Case Research in Marketing: Opportunities, Problems, and a Process

Author(s): Thomas V. Bonoma

Source: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 22, No. 2 (May, 1985), pp. 199-208
Published by: American Marketing Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3151365 .
Accessed: 19/04/2013 06:45

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Marketing Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of Marketing Research.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THOMAS
V. BONOMA*

The authordiscussesmethodsused in other social sciences and in marketingin

termsof two key criteriadefining"good research."It is argued that the simulta-
neous researchdesiderataof data integrityand high currencyor generalizability
often place conflictingoperationaldemandson researchers.Thus, tradeoffs must
be made in employingany methodto investigatea researchproblem.As a con-
sequenceof these inevitabletradeoff, a broaderratherthan narrowermethodset
becomesappropriatefor marketinginvestigations.Case researchis exploredas one
usefulalternativeresearchmethodfor marketers.The nature of case research in
contrastto case teachingor prescientificcase cullingis discussed,the appropriate-
ness of case-based versus more conventionaldeductivemethodsis consideredby
researcherobjectiveand type of probleminvestigated,and a four-stage case re-
searchprocessis described.Generalguidelinesand caveatsfor the conductof mar-
keting case researchare given. The author concludesthat case researchmay be
viewedas a metaphorfor the generalutilityof the variedinductiveresearchmethods
in expandingour perspectiveson marketingresearchproblems.

Case Research in Marketing: Opportunities,

Problems, and a Process

Since Hippocratesfirstpresented14 classic case stud-
ies of disease some 2300 years ago, science has pro-
ceeded along two divergentknowledgepaths. One in-
volves formulatinga tentativetheoryof a phenomenon
"writlarge,"deducingimpliedempiricalconsequences,
andcontrollingsituationalevents in orderto observethe
validityof empiricaldeductions.The second path, less
frequentlyused but equallyvalid, is to reasonfrom in-
dividualand naturallyoccurringbut largely uncontroll-
able observationstowardgeneralizableinductiveprin-
ciples.
Researchin marketing(and more generallyin social
science)hasemphasizedthe role of deduction.In its pur-
est form, deductivereasoningis exemplifiedby the log-
ical syllogism, wherebyone poses premisesand draws
fromthemsomeconclusion.Becausethe conclusioncan
contain no more informationthan is containedin the
*ThomasV. Bonomais AssociateProfessor,GraduateSchool of
BusinessAdministration, HarvardUniversity.
The authoris gratefulto the Editorand threeanonymousJMRre-
viewersfortheircommentson themanuscript. KennethWongof Queens
Universitycontributedmateriallyto a previousversionof the article.
199
premises,given perfectmeasuresthe validityof all find-
ings dependssolely on the quality of logic employed.
However,in practiceprecisionin measurementoften is
obtainedat the expenseof the currency,contextualrich-
ness, or "externalvalidity"of the findings.
The tradeoffof increasedprecisionfor reducedgen-
eralityis not a useful one in all situations;many inter-
estingphenomenacannotbe understoodif removedfrom
their social context. Thus, some researchershave re-
vived inductive, qualitative,and clinical researchap-
proachesas an alternativepathto scientificlearning.
Thepurposeof this articleis to advocatecase research
to marketersas one methodof the inductiveapproach,
and to argue generallyfor more applicationsof quali-
tativetechniquesin marketingscience. Caseresearch,as
the termis used here, refersto the qualitativeand field-
basedconstructionof case studies.It is guidedby a pro-
cess model of discoverywhich leads to (1) a set of the-
oreticalgeneralizationsfrom the clinical observations,
(2) clinical "constrainttesting"of these generalizations,
andeventually(3) a clinicallyvalidatedtheoryof some
marketingphenomenon.
In the next sectionof the article,discussionof the util-
ity and limitationsof case researchis framedwithin a

