Case Study Introduction And Definition Computer

In the social sciences and life sciences, a case study is a research method involving an up-close, in-depth, and detailed examination of a subject of study (the case), as well as its related contextual conditions.

Case studies can be produced by following a formal research method. These case studies are likely to appear in formal research venues, as journals and professional conferences, rather than popular works. The resulting body of 'case study research' has long had a prominent place in many disciplines and professions, ranging from psychology, anthropology, sociology, and political science to education, clinical science, social work, and administrative science.[1][2]

In doing case study research, the "case" being studied may be an individual, organization, event, or action, existing in a specific time and place. For instance, clinical science has produced both well-known case studies of individuals and also case studies of clinical practices.[3][4][5] However, when "case" is used in an abstract sense, as in a claim, a proposition, or an argument, such a case can be the subject of many research methods, not just case study research. Case studies may involve both qualitative and quantitative research methods.

Another suggestion is that case study should be defined as a research strategy, an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon within its real-life context. Case study research can mean single and multiple case studies, can include quantitative evidence, relies on multiple sources of evidence, and benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions. Case studies should not be confused with qualitative research and they can be based on any mix of quantitative and qualitative evidence. Single-subject research provides the statistical framework for making inferences from quantitative case-study data.[2][6] This is also supported and well-formulated in Lamnek, 2005[page needed][6]: "The case study is a research approach, situated between concrete data taking techniques and methodologic paradigms."[this quote needs a citation]

Case studies in research may be mistaken for the case method used in teaching.[citation needed]

Different types of case study research methods[edit]

Ridder (2017)[7] (similarly also Welch et al., 2011[8]) distinguishes four common case study approaches. First, there is the “no theory first” type of case study design, which is closely connected to Eisenhardt’s methodological work. The second type of research design is about “gaps and holes”, following Yin’s guidelines and making positivist assumptions. A third design deals with a “social construction of reality”, which is represented by Stake. Finally, the reason for case study research can also be to identify “anomalies”. A representative scholar of this approach is Burawoy. Each of these four approaches has its areas of application, but it is important to understand their unique ontological and epistomological assumptions. There are substantial methodological differences between these approaches.

Besides these research methods are very different in nature, "case study" can also refer to a teaching method.

Case selection and structure[edit]

An average, or typical case, is often not the richest in information. In clarifying lines of history and causation it is more useful to select subjects that offer an interesting, unusual or particularly revealing set of circumstances. A case selection that is based on representativeness will seldom be able to produce these kinds of insights. When selecting a case for a case study, researchers will therefore use information-oriented sampling, as opposed to random sampling.[9]Outlier cases (that is, those which are extreme, deviant or atypical) reveal more information than the potentially representative case, as seen in the cases selected for more qualitative safety scientific analyses of accidents for example (see e.g. [10][11]). A case may be chosen because of the inherent interest of the case or the circumstances surrounding it. Alternatively it may be chosen because of a researchers' in-depth local knowledge; where researchers have this local knowledge they are in a position to "soak and poke" as Fenno[12] puts it, and thereby to offer reasoned lines of explanation based on this rich knowledge of setting and circumstances.

Three types of cases may thus be distinguished for selection:

  1. Key cases
  2. Outlier cases
  3. Local knowledge cases

Whatever the frame of reference for the choice of the subject of the case study (key, outlier, local knowledge), there is a distinction to be made between the subject and the object of the case study. The subject is the “practical, historical unity”[13] through which the theoretical focus of the study is being viewed. The object is that theoretical focus – the analytical frame. Thus, for example, if a researcher were interested in US resistance to communist expansion as a theoretical focus, then the Korean War might be taken to be the subject, the lens, the case study through which the theoretical focus, the object, could be viewed and explicated.[14]

Beyond decisions about case selection and the subject and object of the study, decisions need to be made about purpose, approach and process in the case study. Thomas[15] thus proposes a typology for the case study wherein purposes are first identified (evaluative or exploratory), then approaches are delineated (theory-testing, theory-building or illustrative), then processes are decided upon, with a principal choice being between whether the study is to be single or multiple, and choices also about whether the study is to be retrospective, snapshot or diachronic, and whether it is nested, parallel or sequential. It is thus possible to take many routes through this typology, with, for example, an exploratory, theory-building, multiple, nested study, or an evaluative, theory-testing, single, retrospective study. The typology thus offers many permutations for case-study structure.[citation needed]

