The methodology can be conceptualized as the process or design that provides the foundation for choosing and employing particular methods, which is then linked to the desired outcomes. Thus, this is the research design that shapes the researcher’s choice and use of methods. It is not only a description of the
•Cognos products (use, bene- fits, drawbacks/ restrictions) • Performance level/ data qual. •operational data sources •DWH
•Business strategy/ comp. adv. •role of management acc./
users/ skills/ knowl./ training RQ1: Can BI
technologies and tools be classified within an appropriate conceptual framework?
•strategic target fields and objectives •service and support •use of reporting and
analysis
RQ2: Can BI technologies and tools be effectively used and integrated into the strategy development process or not?
• use and options of BI tools (analytical skills)
• use in business departments and management levels
• evaluation and expectations of current and potential functions • alternatives (f.i. Panoratio) and other systems for analysis, stra- tegic competitive advantages
RQ3: Can functions and solu- tions be added to current BI technologies and tools to enhance their performances for end users and top manage- ment to gain capability?
methodology, but also an account of the rationale for the choice of methods and the particular forms in which the methods are employed (Crotty, 1998).
In order to develop the research methodology, the research approach has to be defined. A research approach can be either deductive or inductive. The approach determines the relationship between theory and research. In deductive research, the theory and its derived hypotheses come first, and the research and findings follow (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Strategies of inquiry describe types of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research, depicted as research methodologies (Mertens, 2010). Interviews are techniques that are associated primarily with qualitative methods (Easterby-Smith et al., 2004). The use of qualitative approaches has steadily increased in the past. Furthermore, qualitative research favours an inductive approach. An inductive approach is characterized by searching for emerging patterns only after data collection and analysis, with the aim to construct generalizations, relationships, and theories. This approach relies on pre-existing theories or ideas when approaching a problem (Gray, 2009). Thus, theory will be the outcome of the research (Punch, 2005; Bryman & Bell, 2011).
To answer the research questions, an inductive approach is appropriate because the findings of this research will set the basis for generating new ideas and structures. Although the literature review provided theory and relevant concepts from the literature review, that does not represent a contradiction to the inductive approach. As Gray (2009) stated, pre-existing theories or ideas are beneficial when approaching a problem. Saunders et al. (2009) argued that using combination of the deductive and inductive approaches is possible and can be particularly valuable for generating a guide for future research. Thus, the theory as presented in the literature will be considered as a guide for creating new concepts.
The inductive approach has been chosen for conducting a case study (Yin, 2009) in order to understand it in depth and to generate ideas and meanings from the data. For this purpose, the inductive approach is the most appropriate one (Saunders et al., 2009). Furthermore, this approach suits the researcher’s philosophical position as social constructivist. The researcher wants to understand a situation in depth; therefore, the collected data, the meaning, and interpretations
that are derived will be of a qualitative nature. Thus, the inductive approach is the preferred one for being a social constructivist (Creswell, 2009).
Research methodology is divided into three categories: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010). Qualitative and quantitative methods are not mutually exclusive. Studies tend to be defined as either more qualitative or more quantitative (Creswell, 2009). Qualitative methodology collects data that can be expressed mainly in words and uses open-ended questions, whereby the quantitative methodology rather collects data that can be expressed in numbers and use closed-ended questions (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008).
This study is a qualitative one. It was chosen because the researcher wants to explore and understand the individual meanings of the participants as shaped through their experiences and respective business views (Creswell, 2009). Therefore, data will be collected from one-to-one interviews with open-ended questions, in order to give the participants the chance to express their meaning and share their opinions and experiences. The collected data will be of a qualitative nature as produced by the participants.
Interpretations will be derived inductively from the collected data. According to Yin (2009) a qualitative approach is the preferred method when how-questions are asked of participants. The qualitative approach fits well with a social constructivist position (Creswell, 2009).
For the research method, a case study approach will be applied. Eisenhardt (1989, p. 534) defined a case study as follows: “A case study is a research strategy that focuses on understanding the dynamics present within single settings.” According to Eisenhardt and Graebner (2007) the case study is a widely used research method within business research. The case study focuses on a single case or a single organization (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). Bryman and Bell (2011) argued that the case study is particularly appropriate for qualitative methods, because qualitative methods help to examine a case in detail and in a very intensive manner. The case study method is a method that is preferred to answer why and how questions, but can also show which questions can be answered (Saunders et
al., 2009; Yin, 2009). Saunders et al. (2009) argued that for this reason case studies are mostly used in explanatory and exploratory research. In a qualitative approach, the case study typically follows an inductive approach concerning the relationship between theory and research (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
Each method has advantages and disadvantages, depending upon three conditions: the type of research question, the control an investigator has over actual behavioural events, and the focus on contemporary phenomena as opposed to historical phenomena. In general, case studies are the preferred method to use when “how” and “why” questions are asked; the investigator has little control over events and the focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within a real-life context. Nevertheless, some overlapping contents of different methods can be recognized (Yin, 2009). Case studies are designed to illuminate a process, and why and how it is implemented (Schramm, 1971). Therefore, the need to conduct a case study arises from the desire to understand a complex social phenomenon (Verschuren, 2003). According to Yin (2009) case studies are highly appropriate for conducting research on managerial processes. The primary purpose for undertaking a case study is to explore the unique nature of a single case (Simons, 2009).