Journal of Marketing Research

Vol. XXII (May 1985), 199-208

This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
200
broader discussion of the tensions accompanying all
knowledge accrual and the desiderata for "good" re-
search. We then address methodological issues raised
when case research is undertaken and discuss how case
research may be differentiated from other typical and
topical, but nonscientific, applications of case-based
clinical work. Next we present a process model of case
research which represents a map of inductive knowledge
accrual. We conclude with a discussion of the limita-
tions of and opportunities for case research methods and
posit a need for greater breadth in marketing methods.
TENSIONSAND TRADEOFFS
OF KNOWLEDGEACCRUAL
Most scientists agree that researchis distinguishedfrom
other means of knowledge accrual (e.g., heuristic learn-
ing) by its application of "scientific method" in the prob-
lem-solving process (e.g., Sellitz et al. 1959; Simon
1978). However, there is no concurrence about what
comprises sound scientific method in social science and
therefore in marketing (e.g., Calder 1977; Martin 1982).
The general issue is whether and under what circum-
stances "traditional"scientific methods are helpful when
behavioral phenomena are under study (McGrath 1982:
Runkel and McGrath 1972).
Figure 1 positions various research methods and a few
illustrative knowledge-accrual devices (e.g., "myths")'
within a two-dimensional space whose axes are defined
in terms of two primaryobjectives of research. The ver-
tical axis, labeled "data integrity," refers to those char-
acteristics of research that affect error and bias in re-
search results. It is an amalgam of what is variously
referredto as "internalvalidity" (Campbell and Stanley
1963), "statistical conclusion validity" (Cook and
Campbell 1979), and "reliability" (e.g., Guilford 1954;
Sellitz et al. 1959).
The horizontalaxis, labeled "currency,"uses that term
in the sense of "has currency," and pertains to gener-
alizability of results. Specifically, it refers to the char-
acteristics of research that affect the contextual relevance
of findings across measures, methods, persons, settings,
and time. It is an amalgam of what is variously termed
"externalvalidity" (Cook and Campbell 1979; Cronbach
and Meehl 1955) and "pragmatic"or "ecological valid-
ity" (Brunswik 1952; Sellitz et al. 1959).
Ideally, all researches and all researchers seek high
levels of both data integrity and results currency. How-
ever, as Figure 1 suggests, when researchersmake meth-
ods choices they often must trade one desideratum of
'The reason somewhat more than the traditional liberties have been
taken in defining methods of knowledge accrual in Figure 1 is to make
an important point. Though myths have high currency and personal
opinions low, both of these nonscience devices generally involve little
or no data integrity. Thus, at least a modicum of data integrity must
always be preserved for knowledge-gaining activities to be termed
"scientific."
This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JOURNAL
OF MARKETING MAY1985
RESEARCH,
Figure1
A KNOWLEDGE-ACCRUAL
TRIANGLE
HIGH
0
w
z
cX
LOW
MYTHS
LEGENDS
HIGH
CURRENCY
research for another. A practical "feasibility constraint"
forces the researcher-for example, one doing a quasi-
experimenton seat belt usage-to trade some of the coin
of causation (data integrity) for the moderate general-
izability of findings he or she obtains because of the very
choice of research problem and method. The opposite
set of constraints, high data integrity but low currency
to real world settings, beleaguers the laboratory re-
searcher interested in persuasive fear appeals as a po-
tential foundation for seat-belt-related advertising cam-
paigns. According to McGrath(1982), . .. all research
strategies are seriously flawed, often with their very
strengthsin regard to one desideratum functioning as se-
rious weaknesses in regard to other, equally important
goals. Indeed, it is not possible, in principle, to do 'good'
(that is methodologically sound) research" (p. 70).
The cause for this dilemma is the inability of any sin-
gle research method simultaneously to minimize multi-
ple threatsto both data integrity and currency (Campbell
and Stanley 1963). For example, the study which seeks
a high degree of data integrity requires a precise oper-
ationalizationof the research variables, a relatively large
sample size and quantitative data for statistical power,
and the ability to exercise control over persons, settings,
and other factors to prevent causal contamination. In
contrast, a study which seeks high currency typically de-
mands situationally unconstrained operationalizations of
variables to allow cross-setting generalization, and ob-
servations within natural, ecologically valid settings-
"noisy" settings-where large samples, quantitative
 IN MARKETING
CASERESEARCH
measures,and control are more difficult to achieve. Often,
the latter kind of study demands a greater use of sub-
jective or, at best, clinical analysis. Thus, in Figure 1
such methods as laboratory experiments are positioned
in the top left corer (high data integrity, low currency),
whereas methods such as field studies and case re-
search-which seek to relate phenomena as perceived
by the investigator in natural settings-are oppositely
placed (low data integrity, high currency).
Ideally, a researcher can simultaneously pursue high
levels of data validity and generalizability by adopting
triangulationstrategies which provide replication and/or
corroborationof findings across methods within a single
researchproject. The "multitrait-multimethod"approach
of Campbell and Fiske (1959) exemplifies this type of
endeavor. In practice, however, within-project triangu-
lation is rarely used. As Martin (1981) points out, there
often are technological and expense barriers to using
triangulation within any one research project.
Ordinarily, science implicitly relies on "interproject"
triangulationto help accrue a body of knowledge satis-
fying the two desiderata of integrity and currency. Re-
searchers pursuing similar topics may choose different
methods and contexts. This is not bad, for when there
is experimental and field study and case confirmation
that a given phenomenon holds, one may feel more con-
fident about the phenomenon even though some studies
are low in currency and others have data integrity prob-
lems. The notion of cross-method, cross-project vali-
dation is similar to Leone and Schultz' (1980) notion of
research corroboration.
In some research areas, however, such corroboration
does not occur because the "feasibility constraint"is nar-
rowed unnecessarily by habitually chosen methods. If
the methods set used is narrow, a balance of inquiry is
less likely to be achieved in a discipline that marries in-
tegrity with currency across studies.
Making the Tradeoffs
Though a broad set of sociology of science variables
affects methods choice (cf. Mitroff 1974), the focus here
is on aspects of research itself which might help re-
searchersidentify those occasions on which one desider-
atum should be preserved at the expense of another. Two
characteristics of research problems are considered, the
purpose of the research and the nature of the phenom-
enon under study.
Purpose of the research. Following Simon (1978),
McGrath (1982), and Cook and Campbell (1979), one
may discriminatepoints along a hierarchyof study types.
The different types of studies appear to engage the re-
search tensions differently. One common listing of the
points along the research continuum might be: descrip-
tion, classification, comparison, measurement/estima-
tion, establishing association, and determining cause and
effect. At each sequential step in the research hierarchy
one presumes that the preceding types of studies have
been undertaken, either formally or informally, at some
This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
201
previous time. For instance, without evidence of asso-
ciation there is no a priori reason to consider issues of
cause and effect. Similarly, until a phenomenon has been
described, it cannot be adequately classified nor can op-
erational measures be defined. In this sense, studies to-
ward the description end of the continuum might be as-
sociated more frequently with theory building, whereas
those near the cause-and-effect end are more frequently
used for theory disconfirmation.
As researchers move toward the causal end of the re-
search hierarchy, the tensions of knowledge accrual tend
to direct investigators toward methods high in data in-
tegrity. High data integrity builds confidence "that an
observed relationshipbetween variables is causal and that
the absence of a relationship implies no cause" (Cook
and Campbell 1979, p. 84). Once causation is estab-
lished, replications (usually by other high data integrity
methods) may be used to test the limits of (or to cor-
roborate) observed relationships.
When the existing body of knowledge or theory is well
developed, the use of methods oriented toward the lower-
right apex of Figure 1 may be inefficient. Though the-
oretical propositions can be confronted with naturalistic
observation, the disconfirmation of propositions solely
with these methods is ill-advised. Lower apex methods
on the figure risk measurement bias and error due to re-
searchersubjectivity(Gordon 1976) or, as London (1964)
states, "the imposition of value and the fact upon each
other." It is not surprising that when the focal concerns