A closely related study in medicine is the case report, which identifies a specific case as treated and/or examined by the authors as presented in a novel form. These are, to a differentiable degree, similar to the case study in that many contain reviews of the relevant literature of the topic discussed in the thorough examination of an array of cases published to fit the criterion of the report being presented. These case reports can be thought of as brief case studies with a principal discussion of the new, presented case at hand that presents a novel interest.[citation needed]

Marketing Analysis[edit]

Some issues are usually realised in a situation where marketing is concerned. One must, therefore, ensure that he/she can fully understand these things. In a case where the market of any organisation is in a messy state, the agency will always seek to find out some of the reasons why the scenario is that way. They will have to gather information that may help them in solving such issues. For this to be fully achieved, one must be able to carry out a market research to establish where the problem is. This, therefore, calls for the different methods which can be used in a situation where one wants to conduct a marketing research.[16] Some ways can be used to come up with the purpose of study that is most appropriate. The organisations have to choose one of the available techniques so that they can thoroughly conduct their investigations. Some of the primary methods that would be used included interviews, surveys, focus groups, observations and in some cases use field trials.[17] These methods mainly depended on the amount of cash they organisation is willing to spend in having this market research done and also the kind of data that is required by the group.

Case presented[edit]

In our case, the British Airways company is undergoing some series of complications. There have been some complaints from their client as about some issues.[18] Apart from those, there have been some serious issues such as most of their members of staff engaging in the strike as they demand their payments. There have also been significant delays in some of the secured flights just because of the problems associated with their computers. This has mainly sparked most of their clients who have, as a result, felt angered. Most of their brands have also been damaged.

The best method[edit]

In such a scenario, it is usually significant that we research so that we can know what the problem is. This can only be achieved through means that will enable us to find the suitable information that will help in preparation of the action plan to solve these issues. The best method to be used here is that of surveys. The organisation should be able to apply this way because they will be able to get sufficient information which pertains to their brand image from most of their clients. Most of the customers will also complete the survey by ensuring that they give reasons for their various attitudes towards the company’s brand.[citation needed]

Advantages of surveys[edit]

One of the benefits of this method is that the company will be able to get feedback from a significant portion of customers. Most of the customers will be able to answer the questions which will pertain to the brand and therefore a concrete feedback will be achieved. The other merit is the fact that it is less costly when compared to the others such as interviews. The company will just have to pay for the production of questionnaires used in the survey.[citation needed]

Limitation of the method[edit]

On the other hand, surveys also have demerits. One of the disadvantages is the fact that their design is inflexible. This is because the study that the company uses from the beginning, as well as its administration, cannot be changed throughout the process of gathering data that is meaningful. In some cases, the survey questions are usually inappropriate since the company will be forced to come up with items that will be used by the entire body of customers.[citation needed]

Types of case studies[edit]

In public-relations research, three types of case studies are used:[19]

  1. Linear,
  2. Process-oriented,
  3. Grounded.

Under the more generalized category of case study exist several subdivisions, each of which is custom selected for use depending upon the goals of the investigator. These types of case study include the following:

  • Illustrative case studies. These are primarily descriptive studies. They typically utilize one or two instances of an event to show the existing situation. Illustrative case studies serve primarily to make the unfamiliar familiar and to give readers a common language about the topic in question.
  • Exploratory (or pilot) case studies. These are condensed case studies performed before implementing a large scale investigation. Their basic function is to help identify questions and select types of measurement prior to the main investigation. The primary pitfall of this type of study is that initial findings may seem convincing enough to be released prematurely as conclusions.
  • Cumulative case studies. These serve to aggregate information from several sites collected at different times. The idea behind these studies is that the collection of past studies will allow for greater generalization without additional cost or time being expended on new, possibly repetitive studies.
  • Critical instance case studies. These examine one or more sites either for the purpose of examining a situation of unique interest with little to no interest in generalization, or to call into question a highly generalized or universal assertion. This method is useful for answering cause and effect questions.

Case Studies in Business[edit]

At Harvard Law School In 1870, Christopher Langdell departed from the traditional lecture-and-notes approach to teaching contract law and began using cases pled before courts as the basis for class discussions.[20] By 1920, this practice had become the dominant pedagogical approach used by law schools in the United States;[21] it also was adopted by Harvard Business School.[citation needed]

Research in business disciplines is usually based on a positivistepistemology,[22] namely, that reality is something that is objective and can be discovered and understood by a scientific examination of empirical evidence. But organizational behavior cannot always be easily reduced to simple tests that prove something to be true or false. Reality may be an objective thing, but it is understood and interpreted by people who, in turn, act upon it, and so critical realism, which addresses the connection between the natural and social worlds, is a useful basis for analyzing the environment of and events within an organization.[23]

