Skip to main content
Log in

Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The literature on case studies, both in the field of international business (IB) and in the social sciences more generally, has tended to focus on the methods of data production and analysis suited to this research strategy. In contrast, in this paper we investigate methods of theorising from case studies. We seek to understand how case researchers theorise, and how future IB research might utilise case studies for theorising. By means of a qualitative content analysis of case studies published in Journal of International Business Studies, Academy of Management Journal and Journal of Management Studies, we construct a typology of theorising from case studies. Two dimensions of the case study, namely causal explanation and contextualisation, form the basis for our typology. We distinguish four methods of theorising – inductive theory-building, interpretive sensemaking, natural experiment and contextualised explanation – only the first of which has been widely used in JIBS in the period that we investigate. On the basis of our own qualitative analysis, we show the limitations of inductive theory-building, and argue that greater utilisation of the other methods of theorising would enhance the case study's explanatory power and potential for contextualisation. We argue for a more pluralist future for IB research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Although we recognise that case studies can be mixed and even quantitative (for a discussion in IB see, e.g., Nummela & Hurmerinta-Peltomäki, 2006), in this paper we are concerned with case studies as a qualitative research strategy.

  2. In this paper we follow interpretivists and critical realists in acknowledging that research is an act of interpretation. We use terms such as data “production” and typology “construction”, rather than seeking to conceal the role of the researcher.

  3. We decided to include a journal originating in Europe because it has been suggested that case study traditions are more firmly established there than in the US (Bengtsson, Elg, & Lind, 1997).

  4. An illustrative example is the article by Nutt (2000), who positioned his study as a multiple case investigation (N=376) of strategic decisions. This paper was not included in our analysis, since it treated the cases as observations, rather than investigating the phenomenon in its natural setting.

  5. There are many variants of positivism (Halfpenny, 1982), including logical positivism, logical empiricism and falsificationism. The similarities rather than the differences among these traditions are our focus in this paper. However, it is worth noting that we would characterise Eisenhardt's empiricism as distinct from the assumptions behind the “natural experiment” approach, which rather follows a falsification logic, as advocated by Karl Popper (for a discussion of empiricism vs falsificationism, see Johnson & Duberley, 2000).

  6. In this paper we will use “interpretive” in a broad sense to refer to research traditions that include postmodernism, postcolonialism, critical theory and social constructivism.