are causal limits, quantification, and the attendantability
to attain measurable internal validity, statistical conclu-
sion validity, and falsification, the findings of studies in
the lower-right apex of Figure 1 are considered suspect
or even "unscientific" (van Maanen 1979b).
However, when researchers' interests or phenomenon
requirements dictate theory building rather than verifi-
cation or extension, the tasks of description, classifica-
tion, and comparison become relevant. Then methods
oriented toward the lower-right apex of Figure 1 may be
more efficient than others. If properly conducted, re-
search by these methods can provide a "deep under-
standing" (Geertz 1973), a fuller contextual sense of the
phenomena under study (Miles 1979), and an explicit
provocation toward theory building that often is missing
from both simple descriptive work and most cause-and-
effect research (van Maanen 1982a). Presumably, re-
searchersarmed with understandingso gained may then,
under appropriateconditions, seek to move up the hi-
erarchy of study types toward causal disconfirmation.
When methods oriented toward the upper-left apex of
Figure 1 are used to investigate research topics about
which theoretical development is scant or uncertain, re-
search often is inefficient or misleading. Either the power
of deductive methods is underutilized, or theory and/or
method are prematurely pressed into service when their
underlyingassumptionscannot be met. In the formercase,
superior understandingcould be achieved by using tools
that allow development of in-depth information on con-
202
textualfactors.In the latterinstance,the researcherde-
feats the very strengthsof dataintegritythatthe method
choiceis intendedto provide.In bothinstances,the pres-
ervationof data integritymerelyto providea numerate
descriptionof qualitativelycomplex phenomenacan
"sterilize"(vanMaanen1979a)researchto a pointwhere
researchers"poredevoutlyover surveyreturnsas if life
weretrappedbeneaththe pencilmarks"(Dabbs1982, p.
644).2
Phenomenaof interest.Two key issues are relatedto
thenatureof thephenomenon understudy.Oneis whether
the phenomenoncan be studiedusefullyoutsideits nat-
ural setting. The second is whetherit is amenableto
quantification.Manyissues of interestto marketerscan-
notbe studiedoutsidethe contextin whichthey naturally
occur.If, for example,buyerbehavioris seen as a dyadic
interactionwith the seller, interferencewith the context
of thatinteractionmay distortthe behaviorthat is stud-
ied. Thus, even carefullydesigned surveys or simula-
tions mightnot accuratelyportraythe truenatureof the
interactions (e.g., Bonoma,Zaltman,andJohnston1977).
In terms of amenityto quantification,certainareas of
interestto marketerssimply defy countingapproaches.
Forexample,the natureof "goodpractice"in marketing
management(cf. Bonoma1984) andthe coordinationof
marketingactivities with other business functions are
currentlynonquantifiable phenomena;they are so com-
plex it is impossible at this early stage of theorydevel-
opmentto know what to count. Regardlessof whether
these context and quantificationlimitationsare expres-
sions of the currentlack of understandingfor certain
marketingphenomena(poor theory development) or
whetherthey representlimitationsin measurementand
analytictechnology,muchof whatthe marketingscholar
mightstudyrequiresa contextualsensitivitywhich can-
not be achievedby methodsthat maximizedata integ-
rity.
Wheresettingmustbe preservedandquantificationis
possible,the researchercan adopt "quasi-experimental"
designs(CampbellandStanley1963)-provided thereis
a body of priortheoryuponwhich investigationscan be
structuredfor good deduction.However, as implied in
the precedingdiscussion,seeking a high degreeof data
integrityeven underthese morerealisticconditionsmay
force a particularismof method, instrument,operation-
alization,or sample that rendersquestionsof general-
izabilitymoot.
Prematureapplicationof theory-testing"normalsci-
ence" methods in situationswhere context-preserving
2Thisis not to suggestcommercialmarketingresearchstudiesthat
seek to provideinformationon suchitemsas consumptionpatternsof
demographicgroupsare indicativeof "bad"research.Rather,it sug-
gests thata betterdescriptioncould be obtainedby methodsthatalso
seek to explorewhy those patternsexist. Whethersuch depthof de-
scriptioncan be providedby quantitativeinvestigationdependson the
phenomenonunderstudy.
This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JOURNAL
OF MARKETING MAY1985
RESEARCH,
theory-buildingmethodsmight have been more appro-
priatehas been a sourceof concernacrossthe social sci-
ences. Thus arise the frequentcomplaintsthatpsychol-
ogy is the science of the college sophomore,and the
increasing concernabouttheabilityof verbal-report studies
(includingsurveys) to reflect subjects' actual behavior
(e.g., Nisbettand Wilson 1977).
Where respondentscannot verbalize the underlying
causes of their behaviorreliablyor where a phenome-
non, becauseof its complexityor breadth,cannotbe op-
erationalizedmeaningfullyin quantitativeterms,clinical
judgmentbased on qualitativedata is required.Though
dataintegritywill suffersomewhat,clinical approaches
should not be discounted as "unscientific."Clinical
methodsshouldbe guidedby the samegeneralprinciples
as morequantitativemethods;the primarydistinctionis
the use of inductive,theory-building-as opposedto de-
ductive, theory-testing-technology. As Calder(1977)
notes, the clinical approach"attemptsto make use of
scientificknowledgewithoutbeing boundby quantita-
tive methodsof analysis"(p. 357).
MARKETING
RESEARCHSTRATEGIES:
ACTUALAND RECOMMENDED
Until recently,there has been a strongpreferencein
social science researchtowardpreservingdata integrity
throughthe use of quantitative/deductiveresearchmeth-
ods wheneverpossible (e.g., Mitroff 1974). This pref-
erence also is evident in marketing.A randomsample
of 10 issues of the Journalof MarketingResearchfor
the years 1977-1982, for example, shows marketing's
researchmethodsto be characterizedby (1) substantial
methodologicalattentionand self-study, ordinarilyad-
vocatingquantitativeor "objective"methodologicalin-
novations,(2) no qualitativestudiesof any sort, and (3)
considerableuse of indirectmeasuresof behavior(e.g.,
verbalreports)ratherthandirectassessmentsof the phe-
nomena(e.g., purchases)underconsideration.3
In otherdisciplines,a growingdissatisfactionwith the
applicationof quantitativeresearchmethodsand strate-
gies hasemerged,particularly as they areappliedto phe-
nomenanot easily operationalizedor easily observable
outsidethe naturalsettingsin which they occur (for ex-
amples,see the special issue of the AdministrativeSci-
ence Quarterly1979, or the Sage Series in Qualitative
Research,e.g., vanMaanen,Dabbs,andFaulkner1982c).
van Maanen(1982a) gives some reasons for this re-
3Inthis sample, 124 articleswere coded as qualitativeor quanti-
tative in method,as director indirectin measurement,and as em-
ployinga studentor nonstudentpopulation.A limitedsamplingfrom
the Journal of Marketing Research should not be considered repre-
sentativeof the overallcontentof the marketingliterature.However,
JMRis a preeminentpublicationon researchmethodsin marketing,
and as such is indicativeof the methodologicalpreferencesof the
marketingcommunity.
CASERESEARCH
IN MARKETING
emergence of qualitative research in the disciplines of
sociology and psychology: "The sources of disenchant-
ment [with quantitative/deductive tools] are many, but
deservingof passing note are: the relatively trivial amount
of explained variance, the abstract and remote character
of key variables, the lack of comparability across stud-
ies, the failure to achieve much predictive validity . . .
and the causal complexity of multivariateanalysis, which,
even when understood, makes change-oriented actions
difficult to contemplate" (p. 13).
A growing number of researchers in economics (e.g.,
Piore 1979), medicine (e.g., Feinstein 1977), organi-
zational behavior (e.g., Fombrun 1982; van Maanen
1979a), sociology (McGrath, Martin, and Kulka 1982;
Mitroff 1974), and psychiatryhave advocated and helped
foster rebirth of qualitative research in the social sci-
ences. Some of these researchers have gone so far as to
say that, given the low level of theoretical knowledge
about phenomena in which social science is interested,
coupled with the known complexities and context-sen-
sitivities of these same phenomena, qualitative research
is the major or even the only valid knowledge-accrual
device open to scientists whose interests are focused on
human behavior. Though we do not go so far, it may be
noted that many important marketing phenomena meet
the dual conditions of little theoretical knowledge and
high complexity. Such phenomena should be suited to
the application of qualitative research methods. How-
ever, little trend toward qualitative research has yet been
observed in marketing.
Because of marketing's quantitative/deductive re-
search roots, many marketing subject areas not amenable
to study by the methods oriented toward the top-left apex
of Figure 1 have received little research attention of any
sort. For instance, though much is written about nor-
mative pricing strategy formation, almost nothing is
known descriptively about how (or whether!) managers
engage these strategies under real-world pressures. In-
deed, little is known about what constitutes effective
marketing management in practice (or whether practice
is consistent with what little is known from theory, sur-
vey verbalreports,or studentsimulations).What is known
