risk-averse

High vs. low

formalisation

High Risk-averse Low

nal Low Risk-taking Low


d cross-functional High Risk-averse Low


nal High Risk-taking High

nal Low Risk-taking High

nal Low Risk-taking High

nal Low Risk-averse High

nal Low Risk-taking Highinspire future conrmatory research increases the testability ofthe ndings and allows the creation of a particularly strong bridgefrom the qualitative evidence to theory-testing research.

Finally, we strongly recommend using gures to help interpretthe various concepts and their relationships in the qualitative data.Figures can be a very effective way of capturing the chain ofevidence or depicting how a process unfolded. For example, in ourstudy on goal-setting processes in family rms, we constructedFig. 1 to help make sense of the various concepts that emergedfrom our study and their relationships in our data. This guresummarises and generalises the main ndings of our study,graphically presenting the observations and propositions thatemerged from our analysis.

Figures are very helpful to visually represent the study ndings.Continuing with the same example, Fig. 2 illustrates how wevisually showed the empirical evidence supporting our proposition

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 152924Table 3Product innovation in the studied cases.

Company Type of product innovation projects

Firm A Ninety-ve per cent of NPD projects the rm has initiated in

the last ve years (approximately 20) has been motivated by

the attempt to satisfy a latent need in the market. Very often,

customers get in touch with the rm to ask for improvements

or modications to their current products. These improved

products are then also transferred to other clients of the rm. It

happens less frequently (in 5% of product development

projects) that the rm develops new solutions or technologies

for which a market application is sought. Eighty per cent of

NPD projects consist of on-demand manufacturing new plastic

moulds by applying the rms knowledge in the eld of

thermosetting to new materials and cutting-edge technologies

that are purchased from corporate partners. The average

budget per NPD project is 160 kEuro, and the average projectthat goal diversity is expressed more strongly when an intra-familysuccession is imminent.

As an additional illustration, Fig. 3 visualises the ndings of ourstudy on the management and organisation of the productinnovation process in small family and non-family rms.

Murray (2003) offers another interesting example of use ofgures in a case study. She plots longitudinal case study data alonga timeline and illustrates the sequence of phases through whichthe family rms progress over time, providing specic gures tovisualise the three different types of succession journeys thatemerged from her study.

In sum, reporting the results of a case study can be a difculttask for any family business researcher due to the complex natureof this method. It is challenging to report the ndings in a concisemanner that is appropriate for publication in management andorganisation journals, and the researchers ability to condense andconvert a complex phenomenon into a format that is readily

duration is 8 months.

Firm B Classic product innovation projects (70% of the total) entail

developing new products that better satisfy customer needs by

improving the supercial material of wooden products. Five

years ago, the rm decided to leverage the increasing attention

of its clients towards the environment to innovate its products

and manufacturing processes by reducing their environmental

impact. Since then, the rms innovation efforts have been

directed towards improving the sustainability of its offering, to

take advantage of the growing demand for green products

and services. Environmental innovations (30% of the total) are

carried out by co-designing ecological and socially sustainable

new products with universities, research centres, suppliers and

customers. Four new projects are launched every year, the

average budget per NPD project is 40 kEuro, and the average

projects duration is 6 months.

. . . . . .

Firm L Product innovation projects are usually triggered by the

identication of new technologies, which are then developed

so that they can be applied to the rms products. The

functionalities enabled by the new technologies are tested

with selected clients to understand how they can be better

integrated in the rms offering. Ninety-ve per cent of

projects consist of the development of new cutting-edge

technologies, materials and product architectures

characterised by very innovative functionalities and

exceptional performance. The remaining 5% of projects consist

of making gradual improvements over existing products. Two

new product innovation projects were started in 2010. The

average budget per innovation project is 100 kEuro, and the

average project duration is 30 months (6 months for the

minority of projects implying simple improvements over

existing products).

Excerpt from Appendix 1 reported by De Massis, Frattini, Pizzurno, et al. (2013).No. of resources in

R&D (full-time

equivalent)

Annual R&D

budget (Euro)

Product innovation

performance

4 800,000

(80% for productinnovation)

40% of sales from new

products sold in the last 3

years; product innovation

is the main issue in the

rms industrial plan

2010-2012understood by the reader is very important. A typical pitfall inpresenting the results of a case study is being overwhelmed anddistracted by the huge amounts of interesting data that aresuperuous to the research questions. A suggested way to avoidthis pitfall and report a case study is by telling the reader a consistentstory in which the researcher not only describes the themes, buthow those themes t together. Providing a clear and convincingdescription of the context within which the phenomenon occurs aswell as the phenomenon itself is a common trait of high-qualitycase study articles.

