EDMG611

Article

Toward Developing a Framework for Conducting Case Study Research

Shiva Ebneyamini1 and Mohammad Reza Sadeghi Moghadam2

Abstract This article reviews the use of case study research for both practical and theoretical issues especially in management field with the emphasis on management of technology and innovation. Many researchers commented on the methodological issues of the case study research from their point of view thus, presenting a comprehensive framework was missing. We try representing a general framework with methodological and analytical perspective to design, develop, and conduct case study research. To test the coverage of our framework, we have analyzed articles in three major journals related to the management of technology and innovation to approve our framework. This study represents a general structure to guide, design, and fulfill a case study research with levels and steps necessary for researchers to use in their research.

Keywords case study research, methodological and analytical perspective, management of technology and innovation

Introduction

A case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contempo-

rary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the

boundaries between the object of study and context are not clearly

evident. It 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 coverage in a triangulating fashion, and as another

result benefits from the prior development of theoretical proposi-

tions to guide data collection and analysis (Dul and Hak, 2008, p. 4;

as cited in Yin, 2003).

The definition above is an example of an all-inclusive

descriptive definition of case study research represented by Yin

(2003). According to the definition of case study research, there

is no doubt that this research strategy is one of the most pow-

erful methods used by researchers to realize both practical and

theoretical aims. Experienced qualitative researchers have

identified case study research as a stand-alone qualitative

approach. Case study research has a level of flexibility that is

not readily offered by other qualitative approaches such as

grounded theory or phenomenology. Case studies are designed

to suit the case and research question and published case stud-

ies demonstrate wide diversity in study design (Hyett, Kenny,

& Dickson-Swift, 2014). This is particularly true in today’s

environment to cope with the growing frequency and

magnitude of changes in technology and managerial methods

(Voss, Tsikriktsis, & Frohlich, 2002), researchers in technol-

ogy and innovation management need to use more field-based

research methods.

A case study is expected to capture the complexity of a

single case, and the methodology that enables this has devel-

oped within the social sciences. Such methodology is applied

not only in the social sciences, such as psychology, sociology,

anthropology, and economics, but also in practice-oriented

fields such as environmental studies, social work, education,

and business studies (Johansson, 2003). The role of case studies

in research is a paradox. As Dul and Hak (2008) stated, on the

one hand, case studies are widely used by many communities in

business research; for example, case study research has consis-

tently been one of the most powerful methods in operations

management, particularly in the building of new theory. It is

clearly an opinion that case study research in management can

1 Faculty of Management, Department of Management of Technology,

University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran 2 Faculty of Management, Department of Industrial Management, University of

Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Corresponding Author:

Shiva Ebneyamini, Faculty of Management, Department of Management of

Technology, Tehran University, Tehran 0098, Iran.

Email: [email protected]

International Journal of Qualitative Methods Volume 17: 1–11 ª The Author(s) 2018 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/1609406918817954 journals.sagepub.com/home/ijq

Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

be rigorous, as is evidenced by case-based papers in both top

European and U.S. journals. On the other hand, there is strong

resistance to case study research in some communities and its

use has been rather narrow, often restricted to just exploratory

research. Case studies deserve a prominent role in business

research and can be used for analyzing and solving business

problems, as well as for building and testing business theories

(Dul &Hak, 2008). For example in technology management

areas where case study might be used according to Mccutcheon

and Meredith (1993) might be: What are the dynamics of tech-

nology implementation that transcend the particular technology

being introduced? Or in operations management, closely

related to management of technology field, the gap between

what academics were assuming and the real conditions of oper-

ations led to growing disparities between operations manage-

ment research’s prescriptive advice and workable answers for

managers (e.g., McKay et al., 1988). Sensing this gap, a grow-

ing number of OM researchers have seen the need to gather

better information about the realities of operations systems and

to develop better, more complete theories about them. A prime

means of developing well-grounded theories is through empiri-

cal, field-based research (Mccutcheon & Meredith, 1993).

We went through three popular journals in the management

of technology, based on their ranking using Scimago (http://

www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category¼1405) which

are Research Policy, R&D Management, and Technovation,

to see whether the case study is used as a dominant strategy

in the management field or not. We used Google Scholars

advanced search, searched in all of the words “case study

research” anywhere in the article between 2005 and 2015. The

results of our search shows a wide use of case study as a

methodology in the management of technology and innovation

field (Technovation more than 68 papers, R&D Management

more than 189 papers, Research Policy more than 162 papers).

In this article, we tried to use the experiences of operations

management and the management of technology researchers.

We try to represent a general framework with methodological

and analytical perspectives in order to design, develop, and

conduct case study research and then we have analyzed the

mentioned journals article in the late 2015 to test our frame-

work. The reminder of this study is planned as follows: First,

we define case study as a method, then we review methodolo-

gical issues in conducting a case study, after that we summarize

the various viewpoints of case study researchers in Table 1, and

finally, we have analyzed 2015 articles to see whether our

framework covers the steps mentioned in our framework

(Table 1) or not.

