Application of a Case Study Methodology by

Winston Tellis

The Qualitative Report, Volume 3, Number 3, September, 1997

Abstract

In this article, the methodology to accomplish the goals and objectives will be examined. The
reader will become familiar with the specific techniques that are used in the current study,
and supported by the literature that already was reviewed. That methodology will
follow the recommendation of Yin (1994) and has four stages:

1. Design the case study,

2. Conduct the case study,
3. Analyze the case study evidence, and
4. Develop the conclusions, recommendations and implications.

The article begins with an introduction, that includes some of the background information that
is intended to inform the reader. Following that section, each step of the methodology will be
explored in detail. Finally, a summary will connect all the information in a concise manner.

Introduction

Case study is an ideal methodology when a holistic, in depth investigation is needed (Feagin,
Orum, & Sjoberg, 1991). Case studies have been used in varied investigations, particularly in
sociological studies, but increasingly, in instruction. Yin, Stake, and others who have wide
experience in this methodology have developed robust procedures. When these procedures
are followed, the researcher will be following methods as well developed and tested as any in
the scientific field. Whether the study is experimental or quasi-experimental, the data
collection and analysis methods are known to hide some details (Stake, 1995). Case studies,
on the other hand,are designed to bring out the details from the viewpoint of the participants by
using multiple sources of data.

Yin (1993) has identified some specific types of case studies: Exploratory, Explanatory, and
Descriptive. Exploratory cases are sometimes considered as a prelude to social
research. Explanatory case studies may be used for doing causalinvestigations. Descriptive
cases require a descriptive theory to be developed before starting the project. Pyecha
(1988) used this methodology in a special education study, using a pattern matching
procedure. In all of the above types of case studies, there can be single case or multiplecase
applications.

Case study research is not sampling research; that is a fact asserted by all the
major researchersin the field, including Yin, Stake, Feagin and others. However, selecting
cases must be done soas to maximize what can be learned in the period of time available for
the study.

The unit of analysis is a critical factor in the case study. It is typically a system of action
rather than an individual or group of individuals. Case studies tend to be selective, focusing
on one or two issues that are fundamental to understanding the system being examined.

Case studies are multi-perspectival analyses. This means that the researcher considers not
just thevoice and perspective of the actors, but also of the relevant groups of actors and the
interaction between them. This one aspect is a salient point in the characteristic that case
studies possess.
They give a voice to the powerless and voiceless. When sociological investigations present
many studies of the homeless and powerless, they do so from the viewpoint of the "elite"
(Feagin, Orum,
& Sjoberg, 1991).

Case study is known as a triangulated research strategy. Snow and Anderson (cited in
Feagin, Orum, & Sjoberg, 1991) asserted that triangulation can occur with data, investigators,
theories, and even methodologies. Stake (1995) stated that the protocols that are used
to ensure accuracy and alternative explanations are called triangulation. The need for
triangulation arises from the ethical need to confirm the validity of the processes. In case
studies, this could be done by usingmultiple sources of data (Yin, 1984). The problem in case
studies is to establish meaning rather than location.

Denzin (1984) identified four types of triangulation: Data source triangulation, when the
researcher looks for the data to remain the same in different contexts; Investigator
triangulation, when several investigators examine the same phenomenon;
Theory triangulation, when investigators with different viewpoints interpret the same
results; and Methodological triangulation, when one approach is followed by another,
to increase confidence in the interpretation.

The issue of generalization has appeared in the literature with regularity. It is a frequent
criticism of case study research that the results are not widely applicable in real life. Yin in
particular refuted that criticism by presenting a well-constructed explanation of the difference
between analytic generalization and statistical generalization: "In analytic generalization,
previously developed theory is used as a template against which to compare the empirical
results of the casestudy" (Yin, 1984). The inappropriate manner of generalizing assumes that
some sample of caseshas been drawn from a larger universe of cases. Thus the incorrect
terminology such as "small sample" arises, as though a single-case study were a single
respondent.