The strength of a case study is that it allows the researcher to deal with a large variety of evidence such as interviews that would not be available in a conventional historical study (Yin, 2009). Based on the concepts presented above, the case study method is appropriate for the researcher because involved employees of the events can be interviewed and observed to generate valuable data and information for this case.
A common concern about case studies is that they provide little basis for scientific generalization because it is difficult to generalize from a single case (Kennedy, 1976). Thus, the researcher’s goal in this context will be to expand and generalize theories, to create an analytic generalization, and not to enumerate frequencies or to a statistical generalization. Lipset, Trow and Coleman (1956, pp. 419-420) described the goal as doing “generalizing” and not a “particularizing” analysis. This reservation deserves serious consideration because the researcher is trying to
develop generalizations from his research work in order to design a synthesized framework that will provide value to the healthcare industry and AOKN. While it can be difficult to draw generalizations from a single case study, however the potential of case studies can be defended (Verschuren, 2003).
In general, case studies are most often defined by the types of topics to which they apply. The essence of a case study is that it tries to illuminate a decision or set of decisions: why they were taken, how they were implemented, and with what result (Schramm, 1971). The case study strategy begins with “a logic of design…a strategy to be preferred when circumstances and research problems are appropriate rather than an ideological commitment to be followed whatever the circumstances” (Platt, 1992, p. 46).
Because phenomenon and context are not always distinguishable in real-life situations, other technical characteristics, including data collection and data analysis strategies, have to be recognized as a second technical definition of case studies (Yin, 2009). The case study inquiry:
Copes with the technically distinctive situation in which there will be many more variables of interest than data points and as one result
Relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to converge in a triangulating fashion and as another result
Benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis.
The explanations above show how case study research covers the logic of design, data collection techniques, and certain approaches to data analysis. In this context, case studies are not limited to being only a data collection tactic or simply a design feature (Stoecker, 1991).
This Section introduced the importance of the case study as an appropriate research method for the researcher. The case study design in Section 4.4 will support the researcher’s decision as well. The case study approach is a way of investigating an empirical topic by following a set of specific procedures to gain
valuable information and ideas. It is also a basic goal and recognition of the researcher to consider alternative research methods in given environment of social science research (Yin, 2009).
Figure 4.3: The chosen research methodology and design – matching case study to methodology choices
In summary, the researcher uses an exploratory and inductive methodology to generate answers to the research questions. He uses in-depth interviews and content analysis to inform the research results.
Thus, a case study research, using only one single organization, best fits the researcher’s philosophical position and the purpose of this study. Figure 4.3 illustrates and summarizes the chosen methodology. A case study is a good vehicle for an exploratory, inductive, and qualitative approach. It allows the researcher to study one case in depth and to use qualitative methods, which enables the researcher to answer the research questions and the sub-questions adequately. A single case method was chosen because it is closely related to a social constructivist position (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). There are two other reasons why a single case has been selected and why this approach is seen as appropriate for achieving the research purpose:
research
intention/
approach
EXPLORATORY inductive: theory will be the outcome of the researchresearch
philosophy
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTI- VIST research relies on the participant’s views and evaluations ofthe situation and their experiences
research
methodology
INDUCTIVE qualitative - systematic metho- dology in social sciences involving the discovery of theory through theanalysis of data
research
method
CASE STUDY in-depth interviews and content analysis to get deepunderstanding of the topic/ case to
inform the research results
The researcher wants to study one particular case in depth and describe and develop strategic capability for a German health insurance company through the deployment of appropriate BI applications based on the specific situation of that one company, AOKN as case study setting.
AOKN can be an example to explore strategic capabilities along the business strategic target fields. Because BI applications are used primarily to control the company’s developments in multiple segments and are used in the management accounting department, it is a highly sensitive topic. Multiple cases would not provide deeper insights by exploring several health insurance companies. Thus, a single case method provides the optimal instrument and opportunity to conduct an in-depth case study research.
A single case enables the researcher to collect data about AOKN in great detail as shown in the interview output (see Appendix). The collected data relates to the nature and “extent of any improvements within the organization” and extent of developing ideas for answering the research questions. Thus, through the ideas and meanings produced from the interviews, the case study will be multifaceted. The following characteristics of AOKN, the situation and market-orientation are also reasons to conduct a single case.