Categorization of case in case study research method: new approach

Khalifa Ababacar Sy Diop, Ersi Liu
{"title":"Categorization of case in case study research method: new approach","authors":"Khalifa Ababacar Sy Diop, Ersi Liu","doi":"10.21511/kpm.04(1).2020.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study was inspired by two of the leading papers in the case study method: Eisenhardt (1991) and Dyer and Wilkins (1991). The work of those authors could be considered a benchmark for research based on a case study. Additionally, this research comes as a complement to re-categorize case study research design. After reviewing those papers, the authors identified certain misunderstandings relative to when a case study should be addressed as single or multiple case studies. This study reviewed both recent and ancient research papers that used the case study research design in their investigations based on this misunderstanding. Thus, the previously identified misinterpretation of case study categorization is the gap this study filled. For this study, the case study research design was to be re-categorized to understand which case study design suits which research study. Accordingly, based on the identified gap, the study used secondary data to re-categorize the case study research design through a literature review method. As a result, the study identified three case study categories: single setting case study with single sub-case, single setting case study with multiple sub-cases, and multiple case studies. Consequently, the result re-categorizes single case study design into single sub-case and multiple sub-cases. This study makes recommendations through the proposed approach that filled the gap identified in the case study design categorization. In terms of adding to knowledge, this study’s proposed approach will augment the optimal use of case study research design by management, economics, and other disciplines’ researchers in the future.","PeriodicalId":179091,"journal":{"name":"Knowledge and Performance Management","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knowledge and Performance Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21511/kpm.04(1).2020.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

This study was inspired by two of the leading papers in the case study method: Eisenhardt (1991) and Dyer and Wilkins (1991). The work of those authors could be considered a benchmark for research based on a case study. Additionally, this research comes as a complement to re-categorize case study research design. After reviewing those papers, the authors identified certain misunderstandings relative to when a case study should be addressed as single or multiple case studies. This study reviewed both recent and ancient research papers that used the case study research design in their investigations based on this misunderstanding. Thus, the previously identified misinterpretation of case study categorization is the gap this study filled. For this study, the case study research design was to be re-categorized to understand which case study design suits which research study. Accordingly, based on the identified gap, the study used secondary data to re-categorize the case study research design through a literature review method. As a result, the study identified three case study categories: single setting case study with single sub-case, single setting case study with multiple sub-cases, and multiple case studies. Consequently, the result re-categorizes single case study design into single sub-case and multiple sub-cases. This study makes recommendations through the proposed approach that filled the gap identified in the case study design categorization. In terms of adding to knowledge, this study’s proposed approach will augment the optimal use of case study research design by management, economics, and other disciplines’ researchers in the future.
案例研究方法中的案例分类:新途径
本研究的灵感来自案例研究法的两篇主要论文:Eisenhardt(1991)和Dyer and Wilkins(1991)。这些作者的工作可以被认为是基于案例研究的研究基准。此外,本研究是对案例研究设计重新分类的补充。在回顾了这些论文之后,作者发现了一些关于何时应该将案例研究作为单个或多个案例研究来处理的误解。本研究回顾了基于这一误解而在调查中使用案例研究设计的近代和古代研究论文。因此,先前发现的对案例研究分类的误解是本研究填补的空白。对于本研究,案例研究设计将被重新分类,以了解哪种案例研究设计适合哪种研究。据此,基于识别出的差距,本研究利用二手数据,通过文献回顾法对案例研究设计进行重新分类。因此,本研究确定了三个案例研究类别:单一情境案例研究与单一子案例,单一情境案例研究与多个子案例,以及多个案例研究。因此,结果将单个案例研究设计重新分类为单个子案例和多个子案例。本研究通过提出的方法提出建议,填补了案例研究设计分类中发现的空白。在增加知识方面,本研究提出的方法将在未来增加管理,经济学和其他学科研究人员对案例研究设计的最佳使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信