about such questions often evolves from practical ex-
perience, undocumented analogies with other disci-
plines, and common-sense reasoning. The apparent re-
search bias toward types of investigation that preserve
data integrity at the expense of currency results in a
methodological one-sidedness that may impair the de-
velopment and testing of sound theories.
In sum, there is a role and a need for a much broader
set of knowledge-accrual mechanisms than those con-
ventionally employed in marketing research. In partic-
ular, methods toward the lower-right apex of Figure 1
seem especially well-suited to aspects of marketingwhere
there is a relatively thin theoretical base or complex ob-
servational task. One such method found promising by
many researchers(e.g., Duncan 1979; McClintock, Bar-
nard, and Maynard-Moody 1979) is case research.
This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
203
CASES, CASE TEACHING, AND CASE RESEARCH
Case studies are most familiar to marketers as a peda-
gogical device, or as a means of generating exploratory
insights prior to more "rigorous" investigations. Here,
neitherof these uses of cases is viewed as case research;
rather, the use of cases as research tools is our focus.
Though examples of case research qua research can be
found (c.f., Bonoma, in press; Corey 1978; Corey and
Star 1971), little guidance about how to conduct mar-
keting case research is available, except in literaturesnot
often examined by marketing researchers (e.g., Geertz
1973; van Maanen 1982a). In this section, therefore, we
discuss the nature of a case, then differentiate the use of
cases for teaching, prescientific, and research purposes,
and set the stage for discussion of a four-stage qualitative
research process intended to guide qualitative and case-
based research endeavors.
Case Studies
Defined most generally, a case study is a description
of a management situation. As such, it is the marketing
analogue of the physician's clinical examination (e.g.,
MacLeod 1979), and relies on a similar appeal to mul-
tiple data sources for reliable diagnosis (cf. Leenders and
Erskine 1978). Though case studies familiar from class-
room use usually focus on some problem of high cur-
rency to firm management and have broad pedagogical
appeal, cases without any problem focus can be con-
structed to learn about the operation of a healthy man-
agement or marketing organization. Thus, though man-
agement "disease" often is the stimulus for case
construction, a problem focus is not required.
Second, case construction implicates multiple data
sources. Like other qualitative methods, cases often rely
heavily on verbal reports (personal interviews) and un-
obtrusive observation as primarydata sources. However,
case method is distinguished from other qualitative
methods in that it involves numerous other data sources,
some of which are quantitative. These other data sources
serve as a means of "perceptualtriangulation"4and pro-
vide a fuller picture of the business unit under study.
Prime among these sources are financial data (e.g.,
budgets, operating statements), marketperformance data
(e.g., share, sales by territory), and market and com-
petitive data (e.g., product replacement rates, competi-
tive spending levels). Additional data sources consulted
include written archives (e.g., memoranda), business
plans, and direct observations of management interac-
tions.
4Thenotionof "perceptualtriangulation" raises the point that, in
all qualitativeresearch,knowledgedependsheavilyon the perceptions
of theactorsandof the observer(orcase compiler).FollowingGeertz,
however,knowledgecan only be consideredknowledgewithin the
confinesof someone'sperceptualframework,which is called "sig-
nification."The factthatwe knowso littleof how managersperceive
marketingrealitiesis a majorconcern.
204
Third,cases shouldreflectandbe sensitiveto the con-
text within which management'sacts occur and to the
temporaldimensionthroughwhich events unfold. They
go beyondprovidinga staticsnapshotof events, andcut
acrossthe temporaland contextualgestaltof situations.
Finally, cases requiredirect observationof manage-
mentbehaviorby a trainedobserverwho applieshis/her
own construalof the ongoing events, while also trying
to understand the construalsof the actors.Case method,
in short,requiresskilled clinicaljudgmentsaboutwhat
to watchand what it means.
Thus, like otherqualitativemethods,case methodis
concernedbasicallywith the researcher'sinterpretation
of management'ssignificationof events, information,
andreality-that is, it dependson the researcher'sper-
ceptions about management'smeanings, not on some
"objectivereality."Unlike some otherqualitativemeth-
ods, case methodologydraws on numerousother data
sources to triangulatethese perceptionsand significa-
tions withina broadercontext.
Case ResearchVersusCase Teaching
A case is a description,directlyobtained,of a man-
agementsituationbased on interview,archival,natural-
istic observation,and otherdata, constructedto be sen-
sitiveto the contextin whichmanagement behaviortakes
place and to its temporalrestraints.These are charac-
teristicssharedby all cases; thus, the utility of a case
for researchpurposes cannot be determinedwithout
knowledgeof the compiler'spurposesfor its construc-
tion and the uses to which the case is put.
It is commonto speak of "teachingcases" and "re-
searchcases"in discussionsof case method.Such a dis-
tinctionis sometimesnotdiscerniblefromexaminingcases
once constructed.It is the compiler'sresearchobjectives
in applyingcase methods,andthe subsequentuse of what
is compiledfor theorybuilding, that makes the differ-
ence.
Casesusedfor researchpurposesare not simplypicked
fromtopicalaccountsof interestingmanagementdilem-
mas in the pressor to fill a course "hole,"as often hap-
pens with teachingcase development.5Rather,much as
in "normalscience," the investigatorshouldspecify re-
searchobjectivesbeforecase developmentand, indeed,
before case methodis chosen as the researchstrategy.
Furthermore,the objectives may be hierarchicaland
thereforemay change over the early, middle, and late
stagesof the broaderresearchproject.Case methodmay
be appropriatefor one but not anotherstage of the re-
search. For example, the investigationof the determi-
nantsof "goodpractice"in marketingas it occursamong
5The idea that direct observation is required for case research means
that a common practice-using previously compiled cases either to
illustrate theoretically important phenomena or to form the basis for
theory building-cannot be called scientific and in no way constitutes
case research as the term is used here.
This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JOURNAL
OF MARKETING MAY1985
RESEARCH,
marketingmanagersmay be a viableresearchobjective,
satisfiablefromsurveymethods,experimentation, or case
methodat variousprojectstages (Bonoma,in press). It
is the natureof the problemandits formulation(low the-
ory development,complexnature,and need to be stud-
ied in a naturalcontext)which determinesthe applica-
bility of case method,not classroomneed.6
Thus, cases can be used as qualitativeresearchvehi-
cles in the traditionof the methodGeertz(1973) char-
acterizesas "thickdescription."The criticaldifferentia-
tor of case research from other legitimate, but
nonscientific,uses of cases is thatthe researchobjective
of the investigatorshouldguide a coherentapplication
of case methodacross numerouscases for theory de-
velopmentand testing.Whenused in this scientificway,
cases fall in the lower-rightapex of Figure 1.
On the basis of this view, certainendeavorsshould
not be consideredcase research,thoughthey use a case
method.Some projectslack the elementof directnatu-
ralisticobservation,as when existing cases are used to
developa theoreticalmodelfor whichthey werenot con-
structed.Otherdirectnaturalistic observations(as in case
developmentfor classroompurposes)lack the criticalre-
searchobjectiveset to tie togethercross-casedevelop-
mentandto allowtheorybuildingfromthe observations.
Stillothercase methodapplicationsmaybe correctlyim-
plementedin the sense of usingdirectobservationscou-
pled with a researchobjective, but the more developed
state of theory (say, in consumerbehavior)may make
the methodinefficientor inappropriate.
However, many currentlyunderspecifiedmarketing
phenomenaare well suitedfor case-basedinvestigation.
The managementof distributorrelationships,sales man-
agement,and the generalquestionof what constitutes
effectivemarketing management arethreeillustrative
areas
wherecase researchcould lead to substantialtheoretical
advances.
A PROCESSFOR CASERESEARCH
When case developmentis undertakenfor research
purposes,a theory/data/theoryrevisioncycle is useful.
Figure2 showsa four-stageprocessconstructedto guide
and explain qualitativeapplicationsof case method in
marketingresearch.The four stages in the process are
labeled"drift,""design,""prediction,"and "disconfir-
mation."
Regardlessof the researchobjective,in the beginning
stagesof case researchthe investigatorand the investi-
gationare in the drift mode. This stage consists of the
investigator'sattemptsto learnthe concepts,locale, and
jargonof the phenomenonas it occurs "in the field,"
6However, this is not to say that cases compiled for research pur-
poses cannot be used to good effect in the classroom. To the contrary,
one benefit of case research is that it can offer a substantial oppor-
tunity to integrate course development with research progress (see
Bonoma 1984).
CASERESEARCH
IN MARKETING 205