Case Study as a Method

Despite being one of the most frequently used qualitative

research methodologies in educational research, the methodol-

ogists do not have a full consensus on the design and imple-

mentation of the case study, which hampers its full evolution

(Yazan, 2015). Emerging researchers who plan to utilize the

case study usually become confused “as to what a case study is

and how it can be differentiated from other types of qualitative

research” (Merriam, 1998).

We are going to represent a comprehensive and cohesive set

of different definitions with different emphasis and perspec-

tives of researchers in case study starting from 1970. The evo-

lution of the definition of the case study can be seen by

reviewing them.

The essence of a case study, the central tendency among all

types of the case study, is that it tries to illuminate decision or

set of decisions, why they were taken, how they were imple-

mented, and with what results (Schramm, 1971, cited in Yin,

1989, pp. 22, 23). Gummesson (1988) argues that an important

advantage of case study research is the opportunity for a holis-

tic view of the process: “The detailed observations entailed in

the case study method enable us to study many different

aspects, examine them in relation to each other, view the pro-

cess within its total environment and also use the researchers’

capacity for ‘verstehen’”. “A case study is an empirical inquiry

that investigates a contemporary phenomenon in depth and

within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries

between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident and

the investigator has little control over events” (Yin, 1989, 1994,

2009). In essence, Yin views the goal of case studies as under-

standing complex social phenomena and real-life events such

as organizational and managerial processes. The case study is

also defined as an ideal methodology when a holistic, in-depth

investigation is needed (Feagin, Orum, & Sjoberg, 1991). Stake

who is one of the main researchers in this field suggests that

case study research is an investigation and analysis of a single

or collective case, intended to capture the complexity of the

object of study. Researchers who use case study are urged to

seek out what is common and what is particular about the case.

This involves careful and in-depth consideration of the nature

of the case, historical background, physical setting, and other

institutional and political contextual factors. The case is devel-

oped in the relationship between the researcher and informants

and presented to engage the reader, inviting them to join in this

interaction and in case discovery. Case studies have been used

in varied investigations, particularly in sociological studies, but

increasingly, in instruction (Stake, 1995). Stake mentions four

defining characteristics of qualitative research which are valid

for qualitative case studies as well: they are “holistic,”

“empirical,” “interpretive,” and “emphatic.” Whether the study

is experimental or quasi-experimental, the data collection and

analysis methods are known to hide some details (Yazan,

2015). Case studies are designed to bring out the details from

the viewpoint of the participants by using multiple sources of

data (Tellis, 1997). Merriam (1998) defines case study research

as “an intensive, holistic description and analysis of a bounded

phenomenon such as a program, an institution, a person, a

process, or a social unit.” In order to further differentiate case

study method from casework, case method, and case history

(case records), she stresses its unique distinctive attributes:

particularistic (it focuses on a particular situation, event, pro-

gram, or phenomenon); descriptive (it yields a rich, thick

description of the phenomenon under study); heuristic (it

2 International Journal of Qualitative Methods

illuminates the reader’s understanding of phenomenon under

study) (Yazan, 2015). Case study method enables a researcher

to closely examine the data within a specific context. In most

cases, a case study method selects a small geographical area or a

very limited number of individuals as the subjects of study. Case

studies, in their true essence, explore and investigate contempo-

rary real-life phenomenon through detailed contextual analysis

of a limited number of events or conditions and their relation-

ships (Zainal, 2007).

Dul and Hak (2008) define the case study as a study in

which:

� One case (single case study) or a small number of cases

(comparative case study) in their real-life context are

selected and

� Scores obtained from these cases are analyzed in a qua-

litative manner.

There are different ideas about what a case study is. If we try

to find a common denominator that case study researchers

might agree on, it would be something along the following

lines: The case study should have a “case” which is the object

of study. The case should be a complex functioning unit, be

investigated in its natural context with a multitude of methods,

and be contemporary (Johansson, 2003). Nevertheless, the case

study researchers mentioned above emphasize different fea-

tures. Stake points out that crucial to case study research are

not the methods of investigation, but that the object of study is a

case: “As a form of research, the case study is defined by the

interest in individual cases, not by the methods of inquiry

used.” Other researchers, such as Yin (1994), place more

emphasis on the method and the techniques that constitute a

case study (Johansson, 2003). Now that we have reviewed most

of the definition of case study research in literature we can

discuss the subissues regarding the nature of such research.

The Purpose of a Case Study Research

Researchers have different ideas, but many agree on what is the

purpose of doing a research using a case study research strat-

egy. We try to provide an overview of those here. First, we

have to decide whether a case study can help us to achieve our

research goal or not. There are three factors that determine the

best research methodology: The types of questions to be

answered, the extent of control over behavioral events, and the

degree of focus on contemporary as opposed to historical

events. Figure 1, based on Yin (1994), summarizes the different

kinds of research questions and methods that are most appro-

priate based on the research questions.

Based on Figure 1, case study research is appropriate to be

used for researches with “how” and “why” questions. Yin

(1994) also presented at least four applications for a case study

(1) to explain complex causal links in real-life interventions,

(2) to describe the real-life context in which the intervention

has occurred, (3) to describe the intervention itself, and (4) to

explore those situations in which the intervention being

evaluated has no clear set of outcomes. Meredith (1998) noted

that there are three outstanding strengths of case study

research: (1) The phenomenon can be studied in its natural

setting and meaningful, relevant theory generated from the

understanding gained through observing actual practice; (2) the

case method allows the questions of why, what, and how, to be

answered with a relatively full understanding of the nature and

complexity of the complete phenomenon; and (3) the case

method lends itself to early, exploratory investigations where

variables are still unknown and the phenomenon not at all

understood.