Stake (1995) argued for another approach centered on a more intuitive, empirically-grounded
generalization. He termed it "naturalistic" generalization. His argument was based on the
harmonious relationship between the reader's experiences and the case study itself.
He expected that the data generated by case studies would often resonate experientially with
a broad crosssection of readers, thereby facilitating a greater understanding of the
phenomenon.

Yin (1994) presented at least four applications for a case study

model:

1. To explain complex causal links in real-life interventions

2. To describe the real-life context in which the intervention has occurred
3. To describe the intervention itself
4. To explore those situations in which the intervention being evaluated has no clear
set ofoutcomes.

Information technologies involve all four of the above categories, but this study will only report
on the last two. Since the Levy (1988) case study of the University of Arizona, there has been
very little literature relating to the pace of acquisition of information technology at institutions of
higher education. For this reason, Levy (1988) conducted a case study after consulting with
experts in the field and with senior case researchers. Their recommendation was to conduct an
in-depth study of the institution using the case methodology. This study replicates and
extendsthat study and thereby adds to the body of knowledge on the nature of information
technologyacquisition at universities.
Levy (1988) used a single-case design for the study at the University of Arizona. Single cases
may be used to confirm or challenge a theory, or to represent a unique or extreme case
(Yin,
1994). Single-case studies are also ideal for revelatory cases where an observer may
have
accessto a phenomenon that was previously inaccessible. These studies can be holistic or
embedded, the latter occurring when the same case study involves more than one unit of
analysis. Multiple-case studies follow a replication logic. This is not to be confused with
sampling logic, where a selection is made out of a population, for inclusion in the study. This
type of sample selection isimproper in a case study. Each individual case study consists of a
"whole" study, in which facts are gathered from various sources and conclusions drawn on
those facts.

As in all research, consideration must be given to construct validity, internal validity, external
validity, and reliability (Yin, 1989). Levy (1988) established construct validity using the single-
case exploratory design, and internal validity using the single-case explanatory design. Yin
(1994) suggested using multiple sources of evidence as the way to ensure construct validity.
The study used multiple sources of evidence; survey instruments, interviews, and
documents. The specification of the unit of analysis also provides the internal validity as the
theories are developed and data collection and analysis test those theories. External validity is
more difficult to attain in a single-case study. Yin (1994) provided the assertion that external
validity could be achieved from theoretical relationships, and from these generalizations could
be made. It is the development of a formal case study protocol that provides the reliability that
is required of all research.

The design of this case study closely follows that of the Levy study. The methodology
selected by Levy (1988) was based on the seminal work by Yin (1984) and confirmed by
Feagin, Orum, and Sjoberg (1991). That single-case study methodology was used in the
current study and is described below. Danziger (1985) has established the "context of use" as
a mitigating factor in
the study of computing in organizations. The "pattern matching" (Yin, 1984) of acquisition and
use established in other environments may be shown to be applicable in higher education. Yin
(1994) listed six sources of evidence for data collection in the case study protocol:
documentation, archival records, interviews, direct observation, participant observation, and
physical artifacts. Not all need be used in every case study (Yin, 1994). In this study, the last
three types of sources are not relevant, since they are related to direct sociological
investigation, and are not used.

For this case study, the researcher replicated Levy's (1988) study, but also adds to the field by
examining aspects of client/server computing, the Internet, and the WWW. It is based on a
modification of the methodology devised by Yin (1984). Each stage of the methodology will
consist of a discussion of procedures recommended in the literature, followed by a discussion
of the application of those procedures in the proposed study:

1. Design the case study protocol:

a. determine the required skills
b. develop and review the protocol
2. Conduct the case study:
a. prepare for data collection
b. distribute questionnaire
c. conduct interviews
3. Analyze case study evidence:
a. analytic strategy
4. Develop conclusions, recommendations, and implications based on the evidence

The following sections expand on each of the stages listed above, in the order in which they
are executed in the current study. Each section begins with the procedures recommended in
the literature, followed by the application of the recommended procedure in the current study.
 Design the Case Study Protocol

The first stage in the case study methodology recommended by Yin (1994) is the development
of the case study protocol. This stage is composed of two subheadings: Determine the
Required Skills and Develop and Review the Protocol. These are presented in the following
discussion.