Figure2 readyto learnfrom naturalisticphenomenaas they pre-

A PROCESSMODELFORCASERESEARCH sent themselves.
The driftstage becomesthe design stage with the de-
DRIFT-
velopmentof a tentativeexplanationof the divergentob-
EXPLORING.
OF THEPROJECT
THENATURE
CLARIFYING
SCOPE,ISSUESAND servationsso far collected. For example,the movement
INTHEFIELD
HYPOTHESES
fromthe drift to the design stage in a study of organi-
zationalpurchasing dynamics(Corey1978)occurredwith
the insightthatmuch of the varianceattributedto man-
KNOWINGWHATIS NEEDED
TO
Z DESIGN- \FLESH OUTTHEDATAON
CENTRALHYPOTHESES
agers'behaviorsin companiesas diverseas Heinz, Gen-
zZ eralMotors,andIBM seemedto be relatedto the degree
r -- of decentralization in the purchasingorganization.With
I
CREATION this insight, the investigatorhad a basis for the pursuit
0
Z
-
PREDICTION L . of theory.
TESTING
TENTATIVE
FIELD
INNEW
GENERAUZATIONS
In the design stage, the objectof datacollectionis to
LL BUTTHEORETICALLY-RELEVANT
SITES
assessandrefinemajorareasof inquirysuggestedby the
O
preliminarymodel. In the purchasingstudycited before,
DMSCONFIRMATION for instance,cases on purchasingdynamicsmightbe col-
BYEXTREMES ATPRIMA
JUSTLOOKING FACIE
CASESTODETERMINE
EXTREME
lected up and down the centralization/decentralization
( OF GENERALIZATIONS
LIMITATIONS continuumto provide a sufficient (not statisticallyso)
bodyof observations with whichto "fleshout"the model
and permitthe developmentof some generalizationsto
IEA I
LATE
-