Case studies in management are generally used to interpret strategies or relationships, to develop sets of “best practices”, or to analyze the external influences or the internal interactions of a firm.[24] With several notable exceptions (e.g., Janis on Groupthink[25]), they are rarely used to propose new theories.[citation needed]

Generalizing from case studies[edit]

A critical case is defined as having strategic importance in relation to the general problem. A critical case allows the following type of generalization: "If it is valid for this case, it is valid for all (or many) cases." In its negative form, the generalization would run: "If it is not valid for this case, then it is not valid for any (or valid for only few) cases."[citation needed]

The case study is effective for generalizing using the type of test that Karl Popper called falsification, which forms part of critical reflexivity. Falsification offers one of the most rigorous tests to which a scientific proposition can be subjected: if just one observation does not fit with the proposition it is considered not valid generally and must therefore be either revised or rejected. Popper himself used the now famous example: "All swans are white", and proposed that just one observation of a single black swan would falsify this proposition and in this way have general significance and stimulate further investigations and theory-building. The case study is well suited for identifying "black swans" because of its in-depth approach: what appears to be "white" often turns out on closer examination to be "black".[citation needed]

Galileo Galilei built his rejection of Aristotle's law of gravity on a case study selected by information-oriented sampling and not by random sampling. The rejection consisted primarily of a conceptual experiment and later on a practical one. These experiments, with the benefit of hindsight, seem self-evident. Nevertheless, Aristotle's incorrect view of gravity had dominated scientific inquiry for nearly two thousand years before it was falsified. In his experimental thinking, Galileo reasoned as follows: if two objects with the same weight are released from the same height at the same time, they will hit the ground simultaneously, having fallen at the same speed. If the two objects are then stuck together into one, this object will have double the weight and will according to the Aristotelian view therefore fall faster than the two individual objects. This conclusion seemed contradictory to Galileo. The only way to avoid the contradiction was to eliminate weight as a determinant factor for acceleration in free fall. Galileo’s experimentalism did not involve a large random sample of trials of objects falling from a wide range of randomly selected heights under varying wind conditions, and so on. Rather, it was a matter of a single experiment, that is, a case study.[citation needed]

Galileo’s view continued to be subjected to doubt, however, and the Aristotelian view was not finally rejected until half a century later, with the invention of the air pump. The air pump made it possible to conduct the ultimate experiment, known by every pupil, whereby a coin or a piece of lead inside a vacuum tube falls with the same speed as a feather. After this experiment, Aristotle’s view could be maintained no longer. What is especially worth noting, however, is that the matter was settled by an individual case due to the clever choice of the extremes of metal and feather. One might call it a critical case, for if Galileo’s thesis held for these materials, it could be expected to be valid for all or a large range of materials. Random and large samples were at no time part of the picture. However it was Galileo's view that was the subject of doubt as it was not reasonable enough to be the Aristotelian view. By selecting cases strategically in this manner one may arrive at case studies that allow generalization.[citation needed]


It is generally believed[by whom?] that Frederic Le Play first introduced the case-study method into social science in 1829 as a handmaiden to statistics in his studies of family budgets.[26][27]

Other roots stem from the early 20th century, when researchers working in the disciplines of sociology, psychology, and anthropology began making case studies.[citation needed] In all these disciplines, case studies were an occasion for postulating new theories, as in the grounded-theory work of sociologists Barney Glaser (1930- ) and Anselm Strauss (1916-1996).[28]

The popularity of case studies in testing theories or hypotheses has developed only in recent decades.[citation needed] One of the areas in which case studies have been gaining popularity is education and in particular educational evaluation.[29][30][31][32]

Educators have used case studies as a teaching method and as part of professional development, especially in business and legal education. The problem-based learning (PBL) movement offers an example. When used in (non-business) education and professional development, case studies are often referred to as critical incidents.[citation needed]

Ethnography exemplifies a type of case study, commonly found in communication case studies. Ethnography is the description, interpretation, and analysis of a culture or social group, through field research in the natural environment of the group being studied. The main method of ethnographic research is thorough observation, where the researcher observes study participants over an extended period of time within the participants' own environment.[33]

Comparative case studies have become more popular[when?] in social science, policy, and education research. One approach encourages researchers to compare horizontally, vertically, and temporally.[34]

Related uses[edit]

Using case studies in research differs from their use in teaching, where they are commonly called case methods and casebook methods. Teaching case studies have been a highly popular pedagogical format in many fields ranging from business education to science education. Harvard Business School has been among the most prominent developers and users of teaching case studies.[35][36] Business school faculty generally develop case studies with particular learning objectives in mind. Additional relevant documentation, such as financial statements, time-lines, and short biographies, often referred to in the case study as exhibits, and multimedia supplements (such as video-recordings of interviews with the case subject) often accompany the case studies. Similarly, teaching case studies have become increasingly popular in science education. The National Center for Case Studies in Teaching Science[37] has made a growing body of case studies available for classroom use, for university as well as secondary school coursework.[38] Nevertheless, the principles involved in doing case study research contrast with those involved in doing case studies for teaching. Teaching case studies need not adhere strictly to the use of evidence, as they can be manipulated to satisfy educational needs. The generalizations from teaching case studies also may relate to pedagogical issues rather than the substance of the case being studied.[citation needed]

Case studies are commonly used in case competitions and in job interviews for consulting firms such as McKinsey & Company, CEB Inc. and the Boston Consulting Group, in which candidates are asked to develop the best solution for a case in an allotted time frame.[39]

See also[edit]


  1. ^Milfs, Albert J.; Gabrielle Durepos; Elden Wiebe. (Eds.). (2010). Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. Sage Publications. California. p. xxxi. ISBN 978-1-4129-5670-3. 
  2. ^ abRobert K. Yin. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 5th Edition. Sage Publications. California, 2014. Pages 5-6. ISBN 978-1-4522-4256-9
  3. ^Rolls, Geoffrey (2005). Classic Case Studies in Psychology. Hodder Education, Abingdon, England. 
  4. ^Suzanne Corkin. Permanent Present Tense: The Unforgettable Life of the Amnesic Patient, H.M.. Basic Books. New York. 2013. ISBN 978-0-4650-3159-7
  5. ^Rodger Kessler & Dale Stafford. Editors. Collaborative Medicine Case Studies: Evidence in Practice. Springer. New York. 2008. ISBN 978-0-3877-6893-9
  6. ^ abSiegfried Lamnek. Qualitative Sozialforschung. Lehrbuch. 4. Auflage. Beltz Verlag. Weihnhein, Basel, 2005
  7. ^Ridder (2017),
  8. ^Welch et al. (2011),
  9. ^Flyvbjerg, Bent (2016). "Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research". Qualitative Inquiry. 12 (2): 219. doi:10.1177/1077800405284363. 
  10. ^Huang, Huayi (2015). Development of New Methods to Support Systemic Incident Analysis(PDF) (Doctoral dissertation). Queen Mary University of London. [page needed]
  11. ^Underwood, Peter; Waterson, Patrick; Braithwaite, Graham (2016). "'Accident investigation in the wild' – A small-scale, field-based evaluation of the STAMP method for accident analysis". Safety Science. 82: 129–43. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2015.08.014. 
  12. ^Fenno, Richard F (2014). "Observation, Context, and Sequence in the Study of Politics". American Political Science Review. 80: 3–15. doi:10.2307/1957081. JSTOR 1957081. 
  13. ^M. Wieviorka (1992) Case studies: history or sociology? In Ragin, Charles C.; Becker, Howard Saul, eds. (1992-07-31). What Is a Case?: Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. Cambridge University Press (published 1992). p. 10. ISBN 9780521421881. Retrieved 2016-06-20. 
  14. ^Gary Thomas, How to do your Case Study (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2011)[page needed]
  15. ^Thomas, Gary (2011). "A Typology for the Case Study in Social Science Following a Review of Definition, Discourse, and Structure". Qualitative Inquiry. 17 (6): 511–21. doi:10.1177/1077800411409884. 
  16. ^Armstrong et al., 2014[full citation needed]
  17. ^Guesalaga et al., 2016[full citation needed]
  18. ^Harrison, 2013[full citation needed]
  19. ^Stacks, Don W. (2013-08-20). "Case Study". In Heath, Robert L. Encyclopedia of Public Relations. SAGE Publications (published 2013). p. 99. ISBN 9781452276229. Retrieved 2016-06-20.  
  20. ^Kimball, B. A. (2009). The Inception of Modern Professional Education: C. C. Langdell, 1826–1906 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009)[page needed]
  21. ^Jackson, Giles (2011). "Rethinking the case method". Journal of Management Policy and Practice. 12 (5): 142–64. 
  22. ^Chua, Wai Fong (October 1986). "Radical Developments in Accounting Thought". The Accounting Review. 61 (4): 601–32. JSTOR 247360. 
  23. ^Bhaskar, Roy; Danermark, Berth (2006). "Metatheory, Interdisciplinarity and Disability Research: A Critical Realist Perspective". Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research. 8 (4): 278–97. doi:10.1080/15017410600914329. 
  24. ^Klonoski, Robert (2013). "The case for case studies: Deriving theory from evidence". Journal of Business Case Studies. 9 (3): 261–6. 
  25. ^Janis, Irving L (1973). "Groupthink and Group Dynamics: A Social Psychological Analysis of Defective Policy Decisions". Policy Studies Journal. 2 (1): 19–25. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.1973.tb00117.x. 
  26. ^(Les Ouvriers Europeens (2nd edition, 1879)[page needed]
  27. ^Healy, Sister Mary Edward (1947). "Le Play's Contribution to Sociology: His Method". The American Catholic Sociological Review. 8 (2): 97–110. doi:10.2307/3707549. JSTOR 3707549. 
  28. ^Barney G. Glaser and Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research (New York: Aldine, 1967). ISBN 978-0202302607[page needed]
  29. ^Robert E. Stake, The Art of Case Study Research (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1995). ISBN 0-8039-5767-X[page needed]
  30. ^MacDonald, Barry; Walker, Rob (2006). "Case‐study and the Social Philosophy of Educational Research". Cambridge Journal of Education. 5 (1): 2–11. doi:10.1080/0305764750050101. 
  31. ^MacDonald, B. (1978) The Experience of Innovation, CARE Occasional Publications #6, CARE, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK[page needed]
  32. ^Kushner, S. (2000) Personalizing Evaluation. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications[page needed]
  33. ^Encyclopedia of Consumer Culture[full citation needed]
  34. ^Bartlett, Lesley and Vavrus, Frances (2017). Rethinking Case Study Research. Routledge. [page needed]
  35. ^Garvin, David A. (2003). "Making the Case: Professional Education for the World of Practice". Harvard Magazine. 106 (1): 56–107. 
  36. ^W. Ellet. The Case Study Handbook: How to Read, Write, and Discuss Persuasively about Cases. Harvard Business School Press. Boston, MA. 2007. ISBN 978-1-422-10158-2[page needed]
  37. ^Herreid, Clyde F. Herreid, Nancy A. Schiller, Carolyn Wright, Ky. "National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS)". 
  38. ^Palmer, Grier; Iordanou, Ioanna (2015). Exploring Cases Using Emotion, Open Space and Creativity. Case-based Teaching and Learning for the 21st Century. Libri. pp. 19–38. ISBN 978 1 909818 57 6. 
  39. ^Mamou, Victor. "Consulting Case Study". Management Consulting Formula. Retrieved 13 June 2016. 

Further reading[edit]

  • Baskarada, Sasa (October 19, 2014). "Qualitative Case Study Guidelines". The Qualitative Report. 19 (40): 1–25. SSRN 2559424. 
  • Bartlett, L. and Vavrus, F. (2017). Rethinking Case Study Research. New York: Routledge.
  • Baxter, Pamela; Jack, Susan (2008). "Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers". The Qualitative Report. 13 (4): 544–59. 
  • Dul, J. and Hak, T. (2008) Case Study Methodology in Business Research. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-7506-8196-4.
  • Eisenhardt, Kathleen M (1989). "Building Theories from Case Study Research". The Academy of Management Review. 14 (4): 532–50. doi:10.2307/258557. JSTOR 258557. 
  • George, Alexander L. and Bennett, Andrew. (2005) Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. London: MIT Press. ISBN 0-262-57222-2
  • Gerring, John. (2005) Case Study Research. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-67656-4
  • Klonoski, Robert (2013) The case for case studies: Deriving theory from evidence, Journal of Business Case Studies 9/3, pp. 261-266. Available at: JBCS
  • Kyburz-Graber, Regula (2004). "Does case-study methodology lack rigour? The need for quality criteria for sound case-study research, as illustrated by a recent case in secondary and higher education". Environmental Education Research. 10 (1): 53–65. doi:10.1080/1350462032000173706. 
  • Mills, Albert J., Durepos, Gabrielle, and Wiebe, Elden. Eds. (2010) Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. (2 vols.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ISBN 978-1-4129-5670-3
  • Ragin, Charles C. and Becker, Howard S. Eds. (1992) What is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-42188-8
  • Scholz, Roland W. and Tietje, Olaf. (2002) Embedded Case Study Methods. Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ISBN 0-7619-1946-5
  • Straits, Bruce C. and Singleton, Royce A. (2004) Approaches to Social Research, 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-514794-4. Available from: [1]
  • Thomas, Gary. (2011) How to do your Case Study: A Guide for Students and Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Yin, Robert. (2014) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. (5th Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

External links[edit]

  Winter 2006

An Approach to Case Analysis Winter 2006

What is a Case Study?

A case study is a description of an actual administrative situation involving a decision to be made or a problem to be solved. It can a real situation that actually happened just as described, or portions have been disguised for reasons of privacy. Most case studies are written in such a way that the reader takes the place of the manager whose responsibility is to make decisions to help solve the problem. In almost all case studies, a decision must be made, although that decision might be to leave the situation as it is and do nothing.

The Case Method as a Learning Tool

The case method of analysis is a learning tool in which students and Instructors participate in direct discussion of case studies, as opposed to the lecture method, where the Instructor speaks and students listen and take notes. In the case method, students teach themselves, with the Instructor being an active guide, rather than just a talking head delivering content. The focus is on students learning through their joint, co-operative effort.

Assigned cases are first prepared by students, and this preparation forms the basis for class discussion under the direction of the Instructor. Students learn, often unconsciously, how to evaluate a problem, how to make decisions, and how to orally argue a point of view. Using this method, they also learn how to think in terms of the problems faced by an administrator. In courses that use the case method extensively, a significant part of the student's evaluation may rest with classroom participation in case discussions, with another substantial portion resting on written case analyses. For these reasons, using the case method tends to be very intensive for both students and Instructor.

Case studies are used extensively thoughout most business programs at the university level, and The F.C. Manning School of Business Administration is no exception. As you will be using case studies in many of the courses over the next four years, it is important that you get off to a good start by learning the proper way to approach and complete them.

How to do a Case Study

While there is no one definitive "Case Method" or approach, there are common steps that most approaches recommend be followed in tackling a case study. It is inevitable that different Instructors will tell you to do things differently, this is part of life and will also be part of working for others. This variety is beneficial since it will show you different ways of approaching decision making. What follows is intended to be a rather general approach, portions of which have been taken from an excellent book entitled, Learning with Cases, by Erskine, Leenders, & Mauffette-Leenders, published by the Richard Ivey School of Business, The University of Western Ontario, 1997.

Beforehand (usually a week before), you will get:
  1. the case study,
  2. (often) some guiding questions that will need to be answered, and
  3. (sometimes) some reading assignments that have some relevance to the case subject.
Your work in completing the case can be divided up into three components:
  1. what you do to prepare before the class discussion,
  2. what takes place in the class discussion of the case, and
  3. anything required after the class discussion has taken place.
For maximum effectiveness, it is essential that you do all three components. Here are the subcomponents, in order. We will discuss them in more detail shortly.
  1. Before the class discussion:
    1. Read the reading assignments (if any)
    2. Use the Short Cycle Process to familiarize yourself with the case.
    3. Use the Long Cycle Process to analyze the case
    4. Usually there will be group meetings to discuss your ideas.
    5. Write up the case (if required)
  2. In the class discussion:
    1. Someone will start the discussion, usually at the prompting of the Instructor.
    2. Listen carefully and take notes. Pay close attention to assumptions. Insist that they are clearly stated.
    3. Take part in the discussion. Your contribution is important, and is likely a part of your evaluation for the course.
  3. After the class discussion:
    1. Review ASAP after the class. Note what the key concept was and how the case fits into the course.
Top of page

Preparing A Case Study

It helps to have a system when sitting down to prepare a case study as the amount of information and issues to be resolved can initially seem quite overwhelming. The following is a good way to start.

Step 1: The Short Cycle Process
  1. Quickly read the case. If it is a long case, at this stage you may want to read only the first few and last paragraphs. You should then be able to
  2. Answer the following questions:
    1. Who is the decision maker in this case, and what is their position and responsibilities?
    2. What appears to be the issue (of concern, problem, challenge, or opportunity) and its significance for the organization?
    3. Why has the issue arisen and why is the decision maker involved now?
    4. When does the decision maker have to decide, resolve, act or dispose of the issue? What is the urgency to the situation?
  3. Take a look at the Exhibits to see what numbers have been provided.
  4. Review the case subtitles to see what areas are covered in more depth.
  5. Review the case questions if they have been provided. This may give you some clues are what the main issues are to be resolved.
You should now be familiar with what the case study is about, and are ready to begin the process of analyzing it. You are not done yet! Many students mistakenly believe that this is all the preparation needed for a class discussion of a case study. If this was the extent of your preparation, your ability to contribute to the discussion would likely be limited to the first one quarter of the class time allotted. You need to go further to prepare the case, using the next step. One of the primary reasons for doing the short cycle process is to give you an indication of how much work will need to be done to prepare the case study properly.

Step 2: The Long Cycle Process

At this point, the task consists of two parts:
  1. A detailed reading of the case, and then
  2. Analyzing the case.
When you are doing the detailed reading of the case study, look for the following sections:
  1. Opening paragraph: introduces the situation.
  2. Background information: industry, organization, products, history, competition, financial information, and anything else of significance.
  3. Specific (functional) area of interest: marketing, finance, operations, human resources, or integrated.
  4. The specific problem or decision(s) to be made.
  5. Alternatives open to the decision maker, which may or may not be stated in the case.
  6. Conclusion: sets up the task, any constraints or limitations, and the urgency of the situation.
Most, but not all case studies will follow this format. The purpose here is to thoroughly understand the situation and the decisions that will need to be made. Take your time, make notes, and keep focussed on your objectives.

Analyzing the case should take the following steps:
  1. Defining the issue(s)
  2. Analyzing the case data
  3. Generating alternatives
  4. Selecting decision criteria
  5. Analyzing and evaluating alternatives
  6. Selecting the preferred alternative
  7. Developing an action/implementation plan

Defining the issue(s)/Problem Statement

The problem statement should be a clear, concise statement of exactly what needs to be addressed. This is not easy to write! The work that you did in the short cycle process answered the basic questions. Now it is time to decide what the main issues to be addressed are going to be in much more detail. Asking yourself the following questions may help:
  1. What appears to be the problem(s) here?
  2. How do I know that this is a problem? Note that by asking this question, you will be helping to differentiate the symptoms of the problem from the problem itself. Example: while declining sales or unhappy employees are a problem to most companies, they are in fact, symptoms of underlying problems which need to addressed.
  3. What are the immediate issues that need to be addressed? This helps to differentiate between issues that can be resolved within the context of the case, and those that are bigger issues that needed to addressed at a another time (preferably by someone else!).
  4. Differentiate between importance and urgency for the issues identified. Some issues may appear to be urgent, but upon closer examination are relatively unimportant, while others may be far more important (relative to solving our problem) than urgent. You want to deal with important issues in order of urgency to keep focussed on your objective. Important issues are those that have a significant effect on:
    1. profitability,
    2. strategic direction of the company,
    3. source of competitive advantage,
    4. morale of the company's employees, and/or
    5. customer satisfaction.
The problem statement may be framed as a question, eg: What should Joe do? or How can Mr Smith improve market share? Usually the problem statement has to be re-written several times during the analysis of a case, as you peel back the layers of symptoms or causation.

Analyzing Case Data

In analyzing the case data, you are trying to answer the following:
  1. Why or how did these issues arise? You are trying to determine cause and effect for the problems identified. You cannot solve a problem that you cannot determine the cause of! It may be helpful to think of the organization in question as consisting of the following components:
    1. resources, such as materials, equipment, or supplies, and
    2. people who transform these resources using
    3. processes, which creates something of greater value.
    Now, where are the problems being caused within this framework, and why?
  2. Who is affected most by this issues? You are trying to identify who are the relevant stakeholders to the situation, and who will be affected by the decisions to be made.
  3. What are the constraints and opportunities implicit to this situation? It is very rare that resources are not a constraint, and allocations must be made on the assumption that not enough will be available to please everyone.
  4. What do the numbers tell you? You need to take a look at the numbers given in the case study and make a judgement as to their relevance to the problem identified. Not all numbers will be immediately useful or relevant, but you need to be careful not to overlook anything. When deciding to analyze numbers, keep in mind why you are doing it, and what you intend to do with the result. Use common sense and comparisons to industry standards when making judgements as to the meaning of your answers to avoid jumping to conclusions.

Generating Alternatives

This section deals with different ways in which the problem can be resolved. Typically, there are many (the joke is at least three), and being creative at this stage helps. Things to remember at this stage are:
  1. Be realistic! While you might be able to find a dozen alternatives, keep in mind that they should be realistic and fit within the constraints of the situation.
  2. The alternatives should be mutually exclusive, that is, they cannot happen at the same time.
  3. Not making a decision pending further investigation is not an acceptable decision for any case study that you will analyze. A manager can always delay making a decision to gather more information, which is not managing at all! The whole point to this exercise is to learn how to make good decisions, and having imperfect information is normal for most business decisions, not the exception.
  4. Doing nothing as in not changing your strategy can be a viable alternative, provided it is being recommended for the correct reasons, as will be discussed below.
  5. Avoid the meat sandwich method of providing only two other clearly undesirable alternatives to make one reasonable alternative look better by comparison. This will be painfully obvious to the reader, and just shows laziness on your part in not being able to come up with more than one decent alternative.
  6. Keep in mind that any alternative chosen will need to be implemented at some point, and if serious obstacles exist to successfully doing this, then you are the one who will look bad for suggesting it.
Once the alternatives have been identified, a method of evaluating them and selecting the most appropriate one needs to be used to arrive at a decision.