Determine the Required Skills

Recommended Procedures

Yin (1994) suggested that the researcher must possess or acquire the following skills: the
ability to ask good questions and to interpret the responses, be a good listener, be adaptive
and flexible so as to react to various situations, have a firm grasp of issues being studied, and
be unbiased bypreconceived notions. The investigator must be able to function as a "senior"
investigator (Feagin, Orum, & Sjoberg, 1991).

Application of Recommended Procedures

This researcher has had thirty years of experience in both academic and administrative
computing and was adequately prepared for the investigation. This researcher's
training insystems analysis is adequate preparation for the project.

Recommended Protocol the Review

A draft of the protocol will be developed by the researcher. This follows extensive relevant
readings on the topic which would help in developing the draft questions. Yin (1994)
recommended that this be conducted in a seminar format if there are multiple investigators.
The purpose of the seminar or review, in the case of a single investigator, is to discover
problems in the plans or any phase of the study design. If there is a team of investigators, the
seminar format would perhaps highlight team-member incompatibilities and perhaps
potentially productive partnerships amongst the members. If there are unreasonable or
unattainable deadlines in the plan, this will most likely be discovered by the team.

Some of the early criticism of the case study as a research methodology was that it was
unscientific in nature, and because replication was not possible. The literature contains major
refutations by Yin, Stake, Feagin, and others whose work resulted in a suggested outline for
what a case study protocol could include. Yin (1994) reminded the researcher that there is
more to a protocol than the instrument. He asserted that the development of the rules and
procedures contained in the protocol enhance the reliability of case study research. While it is
desirable to have a protocol for all studies, Yin (1994) stated that it is essential in a multiple-
case study. The protocol should include the following sections:

 An overview of the case study project - this will include project objectives,
case studyissues, and presentations about the topic under study
 Field procedures - reminders about procedures, credentials for access to data
sources,location of those sources
 Case study questions - the questions that the investigator must keep in mind
during datacollection
 A guide for the case study report - the outline and format for the report.
The discipline imposed on the investigator by the protocol is important to the overall progress
and reliability of the study. It helps keep the investigator's focus on the main tasks and goals,
while the process of development brings out problems that would only be faced during the
actual investigation. The overview of the project is a useful way to communicate with the
investigator, while the field procedures are indispensable during data collection. The case
study questions are those under study, not those contained in the survey instrument. Each
question should also have a list of probable sources.

The guide for the case study report is often omitted from case study plans, since investigators
view the reporting phase as being far in the future. Yin (1994) proposed that the report be
planned at the start. Case studies do not have a widely accepted reporting format - hence the
experience of the investigator is a key factor. Some researchers have used a journal format
(Feagin, Orum, Sjoberg, 1991) which was suitable for their work, but not necessarily for other
studies. Indeed, the case study at Fairfield University is not served by such a format, nor was
the Levy (1988) study before it. The reason for the absence of a fixed reporting format is that
eachcase study is unique. The data collection, research questions and indeed the unit of
analysis cannot be placed into a fixed mold as in experimental research.

The research questions framed as "who", "what", "where", "how", and "why" determine the
relevant strategy to be used. In the Levy (1988) study and the current study, the nature of the
questions lead to an explanatory-exploratory case study. The Levy (1988) study and
this proposed study, both being exploratory, need not, and do not have a proposition (Yin,
1994). The unit of analysis in a case study could be "an individual, a community, an
organization, a nation - state, an empire, or a civilization" (Sjoberg, Williams, Vaughan, &
Sjoberg, 1991). The Levy (1988) study used the case study organization as the unit of analysis.
The linking of the data to the propositions and the criteria for interpretation of the findings are
not well developed in case studies. However they are represented in the data analysis and
report.

Levy (1988) established the single-case explanatory- exploratory methodology as the most
suitable choice for the investigation of information technology. The explanatory strategy came
from the need to determine the extent to which the patterns of acquisition and use that were
established in other environments were applicable to higher education environment also. The
exploratory strategy was used to examine the economic aspects of information technologies.
As areplication of the Levy study, this study also followed that methodology.