account for divergencesin observations.In other re-

EARLY MIDDLE
STAGES OF THE CASE RESEARCH PROJECT
and to begin preliminaryintegrationfrom literature,a
priori notions about the phenomenon'soperation,and
criticalcomponentsof practiceas observed. This is a
"soakingin" stage in whichcontextsareobservedto get
a betterperspectiveon modificationsnecessaryto the
basic researchquestionin orderto ensurefruitfulinves-
tigation(van Maanen1982b). A case constructedin this
phaseordinarilyshouldbe construedby the investigator
bothas a problemfor individualanalysisand as a stim-
ulus for furtherthinking(e.g., aboutsome classification
schemes which might afford better-directedobserva-
tion). Most researchmethodsinvolve this sort of "situ-
ationanalysis"stage-in one form or another.
A goodexampleof the case researchdriftstageis given
in Piore's (1979) accountof his first attemptto do case
researchin economics. Much of his early researchwas
notdatacollectionat all, but insteadfocusedon learning
to cope with the discrepanciesbetween his prior con-
ceptualizationsof manninglevels in plantsand the way
the issue was thoughtabout in the field. He notes that
it took time to overcomehis reluctanceto listen to man-
agers' "stories"aboutmanninglevels as anythingother
thanuseless mythology, and to considersuch accounts
as perhapsa more useful construalof his researchin-
terest than his own original, theoreticallylegitimate
expression.He notes that, in the absenceof such "sto-
ries," he probablywould have treatedmanagementbe-
havioras model deviationsthat requireda "correction
factor"insteadof as the stimulusfor building a more
correctunderstanding. As Piore'sfrankaccountimplies,
one of the critical, but difficult, tasks of the researcher
in the drift stage is to suspenda priori bias, and to be
LATE
searchprojects, the goal may be more descriptiveor
classification-oriented. In a study of marketingimple-
mentation,for example,completionof the driftstageled
to the specificationof four "levels"at which marketing
executioncould be thoughtto take place, and four crit-
ical managerialskills implicatedin good marketingprac-
tice (Bonoma,in press).
In eithercase, the designstageis one of "fleshingout"
a beginningconceptualization of events.The criticalskill
for the qualitativeresearcherat this pointis to be willing
to let furtherdata"recycle"his/her thinkingbackto drift
if beginningconceptualizationsdo not hold up against
new situationsor as better conceptualizationssuggest
themselves.
Thethirdstageof case research,thepredictionor gen-
eralization-formation stage, occursin the middle-to-late
life of a case researchproject. By this stage the re-
searcherhas botha modelsuggestinggeneralizationsfor
test and a good understandingof the factorson which
field observationsmay be grouped,and wishes to eval-
uatebeginningpredictionsby furthercase construction.
The researchwill compilemorecases fromsites thatare
differentfrom, but conceptuallysimilarto, those sites
used to arriveat the generalizations.This step usually
requiresevaluatingthe generalizationin industriesor
settingsnot yet explored.
In the study of marketingimplementationpreviously
cited, for example,some tentativegeneralizationsabout
good practicewere developedfrom case work done in
the design stage. One such propositionwas that struc-
turesfor implementation(such as systems for competi-
tive intelligence,or policies on pricing)often got in the
way of good practice;skillfulindividualmanagers,how-
ever, couldoffset this structuraldegradationandaccom-
plishexcellentexecution.A largenumberof cases were
collected (1) to test the predictivepower of the gener-