  7. We thank an anonymous reviewer for this insight.

References

  • Abbott, A. 1997. Of time and space: The contemporary relevance of the Chicago school. Social Forces, 75 (4): 1149–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbott, A. 1998. The causal devolution. Sociological Methods Research, 27 (2): 148–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ackroyd, S., & Fleetwood, S. (Eds) 2000. Realist perspectives on management and organisations. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamberger, P. 2008. Beyond contextualization: Using context theories to narrow the micro-macro gap in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 51 (5): 839–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbour, R. 2001. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog? British Medical Journal, 322 (May 5): 1115–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, J., Chandler, J., & Clark, H. 2001. Between the ivory tower and the academic assembly line. Journal of Management Studies, 38 (1): 87–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bengtsson, L., Elg, U., & Lind, J.-I. 1997. Bridging the transatlantic publishing gap: How North American reviewers evaluate European idiographic research. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13 (4): 473–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, O., & Goclaw, R. 2005. Narrating the power of non-standard employment: The case of the Israeli public sector. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (4): 737–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berelson, B. 1971. Content analysis in communication research, (2nd ed.) Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beverland, M. B. 2005. Crafting brand authenticity: The case of luxury wines. Journal of Management Studies, 45 (5): 1003–1029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar, R. 1998. The possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences, (3rd ed.) London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, J. D., & Hunt, J. G. 1986. Getting inside the head of the management researcher one more time: Context-free and context-specific orientations in research. Journal of Management, 12 (2): 147–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonoma, T. V. 1985. Case research in marketing: Opportunities, problems, and a process. Journal of Marketing Research, 22 (2): 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boxall, P., & Steeneveld, M. 1999. Human resource strategy and competitive advantage: A longitudinal study of engineering consultancies. Journal of Management Studies, 36 (4): 443–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, H. E. 2008. Causation and explanation in social science. In B. Steffenmeier, H.E. Brady, & D. Collier (Eds), The Oxford handbook of political methodology: 217–270. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brannen, M. Y., & Doz, Y. 2010. From a distance and detached to up close and personal: Bridging strategic and cross-cultural perspectives in international management research and practice. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26 (3): 236–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Büchel, B. 2000. Framework of joint venture development: Theory-building through qualitative research. Journal of Management Studies, 37 (5): 637–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buck, T., & Shahrim, A. 2005. The translation of corporate governance changes across national cultures: The case of Germany. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (1): 42–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D. 2009. Case-based methods: Why we need them; what they are; how to do them. In D. Byrne & C.C. Ragin (Eds), The Sage handbook of case-based methods: 1–10. London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Calhoun, C. 1998. Explanation in historical sociology: Narrative, general theory, and historically specific theory. American Journal of Sociology, 104 (3): 846–871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelli, P., & Sherer, P. D. 1991. The missing role of context in OB: The need for a meso-level approach. In B.M. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior, (Vol. 13): 55–110. Stanford: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J. 2000. Theorizing about organization cross-nationally. In J.L.C. Cheng & R.B. Peterson (Eds), Advances in international comparative management, (Vol. 13): 27–75. Stanford: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chreim, S. 2005. The continuity–change duality in narrative texts of organizational identity. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (3): 567–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C. 2001. Markets, culture and institutions: The emergence of large business groups in Taiwan, 1950s–1970s. Journal of Management Studies, 38 (5): 719–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, E., & Soulsby, A. 1999. The adoption of the multi-divisional form in large Czech enterprises: The role of economic, institutional and strategic choice factors. Journal of Management Studies, 36 (4): 535–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, T., & Wright, M. 2007. Reviewing journal rankings and revisiting peer reviews: Editorial perspectives. Journal on Management Studies, 44 (4): 612–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, A. 1994. Critical realism: An introduction to Roy Bhaskar's philosophy. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, A. 2005. Critical realism. In G. Steinmetz (Ed.), The politics of method in the human sciences: Positivism and its epistemological others: 327–345. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, S., & Rugman, A. M. 2008. The regional nature of Japanese multinational business. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (2): 215–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Côté, L., Langley, A., & Pasquero, J. 1999. Acquisition strategy and dominant logic in an engineering firm. Journal of Management Studies, 36 (7): 919–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coupland, C., & Brown, A. D. 2004. Constructing organizational identities on the web: A case study of Royal Dutch/Shell. Journal of Management Studies, 41 (8): 1325–1347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coviello, N. E. 2006. The network dynamics of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (5): 713–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danermark, B., Ekström, M., Jakobsen, L., & Karlsson, J. C. 2002. Explaining society: Critical realism in the social sciences. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danis, W. M., & Parkhe, A. 2002. Hungarian–Western partnerships: A grounded theoretical model of integration processes and outcomes. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (3): 423–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Boer, M., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 1999. Managing organizational knowledge integration in the emerging multimedia complex. Journal of Management Studies, 36 (3): 379–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denis, J-L., Lamothe, L., & Langley, A. 2001. The dynamics of collective leadership and strategic change in pluralistic organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (4): 809–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denis, J.-L., Langley, A., & Pineault, M. 2000. Becoming a leader in a complex organization. Journal of Management Studies, 37 (8): 1063–1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dick, P., & Cassell, C. 2002. Barriers to managing diversity in a UK constabulary: The role of discourse. Journal of Management Studies, 39 (7): 953–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duriau, V. J., Reger, R., & Pfarrer, M. D. 2007. A content analysis of the content analysis literature in organization studies: Research themes, data sources, and methodological refinements. Organizational Research Methods, 10 (5): 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckstein, H. 2000. Case study and theory in political science. In R. Gomm, M. Hammersley, & P. Foster (Eds), Case study method: 119–164. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14 (4): 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. 1991. Better stories and better constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic. Academy of Management Review, 16 (3): 620–627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. 2007. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1): 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elger, T. 2010. Critical realism. In A.J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds), Encyclopedia of case study research, (Vol. 1): 253–557. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, J. 2005. Using narratives in social research. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Faems, D., Janssens, M., Madhok, A., & van Looy, B. 2008. Toward an integrative perspective on alliance governance: Connecting contract design, trust dynamics, and contract application. Academy of Management Journal, 51 (6): 1053–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farjoun, M. 2002. The dialectics of institutional development in emerging and turbulent fields: The history of pricing conventions in the on-line database industry. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (5): 848–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feagin, J. R., Orum, A. M., & Sjoberg, G. 1991. A case for the case study. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B. 2006. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12 (2): 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. 2004. Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gephart, R. 2004. From the editors: Qualitative research and the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (4): 454–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerring, J. 2007a. Case study research: Principles and practices. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerring, J. 2007b. The mechanismic worldview: Thinking inside the box. British Journal of Political Science, 38: 161–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, C. 2005. Unbundling the structure of inertia: Resource versus routine rigidity. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (5): 741–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halfpenny, P. 1982. Positivism and sociology: Explaining social life. London: George Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A. 2006. Systematic process analysis: When and how to use it. European Management Review, 3 (1): 24–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, J., Pettigrew, A., & Ferlie, E. 2002. The determinants of research group performance: Towards mode 2? Journal of Management Studies, 39 (6): 747–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heracleous, L., & Barrett, M. 2001. Organizational change as discourse: Communicative actions and deep structures in the context of information technology implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (4): 755–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, S., Martin, R., & Harris, M. 2000. Decentralization, integration and the post-bureaucratic organization: The case of R&D. Journal of Management Studies, 37 (4): 563–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillebrand, B., Kok, R. A. W., & Biemans, W. G. 2001. Theory-testing using case studies: A comment on Johnston, Leach, and Liu. Industrial Marketing Management, 30 (8): 651–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, D. 2002. Disciplining the professional: The case of project management. Journal of Management Studies, 39 (6): 803–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J. 2002. The response of old technology incumbents to technological competition: Does the sailing ship effect exist? Journal of Management Studies, 39 (7): 887–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. 2005. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15 (9): 1277–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jack, G. A., Calás, M. B., Nkomo, S. M., & Peltonen, T. 2008. Critique and international management: An uneasy relationship? Academy of Management Review, 33 (4): 870–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobides, M. G. 2005. Industry change through vertical disintegration: How and why markets emerged in mortgage banking. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (3): 465–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johns, G. 2006. The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31 (2): 386–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P., & Duberley, J. 2000. Understanding management research. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Cramer, M. E., Cross, R. L., & Yan, A. 2003. Sources of fidelity in purposive organizational change: Lessons from a re-engineering case. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (7): 1837–1870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kakkuri-Knuutila, M. L., Lukka, K., & Kuorikoski, J. 2008. Straddling between paradigms: A naturalistic philosophical case study on interpretive research in management accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33 (2–3): 267–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellert, S. H., Longino, H. E., & Waters, C. K. (Eds) 2006. Scientific pluralism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolbe, R. H., & Burnett, M. S. 1991. Content analysis research: An examination of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity. Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (2): 243–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. 2004. Content analysis. An introduction to its methodology, (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, T. 2003. Reorienting economics. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A. S. 1989. Case studies as natural experiments. Human Relations, 42 (2): 117–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, D. 1990. A dual methodology for case studies: Synergistic use of a longitudinal single site with replicated multiple sites. Organization Science, 1 (3): 248–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgren, M., & Packendorff, J. 2006. What's new in new forms of organizing? On the construction of gender in project-based work. Journal of Management Studies, 43 (4): 841–866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, K., & Golden-Biddle, K. 1997. Constructing opportunities for contribution: Structuring intertextual coherence and “problematizing” in organizational studies. Academy of Management Journal, 40 (5): 1023–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, S., & Phillips, N. 2008. Citibankers at Citigroup: A study of the loss of institutional trust after a merger. Journal of Management Studies, 45 (2): 372–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J., & Goertz, G. 2006. A tale of two cultures: Contrasting qualitative and quantitative research. Political Analysis, 14 (3): 227–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maitlis, S., & Lawrence, T. B. 2003. Orchestral manoeuvres in the dark: Understanding failure in organizational strategizing. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (1): 109–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maritan, C. A. 2001. Capital investment as investing in organizational capabilities: An empirically grounded process model. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (3): 513–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markóczy, L. 2000. National culture and strategic change in belief formation. Journal of International Business Studies, 31 (3): 427–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. 2000. Factory innovations and management machinations: The productive and repressive relations of power. Journal of Management Studies, 37 (7): 931–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McInerney, P.-B. 2008. Showdown at Kykuit: Field-configuring events as loci for conventionalizing accounts. Journal of Management Studies, 45 (6): 1089–1116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. 1994. Qatative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. 1980. Paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25 (4): 605–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mota, J., & Castro, L. M. 2004. A capabilities perspective on the evolution of firm boundaries: A comparative case example from the Portuguese moulds industry. Journal of Management Studies, 41 (2): 295–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, W., & de Cock, C. 2002. Battle in the boardroom: A discursive perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 39 (1): 23–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noda, T., & Collis, D. J. 2001. The evolution of intraindustry firm heterogeneity: Insights from a process study. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (4): 897–925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noon, M., Jenkins, S., & Lucio, M. M. 2000. Fads, techniques and control: The competing agendas of TPM and TECEX at the Royal Mail (UK). Journal of Management Studies, 37 (4): 499–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noorderhaven, N. G. 2004. Hermeneutic methodology and international business research. In R. Marschan-Piekkari & C. Welch (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business: 84–108. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nummela, N., & Hurmerinta-Peltomäki, L. 2006. Mixed methods in international business research: A value-added perspective. Management International Review, 46 (4): 439–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nutt, P. C. 2000. Decision-making success in public, private and the third sector organizations: Finding sector dependent best practice. Journal of Management Studies, 37 (1): 77–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. C. 2002. Organizational culture: A ten year, two-phase study of change in the UK food retailing sector. Journal of Management Studies, 39 (5): 673–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogbonna, E., & Wilkinson, B. 2003. The false promise of organizational culture change: A case study of middle managers in grocery retailing. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (5): 1151–1178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Mahoney, J. 2007. The diffusion of management innovations: The possibilities and limitations of memetics. Journal of Management Studies, 44 (8): 1324–1348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orr, R. J., & Scott, W. R. 2008. Institutional exceptions on global projects: A process model. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 562–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Outhwaite, W. 1987. New philosophies of social science: Realism, hermeneutics and critical theory. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pajunen, K. 2006. Stakeholder influences in organizational survival. Journal of Management Studies, 43 (6): 1261–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perlow, L. A., Okhuysen, G. A., & Repenning, N. P. 2002. The speed trap: Exploring the relationship between decision making and temporal context. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (5): 931–955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piekkari, R., Welch, C., & Paavilainen, E. 2009. The case study as disciplinary convention: Evidence from international business journals. Organizational Research Methods, 12 (3): 567–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, W. J., & Levine-Donnerstein, D. 1999. Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 27 (3): 258–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prasad, P. 2005. Crafting qualitative research: Working in the postpositivist traditions. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. 2009. From the editors: For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up and (reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52 (5): 856–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. G., Rockmann, K. W., & Kaufmann, J. B. 2006. Constructing professional identity learning cycles in the customization of identity among medical residents. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (2): 235–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. 2000. Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. 2009. Reflection of casing and case-oriented research. In D. Byrne & C.C. Ragin (Eds), The Sage handbook of case-based methods: 522–534. London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ram, M. 1999. Managing consultants in a small firm: A case study. Journal of Management Studies, 36 (6): 875–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. 2006. Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (3): 433–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redding, G. 2005. The thick description and comparison of societal systems of capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (2): 123–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, M. 2005. Reflections on the “realist turn” in organization and management studies. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (8): 1621–1644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. C. (Eds) 2009. Configurational comparative methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, C. 1996. The logic of historical explanation. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues, S., & Child, J. 2008. The development of corporate identity: A political perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 45 (5): 885–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M., & Fried, Y. 2001. Location, location, location: Contextualizing organizational research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22 (1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruben, D. H. 1990. Explaining explanation. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. 2000. Data management and analysis methods. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research, (2nd ed.) 769–802. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salaman, G., & Storey, J. 2002. Managers’ theories about the process of innovation. Journal of Management Studies, 39 (2): 147–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, A. 1992. Method in social science: A realist approach, (2nd ed.) London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, A. 2000. Realism and social science. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shah, S., & Corley, K. G. 2006. Building better theory by bridging the quantitative-qualitative divide. Journal of Management Studies, 43 (8): 1821–1835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, D. L., Von Glinow, M. A., & Xiao, Z. 2007. Toward polycontextually sensitive research methods. Management and Organization Review, 3 (1): 129–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sminia, H. 2003. The failure of the Sport7 TV-channel: Controversies in a business network. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (7): 1621–1649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. 1995. The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. 2005. Qualitative case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research, (3rd ed.) 443–466. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiles, P. 2001. The impact of the board on strategy: An empirical examination. Journal of Management Studies, 38 (5): 627–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R. 2006. From the editors: What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (4): 633–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B. 1999. Patterns of control within Japanese manufacturing plants in China: Doubts about Japanization in Asia. Journal of Management Studies, 36 (6): 853–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolich, M., Kenney, M., & Biggart, N. 1999. Managing the managers: Japanese management strategies in the USA. Journal of Management Studies, 36 (5): 587–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H. 1989. The validity of idiographic research explanations. Academy of Management Review, 14 (4): 551–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S. 2004. Contributing to global management knowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21 (4): 491–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S. 2006. Contextualization in Chinese management research. Management and Organization Review, 2 (1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S. 2007. From homogenization to pluralism: International management research in the academy and beyond. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (6): 1353–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Maanen, J. 1995. Fear and loathing in organization studies. Organization Science, 6 (6): 687–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, T., & Watson, D. 1999. Human resourcing in practice: Managing employment issues in the university. Journal of Management Studies, 36 (4): 483–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, J. 2008. Commercializing open science: Deep space communications as the lead market for Shannon Theory, 1960–73. Journal of Management Studies, 45 (8): 1506–1532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whetten, D. A. 2009. An examination of the interface between context and theory applied to the study of Chinese organizations. Management and Organization Reviews, 5 (1): 29–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, S., & Liu, X. 2001. Transition trajectories for market structure and firm strategy in China. Journal of Management Studies, 38 (1): 103–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, B., Gamble, J., Humphrey, J., Morris, J., & Anthony, D. 2001. The new international division of labour in Asian electronics: Work organization and human resources in Japan and Malaysia. Journal of Management Studies, 38 (5): 675–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolcott, H. F. 2001. Writing up qualitative research, (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, P. L.-K., & Ellis, P. 2002. Social ties and partner identification in Sino-Hong Kong international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (2): 265–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakura, E. K. 2002. Charting time: Timelines as temporal boundary objects. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (5): 956–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yardley, L. 2000. Dilemmas in qualitative health research. Psychology and Health, 15 (2): 215–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. 2009. Case study research, (4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Snejina Michailova, Marja-Liisa Kakkuri-Knuuttila, Kalle Pajunen, Kristina Rolin, Ben Tipton, Denice Welch, Lawrence Welch, Ian Wilkinson and Yorgos Zotos for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript; as well as students in our PhD case research classes at Aalto University and University of Sydney. Particular thanks are due to Geoff Easton and Ricardo Morais, who have been responsible for our interest in critical realism. Early versions of the paper benefited from feedback at the 2009 European International Business Academy annual conference, and at Academy of Management symposia in 2009 and 2010. We are extremely grateful for the constructive and thoughtful guidance provided by Mary Yoko Brannen as special issue editor, as well as the anonymous JIBS reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Accepted by Mary Yoko Brannen, Guest Editor, 25 August 2010. This paper has been with the authors for two revisions.

APPENDIX

APPENDIX

See Table A1.

Table A1 Categorisation of journal articles 1999–2008

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E. et al. Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. J Int Bus Stud 42, 740–762 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2010.55

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2010.55

Keywords

Navigation