Process of conducting this research is close to what has been defined as "systematic combining" (Dubois & Gadde 2002). An earlier concept known as "abduction" can be found behind it. Abduction refers to investigation of relationship between language and concepts (Peirce, 1931; Kirkeby, 1994). Systematic combining differs from traditional linear approach by its non- linear, continuous back and forth integration of theory and empirical observations in order to match theory and reality. Constant matching of framework will occur during the research, when new insights arise from empirical world. Framework directs the search for empirical data. Additionally, these observations may result in identification of unanticipated related issues with potential implications for further research. Further exploration of empirical data may be redirected, and there may occur need to expand theoretical framework as well. Case studies provide unique opportunities to develop theory and utilize in-depth insights of empirical phenomena and their contexts. Conventional subsequent phases do not reflect the potential uses and advantages of case research. Abduction requires an integrated approach for the reason that various elements in such research work are interrelated. Complex structure of research setting makes systematic combining relevant method especially for single case studies. (Dubois & Gadde 2002.)
Figure 7. Research process by systematic combining
More specifically, fit of the method can be justified by revising the path how the research was carried further from the initial theoretical starting point. The study began from the theoretical curiosity to study PE case in light of MCS. At that point, the exact case was not known. The body of existing literature covering PE cases in light of MCS was scarce. Separate PE and MCS literature in addition to only a few papers combining them both provided the initial framework and direction that guided first approach towards the case (Figure 7, arrow 1). "First information" was informant information. It consisted of the organization structure, history of the parent organization and the particular PE fund to be studied. Furthermore, basic points of the investment philosophy of the company were stated as well. Words like "ownership" and "entrepreneurship" were used with substantial weight. Thus, there was a need to extend the framework to integrate ownership and entrepreneurship in order to understand MCS in the specific context (Figure 7, arrow 2).
Aligned with the ideal of systematic combining, Ahrens & Dent (1998) and Vaivio (2008) suggest sensitive approach to a priori theoretical orientation in order to maintain empirical sensitivity for emerging insights. Especially entrepreneurship was a term that required careful attention, since substantially varying definitions of the term were recognized from the literature. As a result, two additional theoretical traditions ("OJ + DC") were integrated into
PE + MCS OJ + DC Synthesis
First info More info
Interview s Case description Informant Document s Analysis Discussion Framework Meta Primary Case section D a ta g a th e ring Analysis part Discussion Time Stage Implications Implications 1 2 3 5 4 9 7 10 19 17 6 16 15 11 12 13 14 18
the framework, improving both theoretical and empirical understanding of the case. First, judgment approach presented in the framework part defines entrepreneurship as ownership and resource allocation under uncertainty. Second substantially introduced concept was that of dynamic capabilities. It is relative to the older idea of heterogeneous capital and its captures the idea of resource orchestration in changing environment. Arguably, it relates to entrepreneurial management, having a position between judgment approach and MCS. Additionally, useful notions from neighboring literature, such as transaction cost economics and earlier resource based view were discussed in order to increase solidity of the parts in the framework. As Dubois & Gadde (2002) suggest, investing in theory might improve the explanatory power of case studies. After incorporating aforementioned elements into the framework, there were more robust means to approach more specific data and match existing concepts with the everyday language, as Peirce (1931) and Kirkeby (1994) have defined abduction. Additionally, Dubois & Gadde (2002) stress theory development instead of generating completely new ideas, as systematic combining builds more on refinement of existing theories. By putting effort on understanding and linking existing concepts, this research fits better with systematic combining.
As described being inherent for systematic combining (Dubois & Gadde 2002), enriched framework guided further informant data collection (Figure 7, arrow 3). This information provided details to construct comprehensive timeline of the Cleantech fund from capital call to exit mode. Informant data about the policies of the Asset management company, PE funds branch and the specific Cleantech fund were gathered during this time as well (Table 3). Nearly simultaneously, informant provided substantial body of the main data (Figure 7, arrow 4). It consisted of Power Point presentations about original investment plans from the early phases of the fund (Table 3). At the same time, framework was developed into synthesis (Figure 7, arrow 5). Writing synthesis part meant connecting and judging the usefulness of different concepts and their connections against the empirical context of the case. For example, the PE funds branch managing target companies raised a need to emphasize revised framework of LOC (Tessier & Otley 2012) in order to distinguish strategic and operational layers of control systems. Another example of case-specific matching between context and framework is the emphasized role of judgment perspective and heterogeneous capital. Despite their universal explanatory power, they are more obvious aspects in the setting of active ownership.
Table 3. Complementary data sources
Four persons were interviewed. These interviews have been specified in Table 4. They were selected by their focal role to strategy implementation in the Cleantech fund. Informant information and actual interviews reveal that other potential persons would not have such relevance for the research subject. Interview questions were drafted based on the preliminary framework part and cumulative information about the case setting (Figure 7, arrows 6 and 7; Table 3). The interview consisted of four different parts. First, each interviewee was asked briefly about the strategy in general: what it is, how it has been formulated, implemented, and is it possible to have strategic initiatives. Second, LOC framework was incorporated by asking questions concerning practices according to their nature (beliefs, boundaries, diagnostics and interaction systems). These questions reflected an existing case study on PE and MCS by Bruining et al. (2004). Thirdly, informant information and documents revealed that there had been different negotiations and attempts to close M&A deals along the fund history. Each case was briefly discussed with interviewees involved in them in order to enrich written valuable information for further analysis. Fourth, based on the documents gathered earlier, there were certain more operational activities in the fund that took place along the lifespan of the fund. Questions concerning accountabilities and roles of aforementioned levers in their implementation were asked.
Informant document Informant document Power Point presentation Power Point presentation
Type of source
Detailed summary of the fund and its history Organization chart, policy and list of accountabilities Material for investors, early 2012
Strategic plans + buyout of the Technology company
Description
Power Point presentation Plans and valuations of different potential facilities Spreadsheets Valuation models of different facilities
Spreadsheets Financial statements of different facilities
Emails Archived correspondence related to facility projects Websites Finnish business news on facility projects
Websites News on company websites on facility projects Documents Contracts related to target companies
Table 4. Interviews
Interviews and documents were the main source of data for the study. Earlier informant data, documents and theoretical frame that helped to structure the interviews served also as the basis for writing the case description (Figure 7, arrows 8 and 9). The structure of the case description has been influenced by framework. First, the fund and the PE setting will be introduced generally. Its strategy and background story reflect especially the framework of judgment approach. Second, the essential LOC will be described from the point of view of fund strategy implementation. Certain direct operational implications will be included as well. Third, activities of strategy implementation with higher operational relevance will be introduced. This division into strategic and operational levels reflects the revised framework of LOC discussed in the framework part. Finalizing the case description also involved checking certain facts from the case organization (Figure 7, arrows 11 and 12). Whereas the case description was structured in order to introduce history and reflect topics of the framework, the analysis part was more explicitly based on discussing theory through the case description (Figure 7, arrows 13 and 16). In few cases analysis part required information from the original data gathering that was not yet written into the case description. At these points, case description was extended in order to provide better ground for analysis part (Figure 7, arrows 14 and 15).