Inductivism

Conceptual Overview and Discussion

Theory-building can be accomplished through either inductive or deductive reasoning. Case study research lends itself particularly well to an inductive approach, and inductivism is the approach taken in many case-based research endeavor. The rich empirical data that lie at the heart of case study enhance the development of a theory that is accurate, interesting, and testable. The rich data can also act as an inspiration for new ideas. It is these data, and researchers' close adherence to them, that provides the discipline to allow theory built from cases to be considered objective. Through its process of developing theory, inductivism is a natural complement to deductivism, which completes the theory-building cycle by using data to test the new theory.

When approaching research from an inductive perspective, it is expected that theory will emerge through the collection and analysis of data. By letting theory emerge from the data, research can be conducted in areas for which limited theoretical knowledge exists. Research is conducted with no theory under consideration or hypotheses to test. In the particular case of case study research, the [Page 458]theory emerges through patterns of relationships among constructs that are found during the data analysis phase of the study. These relationships can be found both within and across cases. The relationships are then used in the development of constructs, measures, and testable theoretical propositions, all of which add to the ability of inductive case study research to prove consistency within mainstream research, where high importance is placed on testable theory. Inductive case studies can be used to answer “how” and “why” questions in unexplored research areas. The approach is not adequate, however, for answering questions that ask “how often” and “how many,” or for answering questions concerning the relative empirical importance of constructs.

Although it is the rich data collected through a case study that makes it a valuable tool for inductive theory-building, these same data can also pose challenges. As the researcher becomes immersed in the details of a case, it can be difficult to determine which relationships and constructs are crucial. A well-developed and useful theory needs to rise above the particular case being studied, and therefore choices and simplifications must be made. A common weakness of inductive case studies is a failure to be appropriately selective and present only those details that relate directly to the arguments being made.

Although inductive research does not start with a theory or hypotheses, a research question is still needed to guide the study and provide a lens through which the data will be analyzed. An inductive case study also needs to answer the question “why.” Why is it an inductive case study? Readers need to be convinced both that the research question is crucial and that existing research does not address the research question adequately, or at all. Researchers must avoid ex post obviousness or, in other words, leaving readers unsurprised that at least one example of A leading to B was found in the world. Ex post obviousness can leave the value of the research conducted in doubt.

...