8. Ensuring validity and reliability in research ndings

There are four main criteria that have been adopted to assessthe rigour and trustworthiness of case study research (e.g.,Campbell, 1975; Eisenhardt, 1989; Gibbert, Ruigrok, & Wicki,2008; Gibbert & Ruigrok, 2010; Yin, 1981). Table 6 provides an

6 160,000


The whole range of

products has been

completely renewed in

the last 3 years; winner of

several awards for

product innovation

. . . . . . . . .

4 750,000


50% of prots invested in

activities related to

product innovation every

year

Table 4Summary of empirical evidence emerged from the study on goal-setting processes in family rms.

a. Organisational member goals in the family rm by goal content and goal recipient

Goal content Goal recipient

Family Non-family

Economic Family control over the company

Family wealth

Firm growth

Firm survival

Firm economic performance

Non-economic Family harmony

Family social status

Family identity linkage

Firm internal serenity

External relations

b. Differences between professional and familial social interaction processes

Professional social interactions Familial social interactions

Setting Business environment only Business and family environment

Norms Schedules and dened roles Irregularity and ambiguous roles

Means of bargaining Promises of rewards, threats of sanctions Value abstraction, expressions of affect

Means of stabilisation Formal agreement Social control

c. Stabilisations and acts of commitment to family-centred goals by organisational membership of informants

Acts of conformation to family values Resource dedication Total

Family members Shareholders Actively involved Family members Shareholders Actively involved

Professional social interactionsa 18% 27% 21% 26% 22% 29% 32%

Familial social interactionsb 66% 50% 48% 78% 53% 58% 74%

From Kotlar and De Massis (2013).a Percentages refer to the percentage of professional interactions concluded by stabilisation; 92 total episodes.b Percentages refer to the percentage of familial interactions concluded by stabilisation; 73 total episodes.

Table 5Theoretical propositions developed by Kotlar and De Massis (2013).

Proposition 1 Goal diversity is more strongly expressed when an intra-family succession is imminent.

Proposition 2 The greater the goal diversity, the higher the occurrence of goal-centred social interaction processes.

Proposition 3 Professional social interactions involve administrative bargaining, whereas familial social interactions involve affective bargaining.

Proposition 4 In professional social interactions, stabilisation is achieved through formal controls, whereas in familial social interactions stabilisation

follows social control mechanisms.

Proposition 5 The stabilisation of family-centred goals is more likely to occur through familial than professional social interactions.

Proposition 6 The higher the reliance on professional social interactions, the lower the collective commitment to family-centred goals.

Proposition 7 The higher the reliance on familial social interactions, the greater the collective commitment to family-centred goals.

Fig. 1. A process view of goal-setting in family rms.From Kotlar and De Massis (2013).

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 1529 25

rs

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 152926Fig. 2. Goal diversity in the studied rms by stage of intra-family succession. Goal diverm level.

From Kotlar and De Massis (2013).overview of the four validity and reliability criteria and sum-marises the challenges, issues, and suggested research strategiesthat qualitative researchers may take for each criterion.

Construct validity refers to the extent to which a studyinvestigates what it claims to investigate, that is, the quality ofthe conceptualisation or operationalisation of the relevant concept(Denzin & Lincoln, 1994). One of the main issues for case studyresearchers is that these researchers tend to use subjectivejudgments rather than using a well-considered set of measures.Three research strategies can be considered to enhance constructvalidity. First, researchers should seek to triangulate data frommultiple sources (Yin, 2003). The collection and comparison ofthese data ensures that the topic under study is analysed frommultiple perspectives and enhances construct validity based on theconcept of idea convergence and the conrmation of results (Kna& Breitmayer, 1989). Second, researchers should share transcriptsand drafts with participants (i.e., members of the researchedorganisation) for consistency and accuracy. Researchers mayintegrate a process of member checking in which they can checkor clarify events that the informant participated in, and theinformant can contribute additional perspectives on the relevanttopic. Third, researchers should share the transcript and drafts of

Fig. 3. Differences in the product innovation process between family and non-family From De Massis, Frattini, Pizzurno, et al. (2013).ity is proxied by the number of different goals that emerged from interviews at thetheir case study with other investigators and have them reviewedby peers (i.e., academics other than the authors of the case study).

Internal validity refers to the data analysis phase (Yin, 2003) andrefers to the establishment of causal relationships betweenvariables and results.5 Here, the issue deals with whether theresearcher is able to establish a plausible causal relationship,logical reasoning that is rigorous and convincing enough to defendthe research conclusions. Three research strategies can beconsidered to enhance internal validity. First, researchers shouldanalyse their case study by building a sound explanation about thecase (explanation building). More specically, they should stipulatea presumed set of causal links, which demonstrate, for example,that variable x leads to outcome y and that y was not causedspuriously by a third variable z. Second, through pattern matching,researchers should empirically compare the observed patternswith either the predicted patterns or the patterns established inprevious studies and in different contexts. Third, cross-case

rms.