This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
206
alizationand(2) to learnaboutits parameters
(e.g., could
strongstructurescompensatefor weak skills, or was the
oppositethe case?).
The criticalqualitativeresearchviewpointsinvolved
in this stage include(1) opennessto the fact that many
generalizationsare not very general, being circum-
scribedto particularsituations,settings, or industries,
and(2) the willingnessto treatdisconfinringknowledge
as a stimulusfor the developmentof new, modifiedgen-
eralizationswhich do hold acrosssettings.
The fourthstage, disconfirmation,consists of further
testingthe limits of generalizationsnot rejectedin the
predictionstage. An attemptis made to disconfirmthe
tentativegeneralizationsby applyingthem to another,
even broader,set of cases than was sought in the pre-
diction stage. The contexts for these cases should be
characterized by extremeconditionswhere the general-
izations'limits mightbe expectedto be exceeded.
This stage in case researchis a surrogatefor the fal-
sificationproceduresused in deductivework. For ex-
ample,case researchon financialorganizationsin For-
tune 500 companies may identify aspects of pricing
strategies as keysto goodmarketing practice.In thisfourth
stage,the investigator mightcompilecases in some small,
high technologystartupcontextsto learnhow the pro-
posed processesappearin a very differentindustryand
environment.The blendingof the disconfirmatoryas-
pectsof the predictionstage andthe morecompletefal-
sificationattemptsin this stage illustratesan important
point:these four stages do not form some rigid hier-
archy, but ratheran iterativeevolution toward under-
standing,muchlike thatfoundin deductiveresearchap-
proaches.It is the applicationof a process such as this
one to repetitivelydevelopedcases which, along with
researchpurpose,primarilydifferentiatescase research
fromcase development.
It is important,however,to note othersubstantialdif-
ferencesbetweencase researchand more high-data-in-
tegritymethods.First,the goal of datacollectionin case
researchis not quantificationor even enumeration,but
rather(1) description,(2) classification(typology de-
velopment),(3) theorydevelopment,and(4) limitedthe-
ory testing. In a word, the goal is understanding.
Second, most enumerationis of little value to a case
researcher.The goal is not the breadthor representa-
tivenessof large-nresearch,but ratherthe depthof the
knowing.The risks of low data integrityare tradedfor
the currencyandcontextualrichnessof whatis learned.
Onceresearchersareconfidentof theirunderstanding of
a phenomenonexploredwith case research,other,more
traditionaldeductiveapproachesmay be appliedto the
problem(if enoughtheoryhas been developedto allow
them). However, even by itself a "purelyqualitative"
case researchprojectcan be the basis for a valuableand
valid scientific attack on certain classes of important
problems.A case researchprojectcan representa full,
if different,implementation of the scientifictheory-data
cycle whichconformsto the same basic rules of knowl-
edge accrualas "standard" researchmethodologies.
This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JOURNAL
OF MARKETING MAY1985
RESEARCH,
CONCLUSION:
PROBLEMS,OPPORTUNITIES,
AND A PLEAFOR BREADTH
Clearly, case researchis more appropriatefor some
and less appropriatefor other marketingresearchpro-
jects. We have triedto outlinethe situationsin which it
is appropriate and to give some generalprocess guide-
lines for its conduct.
However,significantproblemsremainfor researchers
who wouldadoptcase researchmethodsfor theirinves-
tigationsinto marketingphenomena.These group into
conceptual,executional, and political problems. Con-
ceptually,it is easy to advocatea high quality clinical
judgment,butdifficultto cultivateor improvesuchjudg-
mentexceptby doing clinical projects.Moreover,each
"datapoint"in case research(a case study) can be an
extensiveandexpensiveventure,makingthe acquisition
of such qualitativeexpertise arduousor slow. Execu-
tionally, access to corporationsappropriatefor the re-
searchobjectivesmaynot be as easy as obtainingstudent
subjectsor the resourcesnecessaryfor mail question-
naires.Individualcase studiesare not necessarilyas ex-
pensiveas a majorsurveyproject,but the necessity for
repeatedcase developmentin the theory/data/theory
validationcycle often requiresa more substantialin-
vestmentof time andfundsthanwould have to be made
with some othermethods.Politically,becausethe major
thrustof most publishedmarketingresearchis toward
deductive,numerate,andcausallydirectedresearch,the
researchermay have a greaterchallengein demonstrat-
ing the benefitsandneccessityof qualitativemethodsfor
the problemstudied.
Case researchdoes offer significantopportunitiesto
the marketerand the marketingcommunity.First, it al-
lows investigationof a numberof importantmarketing
problemswhich to date have been ignored in theory
buildingand analysis-often becauseof theircomplex-
ity or ecological-rootedness.Second, the clinical judg-
mentgainedfromcase researchmay feed back not only
into the researchprojectitself, but to the classroom,to
consulting,andto other,deductivetheory-testingefforts
as well. Moregenerally,however, case and otherqual-
itativeresearchcan move marketingscholarscloser to
marketingmanagers,while laying a clinical foundation
for advancingmarketingknowledgein new and signif-
icantareas.
In a broadsense, the advocacyof case researchin this
articleis a metaphorfor wider considerationof nontra-
ditionalandqualitative researchmethodsof all sorts.There
are many which can and should have a place in mar-
ketingresearch.These include Salancik's(1979) "field
stimulationtechnique"involving the documentationof
organizational reactionsto researcher-generated stimuli;
Dabbs'(1982) applicationof videorecordingtechnology
to study events in faster- and slower-than-normal time
to uncover overlooked behavior patterns; and Mc-
Clintock,Barnard,and Maynard-Moody's (1979) "case
cluster"methodin which cases are studiedvia the un-
derlyingmodel of surveyresearch.
 IN MARKETING
CASERESEARCH
There are identifiable sets of research situations (and
stages of research design) where the qualitative, in-depth
natureof these "high currency" approaches is desirable,
even if accompanied by some risks to data integrity. In
particular,they are useful when a phenomenon is broad
and complex, where the existing body of knowledge is
insufficient to permit the posing of causal questions, and
when a phenomenon cannot be studied outside the con-
text in which it naturally occurs. However, these are
"features" of appropriate problems and not the major
"benefits" of nontraditional approaches. The real bene-
fits are that clinical research methods offer the potential
to deepen the perspective of persons performing and us-
ing research, and that they expand the range of research
problems that can be considered. The implementation of
Kelly's (1954) notion of "constructive altemativism" in
research methods, the ability to construe knowledge in
novel and useful ways, is central to maintaining the vi-
tality of any area of inquiry.
REFERENCES
Bonoma,ThomasV. (1984),ManagingMarketing:Text,Cases
and Readings.New York:The Free Press.
(in press), The MarketingEdge: MakingStrategies
Work.New York:The Free Press.
, G. Zaltman,and W. J. Johnston(1977), Industrial
BuyingBehavior. Cambridge,MA: MarketingScience In-
stitute.
Brunswik,E. (1952), "The ConceptualFrameworkof Psy-
chology,"in InternationalEncyclopediaof UnifiedScience,
O. Neurath,ed. Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.
Calder,Bobby J. (1977), "FocusGroupsand the Natureof
QualitativeMarketingResearch,"Journalof MarketingRe-
search, 14 (August),353-64.
Campbell,D. T. and D. W. Fiske (1959), "Convergentand
DiscriminantValidationby the Multitrait-MultimethodMa-
trix,"PsychologicalBulletin, 56, 81-105.
and J. C. Stanley (1963), Experimentaland Quasi-
ExperimentalDesigns for Research. Chicago: Rand Mc-
Nally.
Cook, Thomas, D. and DonaldT. Campbell(1979), Quasi-
Experimentation: Design and Analysisfor Field Settings.
Boston:HoughtonMifflin and Company.
Corey,E. R. (1978), ProcurementManagement:Strategy,Or-
ganizationand Decision Making. Boston: CBI Publishing
Company.
and S. Star(1971), OrganizationalStrategy:A Mar-
ketingApproach. Boston: Division of Research, Harvard
BusinessSchool.
Cronbach,L. J. and P. E. Meehl (1955), "ConstructValidity
in PsychologicalTests," PsychologicalBulletin, 52, 281-
302.
Dabbs, James M., Jr. (1982), "MakingThings Visible," in
Varietiesof QualitativeResearch,Johnvan Maanan,J. M.
Dabbs,Jr., andRobertR. Faulkner,eds. BeverlyHills, CA:
Sage Publications,31-64.
Duncan,RobertR. (1979),StrategicManagement: A New View
of BusinessPolicy. Boston:Little, Brown.
Feinstein,Alvan R. (1977), "The Haze of Bayes, the Aerial
Palacesof Decision Analysis, and the ComputerizedOuija
Board,"ClinicalPharmacology and Therapeutics,
21 (April),
482-96.
This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
207
Fombrun,CharlesJ. (1982), "Strategiesfor NetworkResearch
in Organizations,"Academyof ManagementReview,7 (2),
280-91.
Geertz,CliffordA. (1973), TheInterpretationof Cultures.New
York:Basic Books.
Gordon,R. (1976), "Ethnomethodology-RadicalCritique,"
HumanRelations,29 (March),193-202.
Guilford,J. P. (1954), PsychometricMethods,2nd ed. New
York:McGraw-HillBook Company.
Kelly, GeorgeA. (1955), The Psychologyof Personal Con-
structs.New York:W. W. Norton(2 vols.).
Leenders,MichielR. andJamesA. Erskine(1978), Case Re-
search: The Case WritingProcess, 2nd ed. London, On-
tario:Researchand PublicationsDivision, School of Busi-
ness Administration, The Universityof WesternOntario.
Leone,RobertP. andRandallL. Schultz(1980), "A Studyof
MarketingGeneralizations," Journal of Marketing, 44
(Winter),10-18.
London,P. (1964), TheModesand Moralsof Psychotherapy.
New York:Holt, Rinehartand Winston.
MacLeod, John (1979), Clinical Examination.Edinburgh:
ChurchillLivingstone.
Martin,Joanne(1982), "A GarbageCan Model of the Re-
searchProcess,"in JudgmentCalls in Research,JosephE.
McGrath,JoanneMartin,and RichardA. Kulka,eds. Bev-
erly Hills, CA: Sage Publications,17-40.
McClintock,CharlesC., D. Barnard,andS. Maynard-Moody
(1979), "Applyingthe Logic of Sample Surveysto Quali-
tative Case Studies:The Case ClusterMethod,"Adminis-
trativeScience Quarterly,24 (December),612-29.
McGrath,Joseph E. (1982), "Dilemmatics:The Study of
Choices and Dilemmas,"in JudgmentCalls in Research,
JosephE. McGrath,JoanneMartin,andRichardA. Kulka,
eds. BeverlyHills, CA: Sage Publications,69-102.
, JoanneMartin,andRichardA. Kulka(1982), "Some
Quasi-Rulesfor MakingJudgmentCalls in Research,"in
JudgmentCalls in Research, Joseph E. McGrath,Joanne
Martin,andRichardA. Kulka,eds. BeverlyHills, CA: Sage
Publications,103-18.
Miles, MatthewB. (1979), "QualitativeData as an Attractive
Nuisance,"AdministrativeScience Quarterly,24 (Decem-
ber), 590-601.
Mitroff,Ian M. (1974), The SubjectiveSide of Science. New
York:Elsevier.
Nisbett,RichardE. and T. D. Wilson (1977), "TellingMore
thanWe CanKnow:VerbalReportson MentalProcesses,"
PsychologicalReview, 84 (March),231-59.
Piore,MichaelJ. (1979), "QualitativeResearchTechniquesin
Economics,"Administrative ScienceQuarterly,24 (Decem-
ber), 560-9.
Runkel,P. J. and McGrath,JosephE. (1972), Researchon
HumanBehavior:A SystematicGuide to Method. Skokie,
IL: RandMcNally.
Salancik,GeraldR. (1979), "FieldStimulationsfor Organi-
zationalBehaviorResearch,"Administrative Science Quar-
terly, 24 (December),638-48.
Sellitz, Claire,MarieJahoda,MortonDeutsch,and StuartW.
Cook (1959), ResearchMethodsin Social Relations. New
York:Holt, Rinehartand Winston.
Simon, JulianL. (1978), Basic ResearchMethodsin Social
Science:The Art of EmpiricalInvestigation,2nd ed. New
York:RandomHouse.
van Maanen,John(1979a), "ReclaimingQualitativeMethods
for OrganizationalResearch:A Preface," Administrative
ScienceQuarterly,24 (December),520-6.
208 JOURNAL
OF MARKETING MAY1985
RESEARCH,

