Case Study Method 88

This research applies the case study method for data collection and analysis. This section provides an overview of the case study method, its advantages and disadvantages, and describes the rationale for its adoption in this research.

Yin (1989:23) defined a case study as “an empirical inquiry that: investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used”. Another similar definition by Hartley (1994: 208-209) described case

study based research as one that “consists of detailed investigation, often with data collected over a period of time, of one or more organizations, or groups within organizations with a view to providing an analysis of the context and processes in the phenomenon under study”. Both of these definitions suggest the suitability of the case

study method as an investigative framework for understanding a complex phenomenon within its context.

Locke (2001) identified three types of case studies: the intrinsic case study, the instrumental case and collective cases. An intrinsic case study focuses on the uniqueness of a particular case i.e., the researcher is interested simply in understanding the case itself because of its peculiarity and uniqueness. An instrumental case study, on the other hand, focuses on a particular case because of its potential to provide insight into a substantive issue or to advance a theory. Finally, a collective case is when the instrumental case

extends to more than one case. For example, according to Yin (1989), case studies can involve either single or multiple cases and numerous levels of analysis. This flexibility of the case study method is also demonstrated by Eisenhardt (1989) who argued that a case study method can be used to accomplish various aims including the provisioning of description as well as testing and generating theory. However, according to Yin (1989:21), the case study method provides little basis for scientific generalization. Yin argued that the case study method does not represent a ‘sample’ and, therefore, should be regarded similar to ‘experiments’. Furthermore, in the case study method, a researcher aims to expand and generalize theories i.e., ‘analytic generalization’ and not to enumerate frequencies i.e., ‘statistical generalization’ (Yin, 1989). Despite this shortcoming in supporting generalizations, the case study method is widely used in the field of management and organizational studies.

3.7.1 Rationale for Adopting the Case Study Method

There are three major reasons for adopting the case study method in this research. Firstly, the research topic of employee resistance to technological change is poorly researched in the context of the UAE. In this respect, this research is the first of its kind to explore employee resistance to technological change in that specific context. Subsequently, this study is basically an exploratory investigation. The intention of this research is to describe the nature, causes, and level of resistance to technological change in the UAE (specifically its public sector) and to provide recommendations on how to overcome such resistance. Yin (1989) argued that when the research objectives revolve around ‘how’, ‘what’ and ‘why’ with regard to a contemporary set of events over which the researcher has little or no control, then the case study method will be the most appropriate investigative framework. Similarly, Hartley (1994) argued that case studies are tailor- made for exploring new as well as existing processes and behaviours which are little understood.

Secondly, to understand a phenomenon such as employee resistance to technological change and its causes, which has not been previously researched in the specific context of the UAE, relevant information can only be obtained from the employees themselves. This

is because resistance is a human behaviour that is often driven by self interest and there is a need for the researcher to uncover the true motivations for employee actions which can only be obtained from the employees themselves. In addition, resistance is seldom documented and can be hard to identify because it can take different forms and shapes. Gomez and Rosen 2001) stated that “to understand social process one must get inside the world of those generating it”. The simplest way to achieve this is to get access to the

actors themselves and to elicit their interpretations directly (Johnson, 1987; Nandhakumar and Jones, 1997) which can only be satisfactorily achieved through in- depth interviewing of those actors. Therefore, this research considers case studies the most appropriate strategy for understanding the nature and causes of employee resistance to technological change.

Thirdly, resistance is inherently contextual whereby the introduction of the same technology might cause resistance in certain contexts but not others. Conversely, the same employee might resist technology in certain contexts but not others. This research argues that, in order to obtain a sound understanding of employee resistance to technological change, both inner organizational and outer economical, political and socio-cultural contexts should be considered. Hartley (1994) cogently argued that case studies are useful where it is important to understand social processes in their organisational and environmental contexts. Hence, the case study method is considered a suitable framework that enables the inclusion of contexts in this research.

3.7.2 Selection of Companies

UAE has witnessed fast development in terms of technology adoption due to rapid development of information and communication technology (ICT). This in turn has forced the government organizations to adapt to the change technology (Al-Khouri, 2102). Public sector companies selected for this study are from the region of Al Ain. Al Ain is a small region of Abu Dhabi emirate which has also introduced new technology in all its public sector companies for faster and better performance and services. Two criteria guided the selection of companies for conducting the in-depth investigation, which were:

 Suitability and relevance of the company for observing resistance to technological change. The selected company must have recently introduced a major Information Technology system, whether successfully implemented or otherwise. Recent projects had to be selected in order to reduce, as much as possible, the errors of distortion and memory failure of the actors during the data collection phase (Mintzberg et al., 1976; Papadakis et al., 1998)

 The quality of access given to the researcher. The researcher must be given unrestricted access to conduct interviews with both employees and senior management.

Hartley (1994) described two useful means for gaining access: introduction either through a third party or through broad-ranging interviews with senior managers in potential organizations. The researcher has senior contacts in the ‘Al Ain Distribution Company’ (ADDC), which is a public sector company overseen by ‘Al Ain Water and Electricity Authority’ (ADWEA). Furthermore, ADWEA has recently introduced a number of information systems such as an enterprise Geographical Information System (GIS) which enables the organization to perform its operations and update its activities within an effective and efficient digital utility environment. The company has also recently established a Digital Systems department with the purpose of facilitating the digital business transformation. Consequently, the ADDC meets the aforementioned selection criteria and therefore has been chosen as the main case study for this research. Other organizations include:

 Al Ain Municipality.

 Tawam Hospital.

 The Social Affairs Department.

It is important to note that the intention of this research is not to test hypotheses or make a generalisation in a statistical sense but rather to understand the nature and causes of employee resistance to technological change within its context and to make a theoretical generalisation. Considering this goal, the number of case studies is not of crucial importance. According to Gummesson (1991), it is not necessary to study a large number of cases in order to understand a phenomenon in depth.