PROBLEMÁTICA DE INFLUENCIA PARA LA RELACIÓN ENTRE LA TEORÍA Y LA PRÁCTICA

As Eriksson & Kovalainen (2008: 291) point out, no universal criteria is possible to set for evaluating the goodness or badness of qualitative research work. In this study, the quality tests highlighted by Yin (2009) and Eriksson & Kovalainen (2008) are followed as they are acknowledged as relevant and commonly used procedures in qualitative case study research (see Yin 2009: 40; Eriksson & Kovalainen 2009: 296).

As noted earlier, the authenticity of case study approach has been questioned, the lack of rigor being one of the greatest concerns associated with the method (see section 3.1, p. 46). As a response to such doubts, the author has strived for trustworthiness and validity by establishing construct validity, internal validity and external validity in the research design (see Yin 2009: 40). In addition to these validity aspects, Yin (2009: 40) proposes reliability as the fourth criteria for judging the case study quality. However, Eriksson & Kovalainen (2008: 290, 292) argue while reliability is a classic criterion of quantitative research, it may not fit qualitative research projects: rather, trying to assess qualitative work with such criteria ‘often leads to poor quality research’. Deriving from this statement, the author decided to exclude Yin’s reliability test from the quality assessment measures applied to this research work. Instead, the focus is placed on quality tests and aspects that the author believes are more meaningful from the viewpoint of this study.

According to Yin (2009: 40-41), the test for construct validity is about ‘identifying

correct operational measures for the concepts being studied’ and involves the use of

multiple sources of evidence as well as establishment of the evidence chain. Thus, the concept bears a resemblance to triangulation, which refers to the utilization of multiple perspectives as a mean to refine the research findings and increase validity in the

research (see Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008: 292). As the evidence of the study is gathered from several empirical sources and comprises e.g. interview material and different types of written documents; and as these sources are also used to cross-check information; this study features the triangulation of data. Importantly, because both of the interviewees had deep, longstanding experience in managing the business operations of the case firms, the author sincerely believes they have the best possible knowledge and historical understanding of the matters that contribute to the objective of this research. Furthermore, the individual within-case analyses were followed by the cross- case comparison in which the findings about the case companies were contrasted, which helped the author address various relevant aspects and perspectives. During the analysis the author attempted to foster genuine openness to any empirical evidence that either supported or deviated from the propositions presented in the existing academic literature.

In addition to construct validity, the means to establish internal and external validity are followed in this study. Internal validity deals with seek of establishing a causal relationship between the phenomena of interest and is thus linked to the analysis of research data (Yin 2009: 40-41). In the previous section, the technique used for analysing the empirical data and combining the findings with relevant theories were carefully explained. The purpose of case analysis being to derive the salient concepts, patterns and structures from the empirical material, the thematic network proved a very useful tool for conducting an in-depth analysis of the case data.

The external validity of the study, in turn, is about ‘knowing whether the study findings

are generalizable’ (Yin 2009: 41). As this study was conducted as a multiple case

study, the starting point for gaining more generalizable results is likely better than that in single case studies. However, it should be acknowledged that the sample size of two companies is still very small, which limits the generalizability of the findings (for the limitations of the study, see the next section). Consciousness of such restrictions as well as the critical evaluation of their implications increases the external validity of this research. Finally, one should bear in mind that the purpose of case research is not to

produce statistically generalizable results but provide analytic generalizations (see section 3.1, p. 46).

Member check is another commonly acknowledged contributor to the validity of

qualitative research (see Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008: 292). In order to guarantee that the deductions built on the empirical evidence are in line with the original viewpoint of the interviewees, the respondents were asked to preview the interpretations made by the author. By this way, the accuracy of research findings was tried to ensure while minimizing the risk of any misapprehension with regard to the research data.

‘At its best, the case study report is able to take the reader into the real life setting of the case but also to the mysteries of the theoretical issues in question’ (Eriksson & Halinen 2008: 131). Throughout this study, the author has tried to consider the both aspects rigorously: in addition to describing the research setting of the empirical part (see section 1.2, p. 2 and 4.1, p. 58), the time lines created for both case companies illustrate their historical development and thereby demonstrate the real-life case setting further. These firm-specific timelines of Housemarque and Remedy are presented in Appendix and 4 (p. 141-142) respectively. Also, the synthesis presented at the end of the literature review (section 2.3, p. 35) forms a basis for the theoretical framework as well as the interview questions, which helped to bring the current academic debate to the case company context. In seek of high-quality analysis of the empirical material the qualitative data was then systematized with the help of a thematic network (Figure 17, p. 65). During the analysis, the tool allowed the author to contrast the empirical findings to existing theories in an organized and meaningful way.

In this section, the author has attempted to show how quality can be seen in this study. Finally, it is important to note that the author has strived to follow high ethical principles throughout the research process in its entirety.