Management Research News

The case for case studies in management research

Eric PattonSteven H. Appelbaum
Article information:
To cite this document:
Eric PattonSteven H. Appelbaum, (2003),"The case for case studies in management research", Management Research
News, Vol. 26 Iss 5 pp. 60 - 71
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01409170310783484
Downloaded on: 14 July 2015, At: 03:14 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 4036 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Jennifer Rowley, (2002),"Using case studies in research", Management Research News, Vol. 25 Iss 1 pp. 16-27 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/01409170210782990
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

Jennifer Rowley, (2012),"Conducting research interviews", Management Research Review, Vol. 35 Iss 3/4 pp. 260-271 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/01409171211210154
Arch G. Woodside, Elizabeth J. Wilson, (2003),"Case study research methods for theory building", Journal of Business
& Industrial Marketing, Vol. 18 Iss 6/7 pp. 493-508 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08858620310492374

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:263496 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Biographical Notes The Case for Case Studies in
Eric Patton is Doctoral
Student, Ph.D.
Management Research
Programme in
Adminstration in the by Eric Patton and Steven H. Appelbaum
John Molson School of
Business, Montreal,
Quebec, Canada Abstract
Dr. Steven H. Appelbaum
is Concordia University It is commonly asserted that qualitative research in the organizational sci-
Research Chair in
Organizational
ences lacks the rigor and objectivity of the quantitative approach. Case stud-
Development and ies, while commonly used for educational purposes, have been viewed in a
Professor of less favorable light in terms of research. This paper suggests that case stud-
Management, in the ies represent an important research track in organizational science, not only
John Molson School of as a method of generating hypotheses for quantitative studies, but for gener-
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

Business, Montreal,
Quebec, Canada ating and testing theory. The paper will develop arguments in support of
case study research, will highlight particular issues and constraints relating
to case study research, and will offer recommendations for the use of this
method.
Empirical research advances only when it is accompanied by logical
thinking, and not when it is treated as a mechanistic endeavor
- Richard Yin, 1984.
Introduction

A case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phe-

nomenon within a real-life context where the boundaries between phenome-
non and context are not clearly evident, and in which multiple sources of
evidence are used (Yin, 1984). Case studies typically combine data-
collection methods such as archival searches, interviews, questionnaires,
and observation (Eisenhardt, 1989). While quantitative data often appears
in case studies, qualitative data usually predominates.

In spite of their frequent use and long history, case studies have his-
torically been stereotyped as a weak sibling among social science methods
(Yin, 1984). Investigators who utilize case studies are regarded as having
deviated from their academic disciplines and their investigations are pur-
ported to lack precision, objectivity and rigor. A major reason why case
studies are viewed in a negative light is due to the fact that many equate “pre-
cision, objectivity and rigor” with quantitative measures. Gummesson
(1991) notes that qualitative measures are often classified as second rate by
universities and business schools. Given that qualitative methods of data
collection normally predominate in case studies, it logically follows that
they are held in somewhat lower esteem. This fact is not surprising given the
history of business education and research.

60 Management Research News

 The “Case” For and Against the Use of Case Studies.

The Natural Science School of Social Science Research The Case for
Case Studies
The traditional school of management thought can be traced all the way in Management
back to the seventeenth century and the view of Descartes and Newton that Research
the whole is the sum of its parts (Gummesson, 1991). In this “natural sci-
ence” approach to management, activities and behaviors are broken down
and compartementalized, and management is viewed as a series of steps to
follow; quantification and logic are the dominating forces. This traditional
school treats the fact that workers and organizations consist of human be-
ings as almost an afterthought. While the case study was the approach of
choice for sociologists in the United States at the turn of the century, with the
University of Chicago at the forefront (Hamel, 1991), quantitative statistical
methods in sociology, championed by Columbia University, gained a great
deal of ground by the mid-1930’s and quickly took center stage. Since
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

World War II, sociology has also been dominated by the natural science
model (Sjoberb et al., 1991).

