Research Design

III.4.1. Studying Practice

As previously mentioned, the field of PBS of knowledge and learning is not a homogeneous one and has been developing along several strands, each with its own methodological framework, e.g. ethnomethodology and Activity Theory have both developed strong theoretical and methodological positions. At the same time, there are significant overlaps in the approach to research methods deployed across PBS strands.

All these approaches are heavily indebted to ethnography in terms of the common use of ethnographic data collection and analysis methods. The key early contributors to PBS of knowledge and learning drew on ethnographic work: either based on original

empirical research (Wenger, 1998; Cook and Yanow, 2003) or on published

ethnographic accounts (Lave and Wenger, 1991; Brown and Duguid, 1991, 2001; Cook and Brown, 1999). Traditional ethnographic accounts inspired by symbolic

interactionism, i.e. setting out to represent the meanings of the actors through thick description, have proven very fruitful as a ground for theorising about practice.

The debt owed to ethnography by PBS scholars is hardly surprising: ethnographers have traditionally sought insight into the perspectives and practices of people in their social settings from the ‘inside’ (Crotty, 1998; Hammersley, 1992). Notwithstanding the widespread use of ethnographic research methods, the preferred research design in PBS of knowledge and learning is the case study. The emphasis tends to be on the analytical rather than the descriptive, there is a lesser reliance in data collection on the

ethnographic observation in favour of diversifying data sources and triangulation, and a lesser emphasis is given to the study of culture in favour of practice: all traits consistent with the distinction made between ethnographic and case study research by Creswell (2007). The above account of the use of case studies in PBS of knowledge and learning is of course a broad generalization and many exceptions could be quoted in its

contradiction, not the least of which would be what Kellogg et al (2006) term ‘the

72

cultural perspective’ (e.g. Cook and Yanow, 2011; Yanow and Tsoukas, 2009; Yanow, 2000), where the emphasis is on the understanding of cultures through the study of practice following the anthropological ethnographic tradition. Nevertheless, the vast majority of publications mentioned in Chapter II fit this generalized description.

The methodological approach to research which guides this study is informed by the relational ontology of Bourdieu’s theory of practice and the epistemology of practice underpinning Practice Based Studies of knowledge and learning. It further

acknowledges the need to zoom in/out on practice (Nicolini, 2009) changing theoretical lenses so as to access both the micro- and macro- dimensions of practice without

recourse to reductionism. However, in a departure from the detail of Nicolini’s solution, it follows Bourdieu’s call for an empirical investigation that never loses sight of the structural context of symbolic interaction. This problem is approached by making a commitment to semiotic reading (Eco, 1990) in recording and analysing empirical data.

On the macro side of Nicolini’s ‘telescope’, the approach taken is to follow the advice to ‘follow the actors themselves’ that Nicolini borrows from Actor Network Theory. In so doing, however, the study uses Tilly’s (2004, 2005) model of boundary change in order to maintain relevance and structure the inquiry. Finally, the study follows the established practice in PBS of knowledge and learning in obtaining data through ethnographic field methods and adopting a case study research design.

III.4.2. The Qualitative Case Study

The case study is a widely used research design, also referred to as methodology,

approach, or strategy (Creswell, 2007; Yin, 2003; Eisenhardt,1989). Creswell (2007: 73, original emphasis) defines the case study as “a qualitative approach in which the

investigator explores a bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information (e.g. observations, interviews, audiovisual material, and documents and reports), and reports a case description and case-based themes.” Others, e.g. Stake (1995) and Yin (2003), distinguish between qualitative and quantitative case studies.

Case studies are also classified according to intent: the single instrumental, the multiple case study, and the intrinsic case study (Creswell, 2007). An instrumental case study is one that investigates a theoretical problem within a particular empirical setting as opposed to exploring an intrinsic interest in a particular case in its own right. The case

73

study design adopted for this research project is a single instrumental qualitative case study, which is also consistent with the majority of case studies discussed in Chapter II.

The single case study design is prevalent in PBS of knowledge and learning because the theoretical problems posed by researchers working in this tradition typically require in-depth and sustained access to practice as discussed in Section III.4.1 above. This requirement often precludes the possibility of undertaking a multiple case study research project due to the prohibitive implications regarding access, funding and time commitments. This was also true of this research project: the timeline was constrained by the regulations regarding the period of registration for PhD programmes and research was funded entirely from own resources. Both constraints were amplified by the

demanding geography and timelines associated with the research setting.

A case study usually draws on multiple data sources and data collection methods.

Triangulation is a common approach (Creswell, 2007): researchers seek to increase the internal validity of their findings by applying triangulation of data sources and methods (Yin, 2003), i.e. comparing data obtained, e.g. from interviews, observation, and documentation. Data sources typically include two or more of those listed by Yin (2003), i.e. documentary, archival, interviews, direct observation, participant observation, and physical artefacts Yin (2003). Data analysis is done at two levels:

identification of themes within data and interpretation of data by reference to extant literature (Creswell, 2007). Details of the data collection and analysis undertaken for the purpose of this research project are discussed below: in Sections III.6 and III.7

respectively.

The standards of validation recommended for qualitative case studies cover a spectrum from developing equivalents of positivist standards of objectivity, internal and external validation, and reliability (Creswell, 2007) to questioning the usefulness of validation as a guiding concept for qualitative research (Wolcott, 1990). This study was guided by the recommendations of Whittermore et al (2001) who identified four primary and six secondary validation criteria: the former include credibility, authenticity, criticality, and integrity; the latter are: explicitness, vividness, creativity, thoroughness, congruence, and sensitivity.

74 III.4.2.1. The Choice of the Case

Whilst generalizability is not one of the aims of qualitative case study research (Creswell, 2007), it is important to choose a research setting that would support the achievement of the objectives set for the research project, i.e. enable the researcher to advance the understanding of the theoretical issue or issues driving the research. The possibilities for this kind of purposeful sampling (Creswell, 2007) include choosing a critical case, a typical case, a unique or extreme case, or an accessible case (Creswell, 2007; Yin, 2003).

The selection of the case for the present project was intended to be that of a typical or representative case study (Yin, 2003) that would also be accessible (Creswell, 2007).

Consistent with the original formulation of the research interest specified in Section III.2 above, the intention was to identify a research setting that would offer a good chance of studying knowledge and learning in distributed organising from the practice perspective. This required gaining access to a setting characterised by a commitment to knowledge sharing/transfer and/or a collaborative learning agenda. A significant degree of heterogeneity was also required: preferably including an inter-organisational and an international dimension and involving diverse participants working together under conditions of some geographic and temporal distance. The EU RIS project satisfied these requirements and had the added benefit of being accessible.

As it transpired during the course of the research, the studied project would be better described as an extreme case study (Yin, 2003), i.e. one where the relevant

characteristics are exaggerated. This allowed for a sharper and more rapid definition of the research focus. A flexible, responsive approach to developing a research focus in the course of the research project is one of the characteristics of case study research

(Eisenhardt, 1989). A researcher examines the data to identify emergent themes and then verify those themes progressively as the data accumulates (Yin, 2003; Stake 1995).

Data collection can be gradually focused on the salient themes and the researcher can probe deeper into the issues by adjusting data collection sources and methods as appropriate – an approach known as ‘progressive focusing’ (Stake, 1995; Hammersley and Atkinson, 1983). Whilst a degree of flexibility is beneficial in the sense of helping ensure the relevance of the study, it can also be a hindrance in that too many shifts of focus may result in a lack of focus – a threat that is less likely in studying an extreme case. The gradual development of the research focus for the EU RIS case study was

75 described in Section III.2 above.