Voss and his colleagues (2002) have mentioned, as cited in

Handfield and Melnyk (1998), that the purpose of the case

study is (1) exploration to uncover areas for research and theory

development; (2) theory building to identify/describe key vari-

ables, identifying linkages between variables and identifying

“why” these relationships exist; (3) theory testing to test the

theories developed in the previous stages or predict future out-

comes; and (4) theory extension/refinement to better structure

the theories in the light of the observed results. Dul and Hak

(2008) noted that most of the researchers consider case study

research as a useful research strategy (A) when the topic is

broad and highly complex, (B) when there is not a lot of theory

available, and (C) when “context” is very important. So they

consider using case study for theory building, theory testing,

hypothesis building, hypothesis testing, and description. We

have considered these purposes in our framework in Frame-

work section (Table 1). In our analysis of 15 latest articles

published in three important journals of management of tech-

nology, 13 of the 15 of them were theory extension/refinement,

one theory building, and one of them hypothesis testing.

Types of Case Study Research

In terms of defining types of case study research, researchers

title them differently. Yin (1989) has identified some specific

types of case study research: exploratory, explanatory, and

descriptive. Stake (1995) identified three others: intrinsic,

instrumental, and collective. Or according to Zainal (2007),

other categories include interpretive and evaluative case stud-

ies. Dul and Hak (2008) categorize the case study research as

the single case study and comparative case study. All in all, we

believe that in using the case study research as a methodology

we have two types: single case study or multiple case study

which follows a replication logic. In our analysis of 15 latest

articles published in three important journals of management of

technology, 11 of the 15 of them were multiple case studies,

four longitudinal case study1 and one single case study.

When to Use Case Study Research

Of course, choosing a research strategy or methodology

depends on three things (Yin, 2014): research question, the

extent of control the researcher has over actual behavioral

events, and the degree of focus on contemporary as opposed

to historical events. Case study research is generally thought of

Ebneyamini and Sadeghi Moghadam 3

as being useful to answer “how and why?” questions, and

where in-depth research is needed using a holistic lens. It does

not require control over actual behavioral events. Meredith

(1998) suggests three strong points for case study research:

The phenomenon can be studied in its natural setting and

meaningful; relevant theory generated from the understanding

gained through observing actual practice; the case method

allows the questions of why, what, and how to be answered

with a relatively full understanding of the nature and complex-

ity of the compete for phenomenon; and lastly the case method

lends itself to early, exploratory investigations where the vari-

ables are still unknown and phenomenon not at all understood.

Handfield and Melnyk (1998) (later by modification of

Vosset et al.) have identified four purposes for case study

research: exploration, theory building, theory testing, and the-

ory extension/refinement. According to Dul and Hak (2008),

most of the authors consider case study research as a useful

research strategy when the topic is broad and highly complex,

when there is not a lot of theory available, and when “context”

is very important. They suggest that the case study can be

appropriate for building theory, testing theory, building

hypothesis, testing hypothesis, and descriptive study. In our

analysis of 15 latest articles published in three important jour-

nals of management of technology, 14 of the 15 of them were

theory-oriented and one practice-oriented study.

Validity and Reliability Issues

The definition of generalization has appeared in the literature

with regularity. It is a frequent criticism of case study research

that the results are not widely applicable in real life (Tellis,

1997). Case study research is presented by some as a strictly

exploratory research in which nothing can be proven, most

often by referring to the alleged impossibility to “generalize”

(Dul & Hak, 2008). Researchers have different interpretations

on this issue.

Kirk and Miller’s (1986) definition takes into account the

particular relationship between the researchers’ definition, the

generation of data, and its interpretation:

for reliability to be calculated, it is incumbent on the scien-

tific investigator to document his or her procedure. This must

be accomplished at such a level of abstraction that the loci of

decisions internal to the project are made apparent. The curious

public deserves to know the qualitative researcher prepares him

or herself for the endeavor, and how the data is collected and

analyzed.

The validity, meaningfulness, and insights generated from

qualitative inquiry have more to do with information richness

of the cases selected and the observational/analytical capabil-

ities of the researcher than with sample size (Patton, 1999). To

generalize to a theory is to provide some audience that supports

a theory but not necessarily proves it definitively (Firestone,

1993). Others such as Yin (1984, 1994, 2003) have claimed that

the problem of “generalization” can be solved and that, there-

fore, theories can also be tested in (preferably) “multiple case

studies.”

Literal replication, examining cases where the theory would

predict similar results (e.g., similar success with an equivalent

type of project) and theoretical replication, examining cases

where the theory points to different but predictable results

(e.g., project failure; Yin, 1989). In the context of qualitative

research, reliability is concerned with two questions: could the

same study carried out by two researchers produce the same

findings and could a study be repeated using the same

researcher and respondents to yield the same finding (Kirk &

Miller, 1986). Validity and reliability have a number of dimen-

sions which is addressed in Figure 2.

