Case study design

Having studied the nature of proposed research question, which is ‘organisational learning in construction’ a case study design was selected to study the

phenomenon. The existing theories can be categorised into three groups: theories that are in accordance with the research findings, in contrast with the research findings or neutral (provide no framework or grounding) to the research findings (Eisenhardt, 1989). Case studies can be exploited to build new theories and/or test and retest existing theories that are well developed in foundation (Yin, 2003). Thus, theory plays an important role in case study research.

Case study design is appropriate where it is necessary to study a real-life situation in real time (in a limited space and time) with immediate impact and relevance (Johns, 2008). Moreover, case study design can be used to gather and analyse data about one or a small number of samples as a way of studying a broader phenomenon. Generally, the case is bound by time and activity, and a variety of data collection methods (interviews, document and record analysis, and observations) are usually exploited to collect detailed information over a sustained period of time (Stake, 1995).

A distinctive feature of the case study is the use of multiple sources of evidence to examine the case holistically (Tan, 2002). Hence, case studies inherit different strengths and weaknesses (Gillham, 2000). Yin (2009) explains the logic of case study design in two different aspects. Point (a) below considers the scope of the case study and point (b) explains the technical characteristics and data collection and analysis strategies encompassed in case study design.

a) A case study is an empirical inquiry which:

 investigates a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its

real-life contexts: especially when

 the boundaries between the phenomenon and the context are not

clearly evident.

b) The case study inquiry:

 copes with technically distinctive situations in which there will be

 relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to converge

in a triangulating fashion and, as another result:

 benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions to

guide data collection and analysis.

Yin (2003) further stated that many social scientists deeply believe that the best use of case studies can be obtained in exploratory research rather than descriptive or explanatory investigations. Walsham (1995) proposed that the most appropriate method for conducting empirical research in the interpretative tradition is the in- depth case study; however, such studies are not necessarily qualitative (Stake, 1995). The case study’s main strength is its ability to provide a real situation in which practice can be studied and contact can be made with real participants who can contribute to the research with their practical knowledge (Blakstad, 2001; Simons, 2009).

Case study design is an ideal method/design for particularisation (Stake, 1995). Notably, the data gathered is more qualitative than quantitative (Sekaran, 2003). Its poor ability with regards to generalisation seems to be the key limitation of case study research (Stake, 1995). Eisenhardt (1989) argues that binding the emergent theory with existing literature strengthens the internal validity, generalisability (external validity) and theoretical level of theory building from case study research. The generic characteristics of case study research (Punch, 1998), types of case studies (Yin, 2003) and their central components (Yin, 2009) are discussed in the literature.

Table 4-3: Characteristics of case study research

Each case has boundaries that must be identified at an early stage of the research.

Each case will be a case of something in which the researcher is interested. Hence, the unit of analysis must be defined at the outset in order to clarify the research strategy.

Case studies seek to preserve the wholeness and integrity of the case. However, in order to achieve some focus, a limited research problem must be established geared towards the specific features of the case.

Source: (Punch 1998 p.153)

There are four types of case study design and Yin (2003) discusses the characteristics of each type and their rationales, as noted in the Table 4-4.

Table 4-4: Types of case study design

Characteristics Rationale

Type 1

One case, holistic, one unit of analysis, case and unit of analysis are indistinguishable.

Critical case Unique case Typical case Revelatory case Longitudinal case Type 2

One case, embedded units of analysis, not holistic but still context dependent, case and unit of analysis are distinguishable.

Extensive analysis More focused analysis

Type 3

More cases, holistic, case and unit of analysis are indistinguishable.

More robust findings Replication logic (literal/theoretical) External validity

Type 4

More cases, embedded unit of analysis, not holistic yet context dependent, case and unit of analysis are distinguishable.

More robust findings Replication logic (literal/theoretical) External validity Extensive analysis Focused analysis Source: (Yin, 2003)

Within the boundaries of this investigation, a multiple Type 4 case study design was adopted to understand the process improvement in construction organisations. Three (3) cases were studied.

Case A: Airport and Aviation sector organisation – This case used to identify the organisational processes improvement infrastructure, and the extent to which it facilitated organisational learning from a private sector commercial perspective

Case B: Highways sector organisation – This case also identify the organisational processes improvement infrastructure, and the extent to which it facilitated organisational learning from public and private sector perspective

Case C: School building programme conducted by a major local authority in the UK – Case C was used to identify the organisational processes improvement infrastructure, and the extent to which it facilitated organisational learning, from a public sector perspective

Having identified the nature of above three cases the Type 4 design (see Table 4- 4) provides more opportunities for extensive investigations and also help to achieve robust findings. The unit of analysis is a significant factor in case studies, as it determines what or who is to be analysed. This study focused on into organisational process improvement, thus, organisational process improvement, was considered as the unit of analysis. The detailed information on each case is explained in Chapter 5.

The central components of case study design are discussed in the literature (Yin, 2009).

 Case study questions – ‘how’ and ‘why’

 Case study (theoretical) propositions – pointing attention, limiting scope

and suggesting possible links between phenomena

 Case study units of analysis – main units must be at the same level as

the study questions and typically comparable to those previously studied  Logic linking the data to the propositions – matching pieces of

information to rival patterns that can be derived from the propositions  Criteria for interpreting the findings – iteration between propositions and

data, matching sufficiently contrasting rival patterns to data; there is no precise way of setting the criteria

In a way, the case study can be considered to be an ‘all-encompassing method’ that covers the logic of research design, data collection techniques and approaches to data analysis (Tan, 2002; Yin, 2009). It is important that it must use some empirical methods and present some empirical data. The adopted data collection methods and rational for rejecting other available methods are discussed in following sections.