Advocates of the natural science model assume that an objective

world exists independently of the researcher and that one can uncover “uni-
versal laws” of human nature and social reality. What is most important to
these researchers is the establishment of rigorous and standardized proce-
dures for collecting and analyzing data to test hypotheses and predict the
course of social reality (Sjoberg, Williams, Vaughan and Sjoberg, 1991).
This search for universal laws becomes a deductive process incorporating
technical procedures aimed at demonstrating accuracy while eliminating
any bias on the part of the researcher or the empirical context (Hamel, 1991).
In quantitative studies, the research question seeks out a relationship be-
tween a small number of variables and efforts are made to operationally bind
the inquiry, to define the variables, and to minimize the importance of inter-
pretation until data are analyzed (Stake, 1995). Stake (1995) further asserts
that quantitative researchers regularly treat the uniqueness of cases as “er-
ror”, outside the system of explained science. What quantitative researchers
consider “error” (Standard error of estimate, situational factors, the indi-
viduality of the respondent and the measurer (Cooper and Emory, 1995)
may be of critical importance to the case study researcher. Cornerstones of
Management Science include various mathematical models that encompass
calculus, linear and matrix algebra, and statistical and simulation techniques
(Barman, Buckley and DeVaughn, 1997). Data collection methods typi-
cally include surveys from a large number of people who represent a popula-
tion or a random sample of a population (Orum, Feagin and Sjoberg, 1991).
The goal of the sampling process is to obtain accurate statistical evidence on
the distributions of variables within the population (Eisenhardt, 1989).
Throughout, the focus is on precision in the form of statistical procedures. In
summary, for quantitative analysis, things can be counted; things are related
to one another as natural science forces are related, as cause and effect; and

Volume 26 Number 5 2003 61

 the social world may be assumed to operate according to a few underlying
social laws (Orum et al., 1991).
The Case for
Case Studies The natural science school of social sciences has harshly criticized the
in Management use of case studies in research. Hamel (1995) underlines that the case study
Research has been strongly faulted for 1) its lack or representativeness as a point of
observation for a social phenomenon and 2) its lack of rigor in the collection,
construction, and analysis of the empirical materials that give rise to the
study. The first criticism concerns the view that generalizations cannot be
made on the basis of case studies while the lack of rigor criticism is linked to
the problem of bias, which is introduced by the subjectivity of the researcher
and that of the field informants on whom the researcher relies to get an un-
derstanding of the case. However, the natural science school has itself come
under fire for its shortcomings, notably in the field of business research. For
Management Science, the traditional gap between what practitioners expect
and what theoreticians provide has widened; as such, Management Science
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

has been losing its appeal to the business community, and its usefulness in
practice has been questioned (Barman et al., 1997). Furthermore, Business
Schools have received strong criticism of their undergraduate and MBA
core curricula due to a perceived excessive focus on theory, mathematical
and statistical analytic methods (Goldberg, 1996). Even physicists such as
Capra (1983) underline that the fragmented approach of business research-
ers and economists who favor strictly quantitative measures has created a
huge gap between theory and business reality. By dealing with brief survey
questions and large numbers of disconnected respondents, the flesh and
bones of everyday life is removed from the substance of the research itself,
which diminishes the usefulness of the research (Orum et al., 1991).

Increasingly, there is a feeling that the principle of “Let’s get it down

to something we can count!” does not always formulate the best research
strategy (Kaplan, 1964). Kaplan highlights what is referred to as the mys-
tique of quantity, which is an exaggerated regard for the significance of
measurement, just because it is quantitative, without regard either to what
has been measured or to what can subsequently be done with the measure.
Those bedazzled by the mystique of quantity respond to numbers as though
they were the repositories of occult powers and Kaplan asserts that there ex-
ists behavioral scientists who, in their desperate search for scientific status,
give the impression that they do not much care what they do if only they do it
right: substance gives way to form. In this sense, lack of rigor becomes a
problem in quantitative studies as well. Researchers run the risk of entering
a vicious circle of academic research where researchers quote each other,
have the “right” references, publish papers in the “right” journals, and pres-
ent papers at the “right” conferences (Gummesson, 1991). Furthermore, it
has been shown time and again, that quantitative research can also be af-
fected by the bias of the researcher and of participants: samples can be ma-
nipulated, data can be tampered with or purposely excluded, surveys can be
poorly constructed and respondents can answer dishonestly. In his book,

62 Management Research News

 The Mismeasure of Man, Stephen Jay Gould (1981) highlights how quanti-
tative measures had been used to give scientific validity to notions of intelli-
gence (based on test scores and brain measurement) that were then used by The Case for
white males to discriminate against women and ethnic minorities. Gould’s Case Studies
example highlights that blind faith in quantitative measures is not only in Management
wrong, but also potentially dangerous. Research

The Use of the Case

In his classic work “ General System Theory”, Von Bertalanffy (1973) un-
derlines the reasons why the laws and methods of physics should not be ap-
plied to social phenomena such as the study of Business. Von Bertalanffy
underlines that conventional physics deals only with closed systems, i.e.,
systems that are considered to be isolated from their environment. Living
organisms are essentially open systems that maintain themselves in a con-
tinuous inflow and outflow, a building up and breaking down of compo-
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

nents. Organizations such as businesses, hospitals and universities should

obviously be viewed as open systems in a constant state of flux and in con-
stant contact with their environment. Von Bertalanffy concludes that the
method of classical science is appropriate for phenomena that can be re-
solved into isolated causal chains, or are statistical outcome of an “infinite”
number of chance processes. The classical modes of thinking, however, fail
in the case of interaction of a large but limited number of elements or pro-
cesses. Basically, the case is an integrated system (Stake, 1995).

The research conditions in business administration are such that con-

ceptualization and the operational definitions used for measurement and ob-
servation are rarely subject to the same control as those in the natural
sciences (Gummesson, 1991). Case studies offer the opportunity for a holis-
tic view of a process as opposed to a reductionist-fragmented view that is so
often preferred. According to the holistic view, the whole is not identical
with the sum of its parts; consequently, the whole can only be understood by
treating it as the central object of study (Gummesson, 1991). As a research
endeavor, the case study contributes uniquely to our knowledge of individ-
ual, organizational, social, and political phenomena; the distinctive need for
case studies arises out of the desire to understand complex social phenom-
ena; in brief, the case study allows an investigation to retain the holistic and
meaningful characteristics of real-life events (Yin, 1984). The case study’s
unique strength is its ability to deal with a full variety of evidence - docu-
ments, artifacts, interviews and observations. (Yin, 1984).

Rather than assuming a world of simplicity and uniformity, those who

adopt the qualitative approach of case studies generally picture a world of
complexity and plurality (Orum et al., 1991). Since a number of organiza-
tional issues are related to the intersection of human agents and organiza-
tional structures, a case can be made that various major organizational
issues cannot be addressed until in-depth case studies come to be viewed as

Volume 26 Number 5 2003 63

 not just an adjunct to the natural science model but as having an independent
role of their own in advancing sociological issues. (Sjoberg, 1991).
The Case for
Case Studies It would appear that much of the conflict between those who favor a
in Management natural science approach and those who favor the case study approach is due
Research not to the fact that one approach is superior to the other, but because these
two approaches are so different; not only in their methods but also in their
aims. Related to the issue of quantitative versus qualitative measures, Yin
(1984) underlines that case studies should not be limited to include only
qualitative measures. In addition to the mystique of quantity, Kaplan (1964)
also suggests that there exists a mystique of quality that is equally as danger-
ous. This mystique, like its counterpart, also subscribes to the magic of num-
bers, only it views their occult powers as a kind of black magic, effective
only for evil ends (Kaplan, 1964). The lesson is that no research technique or
measurement should be rejected or used a priori; the focus and scope of a
project should lead to the research design. This lesson also applies to case
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

studies, where both qualitative and quantitative measures can be used as

warranted.

Still, as qualitative methods tend to predominate in case studies, it is

important to underline why and when they should be used and how the case
study approach contrasts against the natural science approach on major is-
sues. First and foremost, the case study takes shape as part of an inductive
approach where the empirical details that constitute the object of study are
considered in light of the particular context (Hamel, 1993). This is in con-
trast to the deductive reasoning methods of the natural science approach
where the uniqueness of the particular case is not considered. However, the
appropriateness of either approach is determined by the aim of the re-
searcher. Quantitative researchers have pressed for explanation and control
by searching for cause and effect relationships between a small number of
variables that can be applied in any setting. Qualitative researchers have
pressed for understanding the complex interrelationships among all ele-
ments present in a particular case (Stake, 1995). Stake (1995) also under-
lines that the qualitative researcher concentrates on the instance, trying to
pull it apart and put it back together again more meaningfully while the
quantitative researcher seeks a collection of instances, expecting that, from
the aggregate, issue relevant meanings will emerge.

In general, case studies are the preferred strategy when the investiga-
tor has little control over events and when the focus is on a contemporary
phenomenon within some real-life context (Yin, 1984). Yin identifies at
least four different applications for case studies. First, to explain the causal
links in real-life interventions that is too complex for the survey or experi-
mental strategies. The difference with the natural science approach in terms
of explanation is that, while the natural sciences seek to explain universal
truths, case studies strive to explain the particular case at hand with the pos-
sibility of coming to broader conclusions. The second application of case

64 Management Research News

 studies is to describe the real-life context in which an intervention has oc-
curred. Third, a descriptive case study of an intervention can serve as an
evaluation tool. Finally, the case study strategy may be used to explore those The Case for
situations in which the intervention being evaluated has no clear, single set Case Studies
of outcomes. This last application indicates that case studies can be useful in Management
for theory generation while the natural sciences approach is usually used for Research
theory testing. In this vein, Hamel (1993) highlights that all social science
studies must start off with a theory based on a review of the literature relat-
ing to the subject under investigation and this theory must then be validated
through the study of a specific object, phenomenon or social problem. The
key point is that before a theory can be validated, it must be constructed. In
other words, a theory or theoretical framework first emerges through the in-
ductive approach of studying an empirical case or object, not through a de-
ductive process. Hamel further asserts that all theories are initially based on
a particular case or object. Eisenhardt (1989) offers that the case study
method’s in-depth style and use of different methods frees the researcher
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

from the shackles of strict procedure, unfreezes thinking and increases the
likelihood of generating novel theory.

The Validity of Case Studies

As previously highlighted, the harshest criticisms of the case study ap-

proach have revolved around the question of validity. Specifically, case
studies are accused of being subjective, lacking rigor and yielding findings
that cannot be generalized across settings. While, as previously emphasized,
problems of validity also exist in strictly quantitative methods, the issues of
validity in case studies deserves attention.

In terms of generalization, many state that you cannot generalize from

a single case and that case studies are only useful for creating hypotheses but
not for testing them. Yin (1984) points out, however, that an investigator’s
goal is to expand and generalize theories (analytic generalization) and not to
enumerate frequencies (statistical generalization). If you have a good de-
scriptive or analytic language by means of which you can truly grasp the in-
teraction between various parts of a system and the important parts of a
system, the possibilities to generalize from very few cases, or even one sin-
gle case, may be reasonably good (Normann, 1984). The key is to build a
proper case with analytic sophistication rather than creating something that
can be easily replicated time and time again. The same philosophy can be at-
tributed to formal experiments: The important thing is the design of the ex-
periment, not the amount of repetitions performed. Case studies should seek
both generalizabilty and the attention to the individual case. Most propo-
nents of the natural science approach view the use of random sampling as
the key to asserting generalized findings. However, for case studies, random
selection is neither necessary nor even preferable (Eisenhardt, 1989). For
case studies, the generalizabilty is determined by the strength of the descrip-
tion of the context. Such descriptions are one of the cornerstones of case

Volume 26 Number 5 2003 65

 studies and allow the reader to determine the level of correspondence of this
particular case to other similar situations. The detail and depth of the de-
The Case for scription rendered by the case study permit an understanding of the empiri-
Case Studies cal foundations of the theory (Hamel, 1993). Hamel (1993) also notes that
in Management the degree of detail in the description of the case study thus serves to ensure
Research that the representativeness of the case under investigation has been defined
in a manner that is clearly apparent. Stake (1995) also asserts that people can
learn much that is general from a single case. He notes that individuals are
familiar with other cases through personal engagement or vicarious experi-
ence and as they add new cases, thus making a slightly new group from
which to generalize, there is a new opportunity to strengthen, modify or re-
ject old generalizations.
Case studies are also criticized for their lack of rigor due to the lack of
standard methodological procedures. However, it could be argued that the
lack of pre-determined steps makes case studies harder and more demand-
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

ing. As previously stated, case studies utilize a plethora of data collection

methods including observation, interviews, histories and quantitative meas-
ures. Rather than lacking rigor, data collection is labor-intensive, can last
months or even years, and data overload seems almost inevitable (Miles,
1990). Without the bounding of a strictly quantitative methodology, the in-
tensive use of empirical evidence can yield theory that is overly complex.
Therefore, discipline and focus is certainly required. It should also be noted
that formal methodologies for qualitative data collection and analysis have
been developed, particularly by Miles and Huberman (1984, 1994), for ob-
serving events, conducting unstructured interviews and coding qualitative
data. Furthermore, the use of multiple data-collection methods provides
stronger substantiation of constructs and hypotheses (Eisenhardt, 1989).
Stake (1995) highlights many triangulation methods used in case studies to
increase validity. Analyzing data in different spaces, at different times and
in different contexts; having other researchers, perhaps from totally differ-
ent backgrounds, review procedures and conclusions; and using different
data sources to study the same object (interviews and archived records) all
serve to attain triangulation and increase confidence in conclusions.
The Case Study Roadmap: The Light at the End of the Tunnel
Through the literature on case study research in general and the work of
Stake (1995), Hamel (1993) and Eisenhardt (1989) in particular, a clear vi-
sion of what activities need to be undertaken in order to conduct a proper and
useful case study emerges. This roadmap can be summarized in the follow-
ing points:
1. Determine the Object of Study
The first crucial step is for the researcher to decide what topic the case will
focus on. It is important for the object of study to be broadly defined so that
the researcher will have room to maneuver and allow the case to lead him or

66 Management Research News

 her into new directions. However, it is important for the aims of the research
to be outlined and tentative hypotheses to be constructed.
The Case for
2. Select the Case Case Studies
in Management
As previously highlighted, case study research does not rely on random Research
sampling techniques. Rather, the case study researcher must strategically
select a case that is pertinent to the object of study and that will allow the
subject to be investigated fully.

3. Build initial theory through a literature review.

The existing literature on the object of study helps frame the case study and
is important for establishing validity in the research and confidence in the
findings. If the theories and hypotheses in the existent literature coincide
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

with the findings of the case, than confidence in the findings will be in-
creased. Still, if the results of the case do not coincide with the literature on
the subject, then an excellent opportunity arises to determine why and per-
haps develop new theory. As Eisenhardt (1989) underlines, tying the emer-
gent theory to existing literature enhances the internal validity,
generalizability, and theoretical level of theory building from case study re-
search.

4. Collecting and organizing the data gathering

To avoid being overwhelmed with mountains of data, instruments and pro-

tocols should be established for the collection of data. While data collection
is a constant process of grasping good opportunities as well as setting struc-
tured plans for observing events, interviewing sources and reviewing docu-
mentation, it is important that the focus remain on the object of study.

5. Analyzing the data and reaching conclusions.

Once again, the danger of being overwhelmed by the quantity of data exists
during the analysis phase. The ultimate goal of the case study is to uncover
patterns, determine meanings, construct conclusions and build theory. As
previously underlined, rich description is a crucial step before conclusions
can be offered. Once context is determined, the data can be examined prop-
erly and findings can be presented. The quality of the context description,
creating links back to the literature and triangulation will all play a crucial
role in determining the validity of the research.

To conclude, the idea that properly designed case studies lack rigor is
clearly false; in fact, case study is remarkably hard, even though case studies
have traditionally been considered to be “soft” research (Yin, 1984).

Volume 26 Number 5 2003 67

 Point-Counter Point: Some Conclusions

The Case for Perhaps the greatest criticism of the case study is that it is subjective and
Case Studies strongly influenced by the researcher. On this point, the case study is guilty
in Management as charged. In fact, the researcher does play a central role in the outcome of
Research the study. Stake (1995) points out that all research depends on interpreta-
tion, but with quantitative designs there is an effort to limit the role of per-
sonal interpretation from the development of the research design, through
the data collection and analysis. Qualitative designs call for the persons
most responsible for interpretations to be in the field, making observations,
exercising subjective judgement, analyzing and synthesizing, all the while
realizing their own consciousness. For mainstream quantitative researchers,
these interpretations and judgement create problems of reliability, which is
often judged by the ability of an experiment or study to be replicated by an-
other researcher who reaches identical conclusions. However, the identity
and interpretation of the researcher need not affect the validity of the study.
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

In case studies, the identity of the researcher will influence the study
based on two factors: access and preunderstanding. Access refers to the abil-
ity to get close to the object of study in order to truly find out what is happen-
ing (Gummesson, 1991). Gummesson (1991) relates many amusing stories
of how business executives would limit the access of researchers, doling out
“company lines” while trying to hide what was really taking place, usually
for self-serving reasons. In the researcher’s efforts to gain access, two types
of figures are essential: gatekeepers and informants. Gatekeepers are those
who can open or close the gate for the researcher while informants are those
who can provide valuable information and smooth the way to others (Gum-
messon, 1991).

Preunderstanding refers to such things as people’s knowledge, in-

sights, and experience before they engage in a research project (Gummes-
son, 1991). Gummesson (1991) underlines that an individual’s
preunderstanding is primarily influenced by five elements: 1) a knowledge
of theories, 2) a knowledge of techniques, 3) a knowledge of institutional
conditions, 4) an understanding of social patterns which encompasses a
company’s cultural value system of often tacit rules of cooperation, social
intercourse, communication, etc, and 5) the personal attributes of the re-
searcher such as intuition, creativity, vitality, and human understanding.
While a lack of preunderstanding will cause the researcher to spend consid-
erable time gathering basic information, preunderstanding can be a serious
threat to the objectivity of a study as it introduces bias on the part of the re-
searcher. Those who are able to balance on the razor’s edge use their preun-
derstanding but are not its slave (Gummesson, 1991). It is essential that
preunderstanding be subject to change, that the researcher be aware of their
own paradigm, selective perception, and personal defense mechanisms;
moreover, they must also take into account the fact that their own possible

68 Management Research News

 insecurity or other personality factors may influence their research (Gum-
messon, 1991). Obviously, as Gummesson points out, the researcher in such
a situation must be mature, open, honest, and possess, I may add, a strong fo- The Case for
cus and sense of discipline. Case Studies
in Management
It is also crucial that the cases study researchers make their identity Research
known up front in very explicit terms. Undoubtedly, the researcher’s sub-
jectivity does intervene, but to the extent this intervention is clearly stated, it
then becomes objectified into an object that is clearly the researcher’s point
of view (Hamel, 1993). Therefore, the researcher is a variable in the research
design. Consequently, the only way some form of objectivity can be sus-
tained is through critical reflection, through recognition that one’s research
results may well be shaped by one’s position in the power structure and by
the ideological context within which one carries out social activities
(Sjoberg et al., 1991). If the researcher is aware of his or her viewpoint and
paradigm, they may be, in fact, more open to new possibilities and new ex-
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

planations. In essence, case studies in management (qualitative) are valid

and reliable. They fulfill the basic tenets of research and occupy a significant
niche. However, the problem for most classical researchers (quantitative) is
that they are different. If being different is a problem, it is possible that this
real-life method of inquiry may be a nouveau solution.

Volume 26 Number 5 2003 69

 References

The Case for

Case Studies Barman, S., Buckley, M.R., and DeVaughn, W.L.A (1997) “Pedagogical
in Management Concerns in Business Education: The Case of Management Science” SAM
Research Advanced Management Journal, Winter 1997.

Capra, F (1983) Le Temps du Changement, Science-Société-Nouvelle Cul-

ture, Paris, Le Rocher.

Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989) “ Building Theories from Case Study Research”

Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, October 1989.

Goldberg, M.A. (1996). “The Case Against Practicality and Relevance as

Gauges of Business Schools” Journal of Management Inquiry, December
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

1996.

Gould, S.J. (1981) The Mismeasure of Man. WW Norton & Company. New
York

Gummesson, E. (1991) Qualitative Methods in Management Research.

Sage Publications. Newbury Park, California.

Hamel, J (1993) Case Study Methods. Sage Publication, Newbury Park,

California.

Kaplan, A. (1964) The Conduct of Inquiry; Methodology in Behavioral Sci-

ence. Chandler Publications. San Francisco.

Miles, M.B. (1990) “New Methods for Qualitative Data Collection and
Analysis: Vignettes and Pre-Structured Cases”. Qualitative Studies in Edu-
cation, Vol. 3 No. 1, 1990.

Miles, M.B., and Huberman, A.M (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis : An

Expanded Sourcebook. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, California.

Orum, A.M; Feagin, J.R.; and Sjoberg, G (1991) “Introduction: The Nature
of Case Study” A Case for the Case Study ed. Feagin, J; Orum, A; Sjoberg,
G. , UNC Press, Chapel Hill.

Sjoberg, G; Williams, N.; Vaughan, T.R.; and Sjoberg, A.F. (1991) “The
Case Study Approach in Social Research” A Case for the Case Study ed.
Feagin, J; Orum, A; Sjoberg, G., UNC Press, Chapel Hill.

70 Management Research News

 Stake, R.E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Sage Publications.
London
The Case for
Von Bertalanffy, L (1973) La Théorie Générale Des Systèmes. Dunod. Case Studies
Paris in Management
Research
Yin, R.K. (1984) Case Study Research - Design And Methods. Sage Publi-
cations. Beverly Hills
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

Volume 26 Number 5 2003 71

 This article has been cited by:

