Theorizing from Cases: A Commentary

Abstract

This commentary has several aims. First, it clarifies theorizing from cases by sharpening the insights of Welch and colleagues (Journal of International Business Studies 42 (5): 740–762, 2011) regarding context while also indicating inaccuracies. More importantly, the commentary outlines recent advances in case study methods including greater use of intermediate theorizing (e.g., abduction, elaboration) between theory building and testing. A major point is that the use of case methods is becoming richer and more diverse with both more sophisticated research designs, such as natural experiments that improve causal identification, and more complex causal explanations (e.g., configurations, equifinality). Another point is the movement away from artificial distinctions among inductive methods towards understanding similarities and genuine differences. Assumptions, boundary conditions, inductive methods, and language emerge as important for meeting the challenge of context in international business. Finally, this commentary looks to the future, including the roles of machine learning and big data in expanding how theorizing from cases can occur.

Welch, C., R. Piekkari, E. Plakoyiannaki, and E. Paavilainen-Mäntymäki. 2011. Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies 42 (5): 740–762.