The problem of validity in qualitative studies is related to

the fact that most qualitative researchers work alone in the

field. They focus on the finding rather than describe how the

results were reached and they are limited in processing infor-

mation (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Yin continually suggests

that emerging researchers should maximize four conditions

related to design quality: construct validity, internal validity,

external validity, and reliability and keep these four

“yardsticks” in their mind in every phase of their inquiry pro-

cess so as to ensure the quality in their investigation (Yazan,

2015). Merriam (1998) represents six strategies to enhance

internal validity (triangulation, member checks, long-term

observation, peer examination, participatory research, and dis-

closure of researcher bias), three techniques to ensure internal

validity (explanation of investigator’s position with regard to

the study, triangulation, and use of an audit trail) and three

techniques to enhance external validity (use of thick descrip-

tion, typicality or modal categories, and multisite designs).

The alleged lack of “generalizability” of the case study has

its origin in confusion about selection of cases and populations

(for testing) from a domain, on the one hand, and sampling

from a population, on the other hand, and in confusion about

what it is generalized (the study, its outcome, or a proposition)

(Dul & Hak, 2008).

Review of Methodological Issues

Case studies often lack academic rigor and are, as such,

regarded as inferior to more rigorous methods where there are

more specific guidelines for collecting and analyzing data.

These criticism stress that there is a need to be very explicit

about the choices one makes and the need to justify them

(Meyer, 2001). Yin (2003) has observed that a case study does

not have a “codified design” like the other research strategies

social scientists employ, which is the reason why some

Strategy Form of research question

Experiment How, why Survey Who, what, where, how many, how much Archival analysis Who, what, where, how many, how much History How, why Case study How, why

Figure 1. Choosing a research strategy.

4 International Journal of Qualitative Methods

investigators do not grant it the merits as a notable research

method. In other words, he concludes that “Unlike other

research strategies, a comprehensive ‘catalog’ of research

designs for case studies has yet to be developed.” Researchers

offer different levels to fulfill the research using a case study

strategy. For example, Yin (1994) proposes four levels: design

the case study, conduct the case study, analyze the case study

evidence, and develop the conclusions, recommendations, and

implications.

Contrary to Yin who suggests a really tight and structured

design for case study method, Stake (1995) argues for a flexible

design which allows researchers to make major changes even

after they proceed from design to research. as stated by Yazan

(2015) Stake does not suggest a specific design for case study

and his obvious flexibility in terms of case study design stems

from his adoption of the notion of “progressive focusing,”

which Parlett and Hamilton (1972) first put forward. Later

on, Tellis (1997) developed four stage of the methodology

based on a modification of the methodology devised by Yin

(1984): design the case study protocol (determine the required

skills and develop and review the protocol), conduct the case

study (prepare for data collection, distribute questionnaire, and

conduct interviews), analyze case study evidence (analytic

strategy), and finally develop conclusions, recommendations,

and implications based on the evidence.

Merriam (1998) presents step-by-step the process of design-

ing qualitative research in a rather detailed fashion. Her dis-

cussion includes conducting a literature review, constructing a

theoretical framework, identifying a research problem, crafting

and sharpening research questions, and selecting the sample

(purposive sampling). Voss and his colleagues (2002) believe

that conducting a case study entails these steps: define the

research framework, constructs, and questions; choosing cases;

developing research instruments and protocols; and conducting

the field research, analysis. Dul and Hak (2008) suggest a

stepwise approach: preparation phase which entails defining

research topic and defining the research general (theory

oriented or practice oriented) and specific objective (theory

building or testing, hypothesis building or testing, or descrip-

tive). Research phase which entails defining the type of case

study based on the propositions and hypothesis (single case

study or comparative case study) and selecting cases, data col-

lection, and data analysis. Lastly implications and report phase.

Based on this literature review authors believe that besides

defining the research topic and question, the main stages in

conducting a case study research contains the levels below.

Selecting Cases

The logic of sampling cases is fundamentally different from

statistical sampling. The logic in case studies involves theoreti-

cal sampling in which the goal is to choose cases that are likely

to replicate or extend the emergence theory or to fill theoretical

categories and provide examples for polar types (Eisenhardt,

1989). Whichever case selection strategy is used as the under-

lying principle common to all of these strategies is selecting

information-rich cases. That is, cases worthy of in-depth study,

this information richness is fundamental to deciding on the num-

ber of cases (Patton, 1999). Qualitative sampling seeks informa-

tion richness (Crabtree and Miller, 1999). The selection of cases

is purposeful, not random (Perry, 1998). Other researchers sup-

port this method of case selection and highlight the inappropri-

ateness of random sampling, for example, Eisenhardt (1989)

states that the random selection of case is neither necessary nor

even preferable. Representativeness is not the criteria for case

selection, rather the guarded choice of each case should be made

such that it either predicts similar results for predictable reasons

(i.e., literal replication) or produces contrary results for predict-

able reasons (i.e., theoretical replication) (Perry, 1998).