5 It should be noted, as suggested by Yin (2003), that internal validity as a

criterion to assess the rigour and trustworthiness of case study research can be

applied only to explanatory studies (not to descriptive or exploratory studies).

a ca

y ce

ved

ions

in a

on

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 1529 27comparison enables a researcher to verify ndings by comparingresults from multiple cases.

External validity refers to the denition of the domain to which acase studys ndings can be generalised. It is important to note thatcase study research does not allow for statistical generalisation, forexample, inferring conclusions about a population (Numagami,1998; Yin, 2003). Rather, case studies allow for analyticalgeneralisation. Whereas statistical generalisation refers to thegeneralisation from observation to a population, analyticalgeneralisation denotes a process that refers to the generalisationfrom empirical observations to theory, rather than a population(e.g., Yin, 2003). Eisenhardt (1989) argued that case studies can bea starting point for theory development because they allow newtheoretical understandings or clarications regarding the phe-nomenon of interest. Building theory with case study research is abottom-up approach such that the specics of empirical evidenceproduce the generalisations of theory. Two research strategies canbe considered to enhance external validity. In multiple-casestudies, researchers should use replication logic as a strategy forbuilding the sample in an iterative process one case at a time. Insingle-case studies, researchers should use theory (also rivaltheories) to raise the level of generality of the emerging theorydescribing the phenomenon. Often, family business scholars, as adefensive reporting strategy, problematise generalisability intheir methods section and then again in the conclusion sectionwhen discussing the limitations of the study. For example, in themethod section of our study on product innovation in family versusnon-family rms, we write:

Of course it is not possible to statistically generalise results

Table 6Approaches to enhance validity and reliability in case study research.

Construct validity Internal validity

Challenges Identifying correct operationalmeasures for the concepts

being studied

Seeking to establishrelationship, whereb

conditions are belie

lead to other condit

Key issues To choose an appropriateoperational set of measures:

subjectivity vs. objectivity

To make inferences case study

Research strategies

for remedy

Triangulate data from multiplesources

Read your conclusions with theparticipants

Conduct your research togetherwith other investigators

Explanation building Pattern matching Cross-case comparis

Adapted from Campbell (1975) and Yin (1984).from this type of exploratory case study analysis (Yin, 2003).Our aim is to make analytical and theoretical generalizations tothe existing body of knowledge regarding the anatomy of theproduct innovation process in family-rms. The ndings willhopefully inform future theoretical and empirical studiesconcerning product innovation in family rms, but cannot begeneralised to populations of rms or markets (De Massis,Frattini, Pizzurno, et al., 2013).

In the same study, we then raise the topic of generalisabilityagain briey in the limitations section:

The main limitation of our study descends from its exploratorynature. Because our objective was to gain theoretical clarica-tions as to how and why the product innovation process infamily rms is different from non-family rms, our ndingsshould not be generalized to any populations of companies.However, and this represents the main contribution of ourstudy, these ndings will hopefully encourage family businessand product innovation scholars to examine whether theresults of our analysis can be statistically generalized. (DeMassis, Frattini, Pizzurno, et al., 2013)

Reliability refers to the extent to which subsequent researchersarrive at the same results if they conduct the study again with thesame steps (Yin, 2003). Here, the issue involves minimising errorsand biases in the study. It should be noted that reliability in casestudy research often boils down to a sufcient presentation of theevidence/data such that the reader has enough of a background tobe able to agree or disagree with the researchers interpretation ofthe data. Three research strategies can be considered to enhancereliability. First, researchers should use a case study protocol areport that transparently claries the research procedures andspecies how the entire case study has been conducted. Second,researchers should use techniques for data preparation that increasethe transparency of the study. Third, replication can be accom-plished by developing a case study database, as already discussed inthe Collecting Information section.

In sum, there are concrete research strategies that qualitativescholars may consider to overcome the typical criticism of casestudy research and increase the validity and reliability of theresults.

9. Conclusion

The purpose of this article was to provide some guidelines thatare useful to family business researchers when deciding whetherand how to use case studies and hopefully to reviewers and editorswhen evaluating case study work.