(1979b), "TheFact of Fictionin OrganizationalEth- (1982b), "Fieldworkon the Beat," in Varieties of

nography,"Administrative Science Quarterly,24 (Decem-
ber), 539-50.
(1982a), "Introduction," in Varietiesof Qualitative
Research.Johnvan Maanen,J. M. Dabbs,Jr., and Robert
R. Faulkner,eds. BeverlyHills, CA: Sage Publications,11-
29.
QualitativeResearch.Johnvan Maanen,J. M. Dabbs, Jr.,
andRobertR. Faulkner,eds. BeverlyHills, CA: Sage Pub-
lications, 103-51.
,J. M. Dabbs,Jr., andRobertR. Faulkner,eds. (1982c),
Varietiesof QualitativeResearch.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Publications.

ADVERTISERS' INDEX

BurkeMarketingServices, Inc................................................................ . Cover4

The Ehrhart-Babic
Group...................................................................... Fl

McGrawHill Book Company ................................................ Cover 3

College Division
Merke Sharp& Dohme ................................................................. 142

Namelab...................................................................... . 157

SophisticatedData Research ....... ................................................. F6

SPSS, Inc . ....................................... F2

SurveySampling......................................................... Cover 2

This content downloaded from 128.119.168.112 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 06:45:05 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions