Abstract:
Qualitative case-based research provides significant contributions to the TIM field, but we lack field-specific guidance. Our initial findings from analysis of 125 articles show that qualitative case-based research in TIM surprising results regarding how few studies use pre-theorising as a rationale for a case approach and the number of single case studies motivated by “uniqueness” factors. We find a multiple data sources from interviews and secondary data, such as the Internet, reports and organisational archives is the norm, but we see very little novelty in data sources. Finally, we see a kaleidoscope of analytical approaches to internal and external validity. We discuss the implications of these initial observations for TIM field development and offer guidance for TIM qualitative case researchers.