Top of page

Key Decision Criteria

A very important concept to understand, they answer the question of how you are going to decide which alternative is the best one to choose. Other than choosing randomly, we will always employ some criteria in making any decision. Think about the last time that you make a purchase decision for an article of clothing. Why did you choose the article that you did? The criteria that you may have used could have been:
  1. fit
  2. price
  3. fashion
  4. colour
  5. approval of friend/family
  6. availability
Note that any one of these criteria could appropriately finish the sentence, the brand/style that I choose to purchase must.... These criteria are also how you will define or determine that a successful purchase decision has been made. For a business situation, the key decision criteria are those things that are important to the organization making the decision, and they will be used to evaluate the suitability of each alternative recommended.

Key decision criteria should be:
  1. Brief, preferably in point form, such as
    1. improve (or at least maintain) profitability,
    2. increase sales, market share, or return on investment,
    3. maintain customer satisfaction, corporate image,
    4. be consistent with the corporate mission or strategy,
    5. within our present (or future) resources and capabilities,
    6. within acceptable risk parameters,
    7. ease or speed of implementation,
    8. employee morale, safety, or turnover,
    9. retain flexibility, and/or
    10. minimize environmental impact.
  2. Measurable, at least to the point of comparison, such as alternative A will improve profitability more that alternative B.
  3. Be related to your problem statement, and alternatives. If you find that you are talking about something else, that is a sign of a missing alternative or key decision criteria, or a poorly formed problem statement.
Students tend to find the concept of key decision criteria very confusing, so you will probably find that you re-write them several times as you analyze the case. They are similar to constraints or limitations, but are used to evaluate alternatives.

Evaluation of Alternatives

If you have done the above properly, this should be straightforward. You measure the alternatives against each key decision criteria. Often you can set up a simple table with key decision criteria as columns and alternatives as rows, and write this section based on the table. Each alternative must be compared to each criteria and its suitability ranked in some way, such as met/not met, or in relation to the other alternatives, such as better than, or highest. This will be important to selecting an alternative. Another method that can be used is to list the advantages and disadvantages (pros/cons) of each alternative, and then discussing the short and long term implications of choosing each. Note that this implies that you have already predicted the most likely outcome of each of the alternatives. Some students find it helpful to consider three different levels of outcome, such as best, worst, and most likely, as another way of evaluating alternatives.


You must have one! Business people are decision-makers; this is your opportunity to practice making decisions. Give a justification for your decision (use the KDC's). Check to make sure that it is one (and only one) of your Alternatives and that it does resolve what you defined as the Problem.

Structure of the Written Report

Different Instructors will require different formats for case reports, but they should all have roughly the same general content. For this course, the report should have the following sections in this order:
  1. Title page
  2. Table of contents
  3. Executive summary
  4. Problem (Issue) statement
  5. Data analysis
  6. Key Decision Criteria
  7. Alternatives analysis
  8. Recommendations
  9. Action and Implementation Plan
  10. Exhibits

Notes on Written Reports:

Always remember that you will be judged by the quality of your work, which includes your written work such as case study reports. Sloppy, dis-organized, poor quality work will say more about you than you probably want said! To ensure the quality of your written work, keep the following in mind when writing your report:
  1. Proof-read your work! Not just on the screen while you write it, but the hard copy after it is printed. Fix the errors before submitting.
  2. Use spell checker to eliminate spelling errors
  3. Use grammar checking to avoid common grammatical errors such as run on sentences.
  4. Note that restating of case facts is not included in the format of the case report, nor is it considered part of analysis. Anyone reading your report will be familiar with the case, and you need only to mention facts that are relevant to (and support) your analysis or recommendation as you need them.
  5. If you are going to include exhibits (particularly numbers) in your report, you will need to refer to them within the body of your report, not just tack them on at the end! This reference should be in the form of supporting conclusions that you are making in your analysis. The reader should not have to guess why particular exhibits have been included, nor what they mean. If you do not plan to refer to them, then leave them out.
  6. Write in a formal manner suitable for scholarly work, rather than a letter to a friend.
  7. Common sense and logical thinking can do wonders for your evaluation!
  8. You should expect that the computer lab's printer will not be functioning in the twelve hours prior to your deadline for submission. Plan for it!
  9. Proof-read your work! Have someone else read it too! (particularly if english is not your first language) This second pair of eyes will give you an objective opinion of how well your report holds together.

Top of page

0 thoughts on “Case Study Introduction And Definition Computer

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *