This week we were supposed to pick both a paper that was using qualitative methods as well as a paper using the case study method. I found this very hard, having only read one text about case study research. Finding the differences just from reading the abstracts from a bunch of papers and to pick one which seemed both interesting and fulfilled the criteria was not an easy task. When I finally had found one which I thought would be a good fit for the case study method, I started to analyze it according to the different steps a case study is built upon found in Eisenhardts text. I soon realized that the paper I had chosen didn’t fulfill many of the steps and that it probably was not a case study. Ah well. Otherwise I found this week to be more fun than earlier weeks, partly because the texts I had chosen as well as the mandatory ones were really interesting to read, and partly because the end of the course is approaching.
I prepared this week by reading the mandatory text on social as well as choosing two texts from the examples. Since we had already read a lot about qualitative studies I don’t feel that I learned anything new in that area. Something new that I did learn about was about case study research, what is regarded as a case study, what it is used for, when and where to use it and what parts it includes.
On the seminar we mostly talked about which paper that was using the case study research method we had chosen. It was interesting to find out that most of our group all had chosen texts which, even though some of them had case study in the title, were in fact not using the case study research method.
Hej,
SvaraRaderaIt would have been interesting to read more about the paper you had chosen and how it turned out to not be a case study as Eisenhardt defines it. My paper, for example, didn't follow those exact steps either but I still think that it was a case study. In your description it does not really become clear what their method was.
Good to hear, however, that you found this theme especially interesting. I also thought that we all learned a lot because not many seemed to have had previous experience with case studies.
Dear Marcus,
SvaraRaderaI agree with you that it was quite the hustle to find and chose an article that would fit the criteria for this week's topics. It would have been nice if you had elaborated a bit about what you learned about case studies since the definition is quite blurry. Neither my article fulfilled all of the criteria from Eisenhardt's article, but I still believe that my article was in fact a case study, something Illias agreed with me during my seminar! I wish all the best with the final blog post!
I also agree that it was difficult to find relevant papers, especially one using a case study methodology as I also had a hard time understanding what a case study actually is from the little information I had about it. I though you did a really good job explaining ow you prepared and what you thought was interesting and less interesting. I would also have liked to read about your thoughts on what a case study is after having had the seminar. For example, during our seminar we discussed what defines a case study and what I think is an important aspect of case studies is that the purpose is to build a theory rather than test a theory. You enter into a field, knowing very little about the area and use a case study methodology in order to find out more and construct a theory about the field you are studying.
SvaraRaderaHi Marcus!
SvaraRaderaI agree with Malina that I think you should have written a little bit more about your chosen case study text since that was the one that you claim you learned the most from reading. I also believe that your reflection could have included some about why and in what way you didn't feel that your "case study paper" were not a case study at all. My chosen study did not either fulfill all the criteria's from Eisenhardt's paper. I do however believe that mine was a case study still, and you say that yours might not be, but I think you could say why you think that. Finally, I think you could have elaborated a bit on why you didn't feel that you learned a lot about qualitative studies from this week? I found that I learned a lot (even though I agree that it was a bit of a hassle to find a good paper).
Good luck with the last post!
You made a clear conclusion of your work about this them. I agree with you that it is a little bit difficult to find a typical paper using a case study method. Although you did not mention too much details about case study, I know you also learn a lot from you reflection of your group discussion. Good luck!
SvaraRaderaHey!
SvaraRaderaI also had difficulties with finding a paper that represents a case study. Especially because at that time (before seminar) it wasn't very clear what case study really is. For me, the paper we had to read in preparation for the case study was not easy to read. I find it confusing (it is probably because of the writing style). But, I guess, the whole process helped in gaining new insights.
Considering qualitative research, I also feel that I didn't learn anything new about it. I think that this topic in general could have been made more interesting, and off course, the lecture would help a lot. :)
I also had the difficulties you describe in finding a suitable case study. It didn't seem like there were a lot of papers actually fulfilling Eisenhardt's description. I don't even know if that description is widely used. Or at least it didn't seem to be an official category in any sense.
SvaraRaderaFinding a suitable case study was hard for me as well, because I wasn't entirely clear on the exact definition of a case - and I'm still not sure that Eisenhardt's description of it can be considered an objective measure. I ended up using the same article for both, seeing as it was a qualitative case study that would reveal interesting overlap between both subjects.
SvaraRadera