Gathering Data

There are recommendations proposed by researchers about data

collection that if it’s done well, it will help the generalization

and viability of the case study research:

Yin (1989, 1994) suggests three principles of data collection

for case studies: use multiple sources of data, create a case

study database, and maintain a chain of evidence. Stake

(1995) states that essential parts of a data-gathering plan are

definition of the case, list of research questions, identification

of helpers, data sources, allocation of time, expenses, and

intended reporting. Dul and Hak (2008) suggest a stepwise

procedure for the development of valid and reliable procedures

for measurement2 (data collection): formulate a precise defini-

tion of the concept; determine the object of measurement; iden-

tify the location of the object of measurement; specify how

evidence of the value of the variable will be extracted from the

object of measurement; specify how sources of evidence will

be identified, selected, and accessed; specify how evidence will

be recorded; specify how data will be categorized; and lastly

write a measurement protocol.

As for data sources, Yin (1994) suggests documentation,

archival records, interview, direct observation, participant

Test Case study tactic

Phase of research in which tactic occurs

Construct validity

-Use multiple sources of evidence

-Establish the chain of evidence -Have the key informants

review draft study report

Data collection Data collection Composition

Internal validity

-Do pattern matching or explanation building or time series analysis

Data analysis

External validity

-Use replication logic in multiple case studies

Research design

Reliability -Use study protocol -Develop case study database

Data collection Data collection

Figure 2. Reliability and validity in case research. Source: Yin (1994).

Ebneyamini and Sadeghi Moghadam 5

observation, and physical artifacts. As for data collection

instruments, Stake (1995) suggests the use of observation,

interview, and document review in qualitative case study

research. Merriam (1998) suggests conducting effective inter-

views, being a careful observer, mining data from documents as

techniques and procedures that researchers need in order to

become effective users of the collection tools. Dul and Hak

(2008) also propose a qualitative interview, using archives,

questionnaire, and observation. Some recommendations men-

tioned by researchers while conducting an interview is that the

starting question after the preliminaries should invite the inter-

viewee to tell the story of their experience of whatever the

research is about (Perry, 1998). The starting point is a question

that is almost content free. This is your warranty that the

answers came from the respondent and did not arise simply

because your questions created a self-fulfilling prophecy (Dick,

1990). Be aware that the data collection in case study research

can be both quantitative and qualitative. The results of our

analysis appear in Table 1.

Data Analysis

Data analysis consists of examining, categorizing, tabulating,

or otherwise recombining the evidence to address the initial

propositions of a study. The analysis of the case study is one

of the least developed aspects of the case study methodology.

The researcher needs to rely on experience and the literature to

present the evidence in various ways, using various interpreta-

tions (Tellis, 1997).

Case study researchers have different interpretations of the

stage, for example, Miles and Huberman (1994) describe the

phases of data analysis as data reduction, data display, and

conclusion drawing and verification. Yin (1989, 1994) identi-

fies three ways for this stage: pattern matching, explanation

building, and time series. He also mentions the use of logic

models and cross-case synthesis. None of these come with any

formulas, although statistical calculations can be part of them.

Eisenhardt (1989) suggests two stage for data analysis: the

analysis within case data and searching for cross-case patterns.

Stake (1995) identifies three ways: correspondence and pat-

terns, categorical aggregation, or direct interpretation and nat-

uralistic generalization. Merriam (1998) mentions six analytic

strategies such as ethnographic analysis, narrative analysis,

phenomenological analysis, constant comparative method,

content analysis, and analytic induction. Dul and Hak (2008)

also mention pattern matching and visual inspection as ways of

analyzing data. The results of our analysis appear in Table 1.

Report

The guide for the case study report is often omitted from case

study plans because investigators view the reporting phase as

being far in the future. Yin (1994) proposed that the report is

planned at the start. Case studies do not have a widely accepted

reporting format - hence the experience of the investigator is a

key factor (Tellis, 1997). Dul and Hak (2008) suggest that the

report part is in relation with the object of the study if the

research is practice-oriented the report has to mention the con-

tributions and implications of study towards practitioners and if

is theory-oriented the report is toward the experts and the impli-

cations for the theory has to be reported. All in all, there is no

specific way to report case study research which is accepted by

all researchers but the guidelines offered can help the of case

study research researchers to report.

Framework

Representing a framework which entails all the steps we men-

tioned above seemed useful. By reviewing almost all the liter-

ature on case study methodology, in this section, we try to

researcher Yin(1984,1995) Stake (1995) Tellis (1997)

Merriam (1998) Voss et.al(2002)

Dul and Hak(2008)

Proposed methodology for conducting case study research

- Design the case study

- Conduct the case study

- Analyze the case study evidence

- Develop the conclusions, recommendations, and implications

No specific step by step methodology

Almost the same as Yin(1995)

-Conducting a literature review

-Constructing a theoretical framework

-Identifying a research problem

-Crafting and sharpening research questions

-Selecting the sample (Purposive sampling)

-Define the research framework, constructs, and questions,

-Choosing cases -Developing research

instruments and protocols

-Conducting the field research

-Analysis

-Preparation phase -Research phase

which - Implications and report phase.

Figure 3. Methodologies proposed by researchers for conducting case study research.

6 International Journal of Qualitative Methods

T a b

le 1 .

Fr am

ew o rk

.

P u rp

o se

o f

C as

e St

u d y

R es

ea rc

h R

ea so

n s

to U

se C

as e

St u d y

R es

ea rc

h T

yp es

o f C

as e

St u d y

R es

ea rc

h M

et h o d s

o f G

at h er

in g

D at

a D

at a

A n al

ys is

in o f C

as e

St u d y

R es

ea rc

h

-P ra

ct ic

e o ri

en te

d -

T h eo

ry o ri

en te

d (D

u l &

H ak

, 2 0 0 8 )

- E x p lo

ra ti o n

- T

h eo

ry b u ild

in g

- T

h eo

ry te

st in

g -

T h eo

ry ex

te n si

o n /r

ef in

em en

t -

H yp

o th

es is

te st

in g

- H

yp o th

es is

b u ild

in g

- D

es cr

ip ti o n

(D u l &

H ak

, 2 0 0 8 ;

St ak

e, 1 9 9 5 ;V

o ss

et al

., 2 0 0 2 ;Y

in ,

1 9 9 4 )

- E x p lo

ra to

ry -

E x p la

n at

o ry

- D

es cr

ip ti ve

- In

tr in

si c

ca se

st u d y

- In

st ru

m en

ta l ca

se st

u d y

- C

o lle

ct iv

e ca

se st

u d y

- Si

n gl

e ca

se st

u d y

- M

u lt ip

le ca

se st

u d y

- In

te rp

re ti ve

ca se

st u d y

- E va

lu at

iv e

ca se

st u d y

(D u l &

H ak

, 2 0 0 8 ; St

ak e,

1 9 9 5 ; Y

in , 1 9 9 3 ; Z

ai n al

, 2 0 0 7 )

- O

b se

rv at

io n

- In

te rv

ie w

- D

o cu

m en

t re

vi ew

- A

rc h iv

al re

co rd

s -

P ar

ti ci

p an

t o b se

rv at

io n

an d

p h ys

ic al

ar ti fa

ct s

- U

se m

u lt ip

le so

u rc

es o f d at

a -

C re

at e

a ca

se st

u d y

d at

ab as

e -

M ai

n ta

in a

ch ai

n o f ev

id en

ce (D

u l

& H

ak , 2 0 0 8 ; St

ak e,

1 9 9 5 ; Y

in ,

1 9 9 3 )

- D

at a

re d u ct

io n

- D

at a

d is

p la

y -

C o n cl

u si

o n

d ra

w in

g an

d ve

ri fic

at io

n -

P at

te rn

m at

ch in

g -

P ro

gr am

lo gi

c m

et h o d

- E x p la

n at

io n

b u ild

in g

- T

im e

se ri

es an

al ys

is -

C ro

ss -c

as e

sy n th

es is

- C

at eg

o ri

ca l ag

gr eg

at io

n -

D ir

ec t

in te

rp re

ta ti o n

- E th

n o gr

ap h ic

an al

ys is

- N

ar ra

ti ve

an al

ys is

- P h en

o m

en o lo

gi ca

l an

al ys

is -

C o n st

an t

co m

p ar

at iv

e an

al ys

is -

C o n te

n t

an al

ys is

- A

n al

yt ic

in d u ct

io n

- C

ro ss

-c as

e an

al ys

is -

W it h in

-c as

e an

al ys

is -

V is

u al

in sp

ec ti o n

(E is

en h ar

d t,

1 9 8 9 ;

H u b er

m an

& M

ile s,

1 9 9 4 ; St

ak e,

1 9 9 5 ;

Y az

an , 2 0 1 5 )

7

develop a pervasive framework, in order to help researchers

using the case study methodology in their research. We suggest

that Table 1 represents the steps and their related issues that a

researcher needs to know and consider while using case study

methodology. These steps and its requirements are shown in

Table 1.We suggest that the starting point of the research is

defining the purpose of our study which can be practical or

theoretical. Then, in the next step, we have to set our specific

purpose. For example, if we are doing a practical research then

for which specific reason: testing a hypothesis, building a

hypothesis, or other reasons which are mentioned in the table.

After that, we can define which type of case study is suitable

depending on the purpose which we defined. In the next step, we

need to choose the method of gathering data which includes

several methods (see Table 1). Finally, we can decide which

method can help us to analyze the data we gathered. Several

methods are mentioned by researchers which has shown in Table

1. We believe that researchers can use this framework as a

checklist in their research with case study methodology.

Analyzing Management of Technology and Innovation Articles Using Case Study Methodology

In order to see whether our framework is pervasive enough,

we decided to review some of the articles published in jour-

nals related to the management of technology and innovation.

We followed all the steps which are represented in Table 1

and represented the results in tables that follow the same

order. Case studies are used widely in the management field,

as the literature seems to reflect that. As mentioned in the Intro-

duction section the journals, we selected are R&D MANAGE-

MENT (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/

(ISSN)1467-9310), TECHNOVATION (https://www.journals.el-

sevier.com/technovation/), and RESEARCH POLICY (https://

www.journals.elsevier.com/research-policy/). We searched

through the articles published between 2005 and 2015. Over

344 paper have been published using case study research as a

methodology which shows the importance of this methodology

in the management of technology and innovation issues. The

results of analyzing 15 papers (the five latest articles published

in each journal) which were accepted/published in 2015 are

shown in following tables:

As mentioned before, the case study research is widely used as

a research methodology by researchers in the management field.

