Mastering the Research Designs for your Qualitative Case Study: More an art than a science?

About

Why this course?

At its core, a research design is a basic strategy that guides the entire research process, from data collection, analysis, interpretation and discussion of results; it even determines the role of prior literature and the choreography of crafting a theoretical contribution. But it is much more than simply a descriptive chronological sequence: research design (or, better: designing research) is about engaging in difficult trade-off decisions that will inevitably present themselves in any empirical research. Quantitative research enjoys fairly standardized reporting conventions, with clear guidance re. transparent, reliable, and ultimately rigorous data collection and analysis procedures, all the way down to the very structure of the final report (e.g., Appelbaum et al., 2018). Research designs for case studies are much less codified. Part of the problem is that the two use different criteria for assessing rigor, and that these criteria have been studied separately for decades, with only limited cross-fertilization (e.g., Aguinis et al., 2019, Gibbert et al., 2008; Gioia et al., 2013). And yet, rigor matters especially in qualitative research as a predictor of article citation impact (Hoorani et al., 2019).

As such, the basic premise of this course is a conundrum: one of the weaknesses of case study research is that it tends to be ‘messy’, which is why we need a clear research design. At the same time, the strength of case study methods is that they are ‘flexible’, i.e. allow for a variety of designs, and even accommodates changes of the research design along the way, in iterative cycles of data collection and analysis (Denzin and Lincoln, 2005; Yin, 1994; Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Gerring, 2007). But don’t such changes to the research design in the signature ‘iterative cycles’ contribute even further to the overall messiness of case-study research (design)? In the end, all this sounds like research designs are more like an art than a science…

The neuralgic problem, therefore, of case study research is its designs. I believe that a certain versatility is needed when it comes to designing case study research along the way, i.e. before and even during the entire research process, from empirical data collection and analysis to write-up and responding to reviewer comments. I like the label research ‘design’ (from the latin designare , to ‘mark out, point out; devise; choose, designate, appoint) as it essentially implies a creative act. I therefore prefer to see the ‘design’ of research-design more like a verb than a noun, and nowhere would the need for active, creative (re-) designing of research be more appropriate than in qualitative methods.

The versatility needed to cut through this conundrum, in my experience, stems only from a minimum level of sophistication in using individual designs both in isolation and in combination. And this sophistication is based on a deep understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of individual designs in terms of quality criteria from nomothetic and idiographic approaches. This course therefore starts off with an introduction to, and application of, individual research designs be they exploratory or explanatory (days one through four), with a strong emphasis on their strengths and weaknesses in view of answering a given research question. The final day is then dedicated to balancing strengths and weaknesses across designs by combining different designs, and we use two generic pathways for illustration, an inductive strategy and a deductive strategy.

What we will do: Pedagogy and Performance Evaluation

The sessions are divided into two main parts. In the first part, we introduce the relevant designs for the day. I have tried to group designs in ways that make sense to me, thus two clusters of exploratory designs and two of explanatory. Each cluster is again subdivided in terms of commonalities and differences underlying basic designs. In the second part, we apply the tool both to existing material (published articles) as well as to your own research project. Participants will be not be required to do the ‘theory’ readings in preparation of each class. Instead, we will explore them on a rolling basis in the sessions. We will practically work in small groups with specific methodological approaches during class, always with an eye on their own (PhD- or other research-) projects. The emphasis in the group work is learning from the best (and sometimes, apparently ‘worst’) practices published in reputable journals.

Participants are required, though, to participate actively in the group work, both as (a) presenter and (b) discussant. Performance evaluation of the group work is on a rolling basis and will be done during the regular course hours. Individual performance is assessed both during the course as well as after the course. During the course, please be prepared to answer direct questions re. the applicability of the designs we study to your own research project. After the course, you will be required to write an individual assignment (topic TBA).

N.B. that this course is specifically on qualitative research design, including upstream implications (role of prior theory) downstream implications for data collection (e.g. via interviews, archival material, participant or direct observation, ethnography), analysis (be it with or without the help of software such as Atlas.ti, NVivo, internet-based, video-based), and the write-up and structure of the final report. At the same time, it does not engage in the actual practice of individual data collection or analysis strategies, for which there are separate courses at the Summers School. The focus is squarely on qualitative research design and the important trade-off decision it entails for qualitative researchers. The focus on qualitative methods also precludes an exploration of mixed (qualitative and quantitative) methods as well as hybrids such as qualitative comparative analysis (QCA).

**The Summer School cannot grant credits. We only deliver a Certificate of Participation, i.e. we certify your attendance.**

If you consider using Summer School workshops to obtain credits (ECTS), you will have to investigate at your home institution (contact the person/institute responsible for your degree) to find out whether they recognise the Summer School, how many credits can be earned from a workshop/course with roughly 35 hours of teaching, no graded work, and no exams.

Make sure to investigate this matter before registering if this is important to you.

Course leader

Michael Gibbert is a Full Professor of Marketing at the Institute of Marketing and Communication Management (IMCA) at Università della Svizzera italiana (USI).

Target group

graduate students, doctoral researchers, early career researchers

Fee info