The Case Study Method

It is through a desire to understand complex social phenomena that a distinctive need for case studies arises (Yin 1994). This method “allows an investigation to retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events—such as…organizational and managerial processes”, (Yin 1994: 3) or, more specific to this research, the scenario-informed strategic planning process. However, methodological choices do not stop after the case method has been decided upon. Case studies—not to be confused with ethnographies (Fetterman 1989) or participant observation (Jorgensen 1989)—and the various alternatives (for example, experiments, surveys, histories), have particular “advantages and disadvantages, depending

upon three conditions: (a) the type of research question, (b) the control an investigator has over actual behavioural events, and (c) the focus on contemporary as opposed to historical phenomena” (Yin 1994: 1).

There are also different types of case studies. Stake (2000) identifies three main types as: the intrinsic case study; the instrumental case study; and the collective case study. The intrinsic case study is undertaken to aid understanding of the case, and is done so not because it represents something greater, but merely because the case itself is of interest. In an instrumental case study, the case itself is of “secondary interest, it plays a supportive role, and it facilitates our understanding of something else” (Stake 2000: 437). The case study is an in depth look at a phenomena occurring with a bounded context (Miles and Huberman 1994) in order to engage and advance the understanding of the external interest (Stake 2000). The collective case study is essentially a multiple version of the instrumental case study. Defined in these terms, this study would fall into the category of an instrumental case study. The case of community planning in Fife offers an avenue in which to observe, explore, and understand how an uses scenario planning to inform the strategic planning process.

An important aspect of choosing a particular methodology depends on the both the substance and form of the research question driving the study. As was stated in the introduction, this study will attempt to analyse and understand how an organisation uses scenario planning to inform the strategic planning process. The key words that underpin the nature of inquiry are ‘how’ and ‘why’.

Considering this, and the fact that the investigator neither wants nor requires control over behavioural events, a case study approach or, as according to Yin (1994: 6), a historical investigation would appear to be best suited to the subject matter. However, considering point (c), it is clear that, given this is to be a study of a contemporary phenomenon within real life context, a historical investigation will not satisfy the demands of the research. In brief, and in accordance with Yin’s “conditions”, a case study method appears to be the most suitable research method because: (a) the research question is aimed at “how” and “why”;

(b) the investigator has little control over events; and (c) the study’s focus is of a contemporary phenomenon. While some of the aforementioned research strategies are not mutually exclusive, the case study method has a “distinct advantage…when a ‘how’ or ‘why’ question is being asked about a contemporary set of events over which the investigator has little or no control” (Yin 1994: 9).

As it seems with many elements of research in business and management studies, definitions are varied. Definitions of what a case study is fall into the same trap, and tend to merely list varied appliances of the method. A basic definition is that it is a single, bounded entity, studied in detail, with a variety of methods, over an extended period (Creswell 1994: 61). Arguing that there is an absence of a satisfying definition, Platt recommends that the case study method should begin with a “a logic of design” (Platt 1992: 46), which Yin (1994) describes as his technical definition. Other authors (see Punch 2005), follow suit and describe a case study not as a simple one-line definition but as a general set of characteristics that represent the core of the method.

As part of his technical definition, Yin argues that the case study method “is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (Yin 1994: 13). Punch (2005), however, points out that while the boundaries may be a little blurry, it is important that the researcher identifies and describes the boundaries of the case (Yin 1994; Punch 2005). Acknowledging that the case is a ‘bounded system’ is the first of Punch’s (2005) four characteristics defining case studies. The second characteristic is designed to identify the essence of the case in order to clarify units of analysis. It is intended to intensify the focus of the research, and echoes the words of Marcus Aurelius, who wrote that of every particular thing, one must ask, “what is this by itself in its own constitution, what is its substance or substrate, what [is] its causal element [?]” (Aurelius 1989: 70). The third characteristic is the attempt to maintain the holistic richness of the case within the specific parameters of the research questions. Finally, Punch (2005) acknowledges the need of not just multiple sources of data but of multiple methods too (further discussion of triangulation will occur in section 3.7). This sentiment is echoed in the second part of Yin’s (1994)

technical definition. He also argues of the ability of the case study inquiry to cope with the imbalance between variables of interest and data points, as well as the benefit that comes from using theoretical propositions to guide both data collection and analysis (Yin 1994).

This section has defined, described and detailed the general characteristics of the case study enquiry. However, there are many different research strategies one can employ to examine the phenomenon in question. Thus, the following section will describe some of these competing research designs, articulating the benefits of each approach within the context of the research questions, and also providing reasons for their rejection in favour of the case study method.