By carefully analyzing the articles, we have found that the frame-

work presented in Table 2 (framework) is pervasive and all

researchers passed the steps which we considered necessary to

use the case study as the research methodology. To explain what

was mainly in common in our analysis, it seemed like most of the

researchers (93%) used the case study research for the purpose of

conducting a theory-oriented research with the theory extension/

refinement (86%) goal. In the gathering data phase, using quali-

tative interviews and archival data methods were well reported.

Pattern matching (46%), cross-case analysis (46%), and data

reduction (33%) are dominant in the analyzing data phase.

Table 2. R&D Management.

Articles Purpose of Case Study Research

Reasons to Use Case Study Research

Types of Case Study Research Methods of Gathering Data Data Analysis

Sustainability and scalability of university spinouts: a business model perspective (Bigdeli et al., 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

- Semistructured interview - Archival data - Observation - Meetings

- Data reduction (open coding)

- Pattern matching

One year ahead! Investigating the time lag between patent publication and market launch: insights from a longitudinal study in the automotive industry (Gerken et al., 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Longitudinal case study

Archival data Pattern matching

Managing dual business models in emerging markets: an ambidexterity perspective (Winterhalten et al., 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

- Semistructured interview - Archival data

- Cross-case analysis - Visualization

techniques - Pattern matching

Evolving schemes of interpretation: investigating the dual role of architectures in new product development (Magnusson & Lakemond, 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Longitudinal case study

- Semistructured interview - Archival data

- Narrative analysis - Pattern matching

Toward an attention-based view of technology decisions (Palmie et al., 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

- Semistructured interview - Archival data

- Cross-case analysis

8 International Journal of Qualitative Methods

Table 3. Technovation.

Articles

Purpose of Case Study Research

Reasons to Use Case Study Research

Types of Case Study Research

Methods of Gathering Data Data Analysis

Boundaries of R&D collaboration (Back & Kohtamaki, 2015)

Theory oriented

Theory extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

- Structured interview

- Archival data - Meetings

- Within-case analysis

- Cross-case analysis

Identifying new dimensions of business incubation: a multilevel analysis of Karolinska institute’s incubation system (Baraldi & Havenvid, 2015)

Theory oriented

Theory extension/ refinement

Longitudinal case study

- Semistructured interview

- Archival data - Informal

meetings

- Compare the narratives of informants

- Pattern matching

Understanding a new generation incubation model: the accelerator (Pauwels et al., 2015)

Theory oriented

Theory extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

-Semi-structured interview

- Archival data

- Writing individual case histories by using archival data

- Using repertory grid method

- Cross-case analysis Situated regional university incubation: a multilevel

stakeholder (Mc Adam et al., 2015) Theory

oriented Theory building Comparative

case study -In-depth

interview - Archival data

- Cross-case analysis - Data reduction

(open coding) Innovation in start-ups: ideas filling the void of

resources and capabilities (Paradkar et al., 2015) Theory

oriented Theory

extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

Interview (open- ended questions)

- Pattern matching - Cross-case analysis

Table 4. Research Policy.

Articles Purpose of Case Study Research

Reasons to Use Case Study Research

Types of Case Study Research

Methods of Gathering Data Data Analysis

Impact of stronger patent regimes on technology transfer: the case study of the Thai automotive industry (Intarakumerd & Charoenporn, 2015)

Practice oriented Hypothesis testing Comparative case study (to answer research questions numbers 2 and 3)

- Interview - Archival data

- Visual inspection

Commercializing user innovations by vertical diversification: the user- manufacturer innovator (Block et al., 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

- Semistructured interview and formal interviews

- Archival data

- Data reduction (open coding)

- Cross-case analysis

- Asking independent researchers to recode the text passages

Where and how to search? Search paths in open innovation (Lopez-Vega et al., 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

-Semi-structured interview

- Archival data - Observation

- Data reduction(open coding) and axial coding

Situated novelty: introducing a process perspective on the study of innovation (Janssen & putters, 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Comparative case study

- Semistructured interview

- Archival data - Observation

Data reduction (open coding)

Understanding the emergence of new science and technology policies: policy entrepreneurial ship, agenda setting, and the development of European framework program (Edler & James, 2015)

Theory oriented Theory extension/ refinement

Single case study -Interview - Archival data

Pattern matching

Ebneyamini and Sadeghi Moghadam 9

Implications and Limitations

In order to represent a cohesive framework and literature

review with a methodological perspective, we have gone

through a significant volume of articles and books available

in case study research. Not every researcher in this field

directly pointed out to the methodology of using the case study

research, and their approaches are not the same, so by studying

their papers and books over and over, we could extract what

was mainly in common between researchers. In addition, there

are a lot of articles using the qualitative method and especially

case study, so we narrowed them to the 2005–2015 period.