External validity Reliability

usal

rtain

to

Dening the domain towhich a studys ndings

can be generalised

Demonstrating that the operationsof a study such as the data

collection procedures can be

repeated leading to the same results

To generalise the studyndings (from an analytical

point of view)

To minimise errors and biases ina study

Use replication logic inmultiple-case studies

Use theory in single-casestudies (also rival theories)

Use a case study protocol Use techniques for data preparation Develop a case study databaseOn the one hand, case study research offers family businessscholars signicant opportunities to contribute to the familybusiness literature by advancing the theoretical understanding offamily rms. This theoretical development will likely expand ourknowledge on whether and how rms with family involvementdisplay particularistic behaviours, develop distinctive resources orproduce dissimilar performances compared to other types of rms(De Massis, Kotlar, Chua, & Chrisman, 2014). We argue that manyof the features and dimensions that make family rms resources,behaviours and performances unique are especially possible tocapture and grasp through the richness, depth, and closeness of thecase study method. For example, case studies can be particularlyhelpful to understand how processes are deployed in family rms,which is an area that has been rather neglected so far. Process casestudies on intra-family ownership and management successionprocesses might shed new light on hard-to-get-at phenomena atthe micro-level of social interaction and organisational develop-ment in family rms (De Massis, Chua, & Chrisman, 2008; Salvato &

A. De Massis, J. Kotlar / Journal of Family Business Strategy 5 (2014) 152928Corbetta, 2013). Likewise, we still know little about the mecha-nisms and dynamics through which family-centred non-economicgoals enter decision making in family rms (Chrisman, Chua,Pearson, & Barnett, 2012) or how the evolution of family dynamicsand/or unique endowments of family rms social, human, andnancial resources along the rm life cycle shape their innovativebehaviour and performance over time (De Massis, Chirico, Kotlar, &Naldi, 2014; De Massis, Frattini, & Lichtenthaler, 2013; Kotlar, DeMassis, Frattini, Bianchi, & Fang, 2013). At the same time, casestudy research is an appropriate approach with which to gain amore ne-grained understanding of the differences within theheterogeneous population of family rms (Chua, Chrisman,Steier, & Rau, 2012). For example, following case studyapproaches, prospective scholars may examine the micro-foundations and mechanisms engendered by family ownershipdispersion in family rms, which has been argued to be animportant source of heterogeneity among the population offamily rms (De Massis, Kotlar, Campopiano, & Cassia, 2013).Well-designed, contextualised and properly implemented casestudies will help to answer many important yet overlookedquestions about critical family rm processes and resources thatwill in turn contribute to the literature by lling the relevantgaps in our knowledge about the behaviour of family rms.

On the other hand, as the family business eld continuesto mature, case study research provides family business scholarswith growing opportunities to contribute to the mainstreammanagement literature. We believe that family rms are especiallyapt as a context in which to address some important debates inmanagement and organisational theory. For example, behaviouraland stakeholder theorists are currently engaged in questions abouthow top executives respond to multiple and competing stake-holder claims and how they prioritise such claims in decisionmaking. Family rms are characterised by the need to balance thedivergent identities, interests, and priorities of members of thefamily and the business systems, all of which are aspects that areparticularly difcult to capture through quantitative methods. Thisallows, for example, the investigation of the executives prioritisa-tion of stakeholders claims in the idiosyncratic and very insightfulsituation where divergent identities, interests, and goals ofmultiple stakeholders coexist within the organisation (De Massis& Kotlar, 2012; Mitchell, Agle, Chrisman, & Spence, 2011). Thus,family rms provide a unique context for case study work aimed atextending or enriching behavioural and stakeholder perspectiveson such an important issue.

It is our hope that the guidelines discussed in this article willstimulate and guide future case study work in the family businesseld, allowing qualitative researchers to take advantage of suchopportunities for future research.

In closing, this article suggests important implications forscholars, reviewers and editors of case studies in the family businesseld. Scholars are encouraged to draw upon our reection of thekey elements for designing and implementing qualitative casestudy research to prepare increasingly rigorous case studies forsubmission. Reviewers are encouraged to use our guidelines as areference framework when evaluating case study work with familyrms. Journal editors are encouraged to use these guidelines as achecklist in order to formulate editorial policies that are as clearand transparent as possible for prospective submitters to publishhigh-quality case study work.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Editor-in-Chief, Joseph H. Astrachan, andthe Assistant Editor, Torsten M. Pieper, for their editorial guidance,and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful and develop-mental feedback.References

Amabile, T. M., Patterson, C., Mueller, J., Wojcik, T., Odomirok, P. W., Marsh, M., et al.(2001). Academicpractitioner collaboration in management research: A case ofcross-profession collaboration. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 418431.

Amis, J. M., & Silk, M. L. (2008). The philosophy and politics of quality in qualitativeorganizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), 456480.

Astrachan, J. H. (1988). Family rm and community culture. Family Business Review,1(2), 165189.

Bansal, P., & Corley, K. (2012). Publishing in AMJPart 7: Whats different aboutqualitative research? Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 509513.

Barry, C.A. (1998) Choosing qualitative data analysis software: Altas/ti and Nudistcompared. Sociological Research Online, 3(3), available at http://www.socreson-line.org.uk/socresonline/3/3/4.html, accessed August 31st, 2013.

Bartunek, J. M., Rynes, S. L., & Ireland, R. D. (2006). Wha

the case study method in family business research: guidelines for qualitative scholarship

Documents