Strategies for the selection of a case or sample

The next question focuses on the particular strategy used in selecting a single case, the study of which would yield a plenitude of information and evidence relating to the phenomenon under investigation. Flyvbjerg (2006, p. 229) argues that a representative case or random sample might not be the optimal strategy as an average might be just “average” and so would not yield very rich data. In fact, Flyvberg argues, an atypical case might be more useful as “it could

153

activate more actors and more structures and systems for exploration” (ibid.).

Studying an atypical case could be more fruitful in reaching deeper root causal explanations and their repercussions rather than noting phenomena and the frequencies of their occurrences which may, in the end, amount to little more than describing the symptoms rather than the causes of the matter under investigation.

Flyvbjerg (2006) classifies the various strategies for selecting a case or sample in case studies which are predominantly information-oriented as in this research. These are presented in Table 4.3 (See Below).

Table 4.3 Strategies for selection of cases in information-oriented studies Type of Case Study Selection

Strategy

Aim

Information-oriented selection To maximise the utility of information from small samples or single cases.

Selection is on the basis of expected information to be derived

1. Extreme/Deviant cases To obtain information on the basis of unusual cases either problematic or exemplary

2. Maximum variation cases To obtain information about the significance of various circumstances e.g. cases that are different on one dimension: size, form, location, budget

154

3. Critical cases To obtain information that permits deductions of the type: “if this is valid/not valid for this case, then it applies to all cases

4. Paradigmatic cases To develop a metaphor for the domain that the case concerns

Adapted from Flyvbjerg (2006, p. 230)

1. The extreme or deviant case can provide evidence for emphasising a particular point in a dramatic fashion. Flyvbjerg (2006, p. 229) offers Freud’s (2003) “Wolf-Man” and Foucault’s (1979) Panopticon as examples of this type of case study.

2. Maximum variation cases refer to those cases which stand out on one particular dimension or criterion

3. Critical cases are those which have a strategic importance in relation to the whole matter under investigation. For example, in tracing the causes of a certain illness, selecting a clinic noted for its high standards of hygiene would lead to this clinic being a critical case, as if the illness continued to spread in this clinic, it could be deduced that it would spread in any situation and that ward hygiene was not an issue. Conversely, if the disease ceased to spread in these conditions, then ward hygiene could be identified as a causal factor for the spread of the disease.

155

Considering either the most or least likely example can be a useful strategy for selecting a critical case.

Flyvbjerg (2006) offers a classical model case study for a least likely and most likely case. Michel’s (1962) study of oligarchy in organisations was based on a horizontally structured company which had a democratic style of leadership and so was a “least likely” case of being oligarchic. By choosing a least likely case Michel would be able to conclude that if this organisation proved to be oligarchic, then, a fortiori, most others must be also.

An example of a “most likely” case offered by Flyvbjerg is Whyte’s (1943) study of a slum neighbourhood in Boston, which, according to accepted social theory at that time, should have exhibited social disorganisation.

Whyte found quite the opposite and, thus, was able to call the existing theory into question. Thus, a most likely case is particularly useful for the negation of a proposition, just as a least likely case is appropriate for confirming a theory. Depending on how the original hypothesis was formulated, Whyte’s slum neighbourhood study could be a least likely case if the hypothetical proposition was that social organisation was a universal phenomenon.

4. A paradigmatic case is based on the work of Kuhn (1978), who explained the origins of scientific revolutions by the emergence of paradigms or exemplary cases which become prototypes. Foucault’s study of a European prison can be regarded as a paradigmatic case or a predictive

156

theory. However, as Fryvbjerg (2006, p. 232) points out, there is no predictive theory for how a predictive theory comes about and, consequently, there are no rules or principles for identifying a paradigmatic case. No standard exists for a paradigm as it sets the standard for all other cases of the same type. Thus, choosing a paradigmatic prototype can be highly intuitive and not dissimilar from how one recognises a painting or poem as an outstanding example of its type.

Evidence was compiled based on IT project planning and implementation within the NGHA to evaluate it as a paradigmatic case of IT project planning and implementation generally in developing countries. This is based on its having received a most prestigious award as a shining exemplar of IT project implementation in the Middle East. Xu andMeyer’s (2013) argument for case studies in developing countries as “laboratories” for testing and refining assumptions drawn from studies from developed economies will serve as the backdrop for approaching the NGHA in Saudi Arabia as a paradigmatic case of IT project implementation in a developing economy.

Having decided that a paradigmatic type case study was appropriate for this research, attention is now given to the design of the case study.