1. Kotapati Srinivasa Reddy, Tahir Nisar. 2015. Beating the Odds! Build theory from emerging markets phenomenon and the
emergence of case study research—A “Test-Tube” typology. Cogent Business & Management 2, 1037225. [CrossRef]
2. Natalie Galea, Abigail Powell, Martin Loosemore, Louise Chappell. 2015. Designing robust and revisable policies for gender
equality: lessons from the Australian construction industry. Construction Management and Economics 1-15. [CrossRef]
3. Bruno S. Silvestre. 2015. Sustainable Supply Chain Management in Emerging Economies: Environmental Turbulence,
Institutional Voids and Sustainability Trajectories. International Journal of Production Economics . [CrossRef]
4. Marie-Christine Chalus-Sauvannet, Bérangère Deschamps, Luis Cisneros. 2015. Unexpected Succession: When Children
Return to Take Over the Family Business. Journal of Small Business Management n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]
5. Giovanni O. Serafini, Leslie T. Szamosi. 2015. Five star hotels of a Multinational Enterprise in countries of the transitional
periphery: A case study in human resources management. International Business Review . [CrossRef]
6. Elisabeth Brämberg, Charlotte Klinga, Irene Jensen, Hillevi Busch, Gunnar Bergström, Mats Brommels, Johan Hansson.
2015. Implementation of evidence-based rehabilitation for non-specific back pain and common mental health problems: a
process evaluation of a nationwide initiative. BMC Health Services Research 15, 79. [CrossRef]
7. John James Cater, Roland E. Kidwell. 2014. Function, governance, and trust in successor leadership groups in family firms.
Journal of Family Business Strategy 5, 217-228. [CrossRef]
8. Alexander Styhre. 2014. In the service of God and the parish: Professional ideologies and managerial control in the Church
of Sweden. Culture and Organization 20, 307-329. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

9. Gianna Moscardo. 2014. Tourism and Community Leadership in Rural Regions: Linking Mobility, Entrepreneurship,
Tourism Development and Community Well-Being. Tourism Planning & Development 11, 354-370. [CrossRef]
10. John James Cater III, Brent Beal. 2014. Ripple effects on family firms from an externally induced crisis. Journal of Family
Business Management 4:1, 62-78. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
11. João F. Proença, Manuel Castelo Branco. 2014. Corporate social responsibility practices and motivations in a peripheral
country: two Portuguese illustrative cases. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society 14:2, 252-264.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
12. Alexander Styhre. 2014. Gender Equality as Institutional Work: The Case of the Church of Sweden. Gender, Work &
Organization 21:10.1111/gwao.2014.21.issue-2, 105-120. [CrossRef]
13. Angela R. Dobele, Kate Westberg, Marion Steel, Kris Flowers. 2014. An Examination of Corporate Social Responsibility
Implementation and Stakeholder Engagement: A Case Study in the Australian Mining Industry. Business Strategy and the
Environment 23, 145-159. [CrossRef]
14. Bérangère Deschamps, Luis Cisneros, Franck Barès. 2014. PME familiales québécoises : impact des parties prenantes externes
à la famille dans les co-successions en fratrie. Management international 18, 151. [CrossRef]
15. Muhammad Ali Noor, Malik M.A. Khalfan, Tayyab Maqsood. 2013. The role of procurement practices in effective
implementation of infrastructure projects in Pakistan. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 6:4, 802-826.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Judy Vesel, Tara Robillard. 2013. Teaching Mathematics Vocabulary with an Interactive Signing Math Dictionary. Journal
of Research on Technology in Education 45, 361-389. [CrossRef]
17. Catherine Farrell, Jonathan Morris. 2013. Managing the neo-bureaucratic organisation: lessons from the UK's prosaic sector.
The International Journal of Human Resource Management 24, 1376-1392. [CrossRef]
18. Robert Gerth, Albert Boqvist, Marcus Bjelkemyr, Bengt Lindberg. 2013. Design for construction: utilizing production
experiences in development. Construction Management and Economics 31, 135-150. [CrossRef]
19. Christina Öberg. 2013. Competence integration in creative processes. Industrial Marketing Management 42, 113-124.
[CrossRef]
20. Laurent Sié, Ali Yakhlef. 2013. The Passion for Knowledge: implications for its Transfer. Knowledge and Process Management
20, 12-20. [CrossRef]
21. Steven H. Appelbaum, Seth Keller, Harold Alvarez, Catherine Bédard. 2012. Organizational crisis: lessons from Lehman
Brothers and Paulson & Company. International Journal of Commerce and Management 22:4, 286-305. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
22. Maureen Brookes, Angela Roper. 2012. Realising plural-form benefits in international hotel chains. Tourism Management
33, 580-591. [CrossRef]
23. Alessandra Cozzolino, Silvia Rossi, Alessio Conforti. 2012. Agile and lean principles in the humanitarian supply chain. Journal
of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management 2:1, 16-33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
 24. Luis Cisneros, Emilie Genin, Jahan Peerally. 2012. Family, business and power: illustrating three extreme cases. Journal of
Family Business Management 2:1, 40-56. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
25. Ali Yakhlef, Laurent Sié. 2012. From Producer to Purchaser of IT Services: interactional Knowledge. Knowledge and Process
Management 19:10.1002/kpm.v19.2, 79-90. [CrossRef]
26. Johan Hansson, Sara Tolf, John Øvretveit, Jan Carlsson, Mats Brommels. 2012. What Happened to the No-Wait Hospital?
A Case Study of Implementation of Operational Plans for Reduced Waits. Quality Management in Health Care 21, 34-43.
[CrossRef]
27. Alex Hill, Richard Cuthbertson. 2011. Fitness map: a classification of internal strategic fit in service organisations.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management 31:9, 991-1021. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
28. Sabine Hotho, Katherine Champion. 2011. Small businesses in the new creative industries: innovation as a people management
challenge. Management Decision 49:1, 29-54. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
29. Joshua Rupert Hills, Grant Cairncross. 2011. Small accommodation providers and UGC web sites: perceptions and practices.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 23:1, 26-43. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
30. Qile He, David Gallear, Abby Ghobadian. 2011. Knowledge Transfer: The Facilitating Attributes in Supply-Chain
Partnerships. Information Systems Management 28, 57-70. [CrossRef]
31. Walter D. Fernández, Sigi Goode, Miranda Robinson. 2010. Uneasy Alliances: Tradition and ICT Transformation in the
Value Chain. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 20, 234-256. [CrossRef]
32. Alexander Styhre. 2010. Disciplining professional vision in architectural work. The Learning Organization 17:5, 437-454.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by University of Mississippi At 03:14 14 July 2015 (PT)