Recommended Procedures

The second stage of the methodology recommended by Yin (1994) and which were used in the
current study, is the Conduct of the case study. There are three tasks in this stage that must
be carried out for a successful project: Preparation for Data Collection, Distribution of the
Questionnaire, and Conducting Interviews. These stages are presented together in the
following section, since they are interrelated. Once the protocol has been developed and
tested, it puts the project into the second phase - the actual execution of the plan. In this phase
the primary activity is that of data collection. The protocol described above addresses the types
of evidence that are available in the case organization. In case studies, data collection should
be treated as a design issue that will enhance the construct and internal validity of the study,
as well as the external validity and reliability (Yin, 1994). Most of the field methods described
in the literature treat data collection in isolation from the other aspects of the research process
(Yin, 1994), but that would not be productive in case study research.
Yin (1994) identified six primary sources of evidence for case study research. The use of
each ofthese might require different skills from the researcher. Not all sources are essential in
every casestudy, but the importance of multiple sources of data to the reliability of the study
is well established (Stake, 1995; Yin, 1994). The six sources identified by Yin (1994) are:

 documentation,
 archival records,
 interviews,
 direct observation,
 participant observation, and
 physical artifacts.

Documents could be letters, memoranda, agendas, study reports, or any items that could add
to the data base. The validity of the documents should be carefully reviewed so as to avoid
incorrect data being included in the data base. One of the most important uses of documents
is to corroborate evidence gathered from other sources. The potential for over-reliance on
document as evidence in case studies has been criticized. There could be a danger of this
occurrence if the investigator is inexperienced and mistakes some types of documents for
unmitigated truth (Yin,
1994).

Archival records could be useful in some studies since they include service records, maps,
charts, lists of names, survey data, and even personal records such as diaries. The investigator
must be meticulous in determining the origin of the records and their accuracy.

Interviews are one of the most important sources of case study information. The interview
could take one of several forms: open-ended, focused, or structured. In an open-ended
interview, the researcher could ask for the informant's opinion on events or facts. This could
serve to corroborate previously gathered data. In a focused interview, the respondent is
interviewed for only a short time, and the questions asked could have come from the case
study protocol. The structured interview is particularly useful in studies of neighborhoods
where a formal survey is required. The use of tape recorders during the interviews is left to the
discretion of the parties involved.

Direct observation in a case study occurs when the investigator makes a site visit to gather
data. The observations could be formal or casual activities, but the reliability of the
observation is the main concern. Using multiple observers is one way to guard against this
problem.

Physical artifacts could be any physical evidence that might be gathered during a site visit.
That might include tools, art works, notebooks, computer output, and other such physical
evidence.

The data that are collected during this phase need to be organized and documented just as it
is inexperimental studies. The two types of databases that might be required are the data and
the report of the investigator. The design of the databases should be such that other
researchers would be able to use the material based on the descriptions contained in the
documentation. All types of relevant documents should be added to the database, as well as
tabular materials, narratives, and other notes.
Application of Recommended Procedures

This study used the methodology established by Levy (1988) in his investigation of the
impacts of information technology at the University of Arizona. The methodology
recommended by Yin (1984) and others was adapted for use at Fairfield University.

The questionnaire developed by Levy (1988) was modified for use at Fairfield University. The
modifications were approved by Levy (1988). The modified instruments reflect both the current
case organization and the technology environment under study. The modified instruments were
tested on a group of individuals from the administration and from the faculty at Fairfield
University, the case organization. The results from the test group indicated that changes to the
instruments would be beneficial, and these changes were made. The remodified instruments
werereviewed by Levy. King and Kraemer (1985) provided the logical categories for context of
use incomputing environments and were adapted by Levy in the 1988 study: technological
development, structural arrangements, socio-technical interface, political/economic
environment, and benefits/problems. Specific questionnaire items cover these areas. These
categories were also employed in the analysis.

Analyze Case Study Evidence

Analytic Strategy

Recommended Procedure

The following discussion will present the Analytic Strategy that should be followed in the
course of evaluating data gathered in the previous stage of the study. There are various
viewpoints relating to this phase of the study, and one of them is that statistical robustness is
not an absolute necessity in all case studies. This researcher will present the specific statistical
techniques that will be used in this study later in the section.

"Data analysis consists of examining, categorizing, tabulating, or otherwise recombining the

evidence to address the initial propositions of a study" (Yin, 1994). The analysis of case study
is one of the least developed aspects of the case study methodology. The researcher needs to
rely on experience and the literature to present the evidence in various ways, using various
interpretations. This becomes necessary because statistical analysis is not necessarily used in
all case studies. This case study employs a series of statistical tests to help in the
presentation of thedata to the reader. However not all case studies lend themselves to
statistical analysis, and in factthe attempt to make the study conducive to such analysis could
inhibit the development of other aspects of the study. Miles and Huberman (1984) have
suggested alternative analytic techniques of analysis in such situations, such as using arrays
to display the data, creating displays, tabulating the frequency of events, ordering the
information, and other methods. This must be done in a way that will not bias the results.

References

Aczel, A. (1996). Complete business statistics. New York: Richard Irwin.

Blumenstyk, G. (1994, November). Colleges struggle to develop formal strategies to pay

for computing. Chronicle of Higher Education, 41(10), A44-45.

Computer User Group, Fairfield University. (1993). A plan for the strategic
implementation, use and development of a university-wide computing environment. Fairfield,
CT: Fairfield
University.

Danziger, J. (1985). Social science and the social impacts of computer technology.
SocialScience Quarterly, 66, 1.

Deitch, K. (1994, May 1). A price war for higher education. Change, 26(3), 53-54.

DeLoughry, T., Wilson, D. (1994, June 22). Is new technology worth it?. Chronicle

of
Higher Education, 40(42), A19, A21.

Denzin, N. (1984). The research act. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

DePalma, A. (1991, November 27). As a deficit looms, 26 threaten to quit key

Columbia posts. New York Times, 141(48797), A1.

Evangelauf, J. (1992, March 11). At public colleges more double digit tuition growth.
Chronicle of Higher Education, 38(27), 29,32.

Fairfield University Controller. (1995). Analysis of revenue and expenditures from fiscal year
1989 - 1995. Fairfield, CT: Fairfield University.

Feagin, J., Orum, A., & Sjoberg, G. (Eds.). (1991). A case for case study. Chapel Hill,
NC: University of North Carolina Press.

King, J., & Kraemer, K. (1985). The dynamics of computing. New York: Columbia
University Press.

Levy, S. (1988). Information technologies in universities: An institutional case

study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff.

Loehlin, J. (1992). Latent variable models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates. Long-Range Planning Committee. (1992). The long range plan 1993-1998.

Fairfield, CT:
Fairfield University.

Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A source book for
new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Pyecha, J. (1988). A case study of the application of noncategorical special education

in twostates. Chapel Hill, NC: Research Triangle Institute.

Reynolds, H. (1977). The analysis of cross-classifications. New York: The Free Press.

Sjoberg, G., Williams, N.,Vaughan, T., & Sjoberg, A. (1991). The case study approach

in
social research. In Feagin, J., Orum, A., & Sjoberg, G. (Eds.), (1991). A case for case study
(pp.27-79). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Stake, R. (1995). The art of case research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Tellis, W. (1997, July). Introduction to case study [68 paragraphs]. The Qualitative Report
[On-line serial], 3(2). Available: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.html

Trochim, W. (1989). Outcome pattern matching and program theory. Evaluation and
Program Planning, 12(4), 355.
 Yin, R. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods (1st ed.). Beverly Hills,
CA: SagePublishing.

Yin, R. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods (Rev. ed.). Newbury
Park, CA:Sage Publishing.
 Yin, R. (1993). Applications of case study research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publishing.

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA:Sage Publishing.

Author Note
+
Winston Tellis, Ph.D. is Director of Undergraduate Programs in Fairfield University's School
of Business and formerly he was Director of Technical Services also in the School of
Business at Fairfield. He received his B.Com. at the University of Bombay, India; his M.A.
from Fairfield University; and his Ph.D. from Nova Southeastern University. He can be
contacted at Fairfield University School of Business, Fairfield, CT 06430. His email address is
[email protected].

Winston Tellis
1997
copyright