33. Leo McCann, John Hassard, Jonathan Morris. 2010. Restructuring Managerial Labour in the USA, the UK and Japan:
Challenging the Salience of ‘Varieties of Capitalism’. British Journal of Industrial Relations 48:10.1111/bjir.2010.48.issue-2,
347-374. [CrossRef]
34. John James Cater III, Robert T. Justis. 2010. The development and implementation of shared leadership in multi‐generational
family firms. Management Research Review 33:6, 563-585. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
35. Catarina Delgado, Marlene Ferreira, Manuel Castelo Branco. 2010. The implementation of lean Six Sigma in financial services
organizations. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 21:4, 512-523. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
36. Kaj Storbacka, Lynette Ryals, Iain A. Davies, Suvi Nenonen. 2009. The changing role of sales: viewing sales as a strategic,
cross‐functional process. European Journal of Marketing 43:7/8, 890-906. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
37. Riadh Azouzi, Robert Beauregard, Sophie D’Amours. 2009. Exploratory case studies on manufacturing agility in the furniture
industry. Management Research News 32:5, 424-439. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
38. Jonathan Morris, Barry Wilkinson, Jos Gamble. 2009. Strategic international human resource management or the ‘bottom
line’? The cases of electronics and garments commodity chains in China. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management 20, 348-371. [CrossRef]
39. David J. Closs, Mark A. Jacobs, Morgan Swink, G. Scott Webb. 2008. Toward a theory of competencies for the management
of product complexity: Six case studies. Journal of Operations Management 26, 590-610. [CrossRef]
40. Leo McCann, Jonathan Morris, John Hassard. 2008. Normalized Intensity: The New Labour Process of Middle Management.
Journal of Management Studies 45:10.1111/joms.2007.45.issue-2, 343-371. [CrossRef]
41. Simon Knox, Colin Gruar. 2007. The Application of Stakeholder Theory to Relationship Marketing Strategy Development
in a Non-profit Organization. Journal of Business Ethics 75, 115-135. [CrossRef]
42. Lynette Ryals, Simon Knox. 2007. Measuring and managing customer relationship risk in business markets. Industrial
Marketing Management 36, 823-833. [CrossRef]
43. Niels N. Grünbaum. 2007. Identification of ambiguity in the case study research typology: what is a unit of analysis?.
Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 10:1, 78-97. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
44. Christoph Hienerth. 2006. The commercialization of user innovations: the development of the rodeo kayak industry. R and
D Management 36:10.1111/radm.2006.36.issue-3, 273-294. [CrossRef]
45. Gianna Moscardo. 2005. Peripheral Tourism Development: Challenges, Issues and Success Factors. Tourism Recreation
Research 30, 27-43. [CrossRef]