As mentioned before, the case study is one of the most

powerful methods used by researchers to realize both practical

and theoretical aims. This study can be practical for researchers

interested in case study research as we tried to represent a broad

view of the nature of case study, different views of researchers

and methodological issues related to this research strategy.

Plus, the framework can help researchers to recognize which

steps to follow, and what are the requirements or tools of each

step to fulfill their research.

Conclusion

In this article, we reviewed and categorized the main steps and

related issues in order to represent a pervasive framework for

researchers using this methodology. We realized that the case

study methodology is one of the dominant methodologies in the

management of technology and innovation. This provided an

opportunity for us to review some of the articles in this field to

see whether our framework can cover the steps that other

researchers followed in their papers. Fortunately, every single

step and related contents fell inside our framework. This article

can help researchers in using our framework to conduct their

research much easier. For further studies, researchers in other

fields can use our framework to see whether the articles pub-

lished in their field cover the framework or not.

Acknowledgment

We thank all the experts in research methodology for assisting us in

order to confirm our results in analytical section (results presented in

Table 2, 3, and 4).

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to

the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author-

ship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

1. Longitudinal case study is a single case study that the same subjects

or cases are observed multiple times, and often over the course of

many years.

2. They use the term “measurement” for the data collection step.

References

Back, I., & Kohtamaki, M. (2015). Boundaries of R&D collaboration.

Technovation, 45, 15–28.

Baraldi, E., & Havenvid, M. I. (2015). Identifying new dimensions of

business incubation: A multi-level analysis of Karolinska insti-

tute’s incubation system. Technovation, 50, 53–68.

Bigdeli, A., Li, F., & Shi, X. (2016). Sustainability and scalability of

university spinouts: A business model perspective. R&D Manage-

ment, 46, 504–518.

Block, J. H., Henkel, J., Schweisfurth, T. G., & Stiegler, A. (2015).

Commercializing user innovations by vertical diversification: The

user-manufacturer innovator. Research Policy, 45, 224–259.

Crabtree, B., & Miller, W. (1999). Doing qualitative research (2nd ed.,

pp. 18–20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dick, R. (1990). Convergent interviewing. Brisbane, Australia:

Interchange.

Dul, J., & Hak, T. (2008). Case study methodology in business

research. Abingdon, England: Routledge.

Edler, J., & James, A. D. (2015). Undrestanding the emergence of new

science and technology policies: Policy entrepreneurship, agenda

setting and the development of the European framework programe.

Research Policy, 44, 1252–1265.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research.

Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.

Feagin, J. R., Orum, A. M., & Sjoberg, G. (1991). A case for the case

study. Chapel Hill, NC: UNC Press Books.

Firestone, W. A. (1993). Alternative arguments for generalizing from data

as applied to qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 22, 16–23.

Gerken, J. M., Moehrle, M. G., & Walter, L. (2015). One year ahead!

investigating the time lag between patent publication and market

lunch: Insights from longitudinal study in automative industry.

R&D management, 45, 287–303.

Gummesson, E. (1988). Qualitative methods in management research:

Case study research, participant observation. Action research/

action science, and other “qualitative methods” used in academic

research and management consultancy, United Kingdom,

Chartwell-Bratt Ltd.

Handfield, R. B., & Melnyk, S. A. (1998). The scientific theory-build-

ing process: A primer using the case of TQM. Journal of opera-

tions Management, 16, 321–339.

Huberman, M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis

methods. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualita-

tive research. London, England: Sage.

Hyett, N., Kenny, A., & Dickson-Swift, V. (2014). Methodology or

method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports. Inter-

national Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-

Being, 9.

Intarakumnerd, P., & Charoenporn, P. (2015). Impact of stronger pat-

ent regimes on technology transfer: The case study of Thai auto-

mative industry. Research Policy, 44, 1314–1326.

Janssen, M., Stoopendaal, A., & Putter, K. (2015). Situated novety:

Introducing a process perspective onn the study of innovation.

Research Policy, 44, 1974–1984.

Johansson, R. (2003). Case study methodology. Methodologies in

Housing Research, Stockholm.

10 International Journal of Qualitative Methods

Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative

research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lopez-Vega, H., Tell, F., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2015). Where and

how to search? search paths in open innovation. Research Policy,

45, 125–136.

Magnusson, T., & Lakemond, N. (2015). Evoving schemes of inter-

pretation: Investigating the dual role of architectures in new prod-

uct development. R&D Management, 47, 36–46.

McAdam, M., Miller, K., & McAdam, R. (2015). Situated rigional

university incubation: A multi-level stakeholder perspective. Tech-

novation, 50, 69–76.

McCutcheon, D. M., & Meredith, J. R. (1993). Conducting case study

research in operations management. Journal of Operations Man-

agement, 11, 239–256.

Meredith, J. (1998). Building operations management theory through

case and field research. Journal of Operations Management, 16,

441–454.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Appli-

cations in Education. Revised and Expanded from “Case Study

Research in Education”: ERIC.

Meyer, C. B. (2001). A case in case study methodology. Field Meth-

ods, 13, 329–352.

Palmie, M., Lingens, B., & Gassmann, O. (2015). Towards an atten-

tion-based views of technology decisions. R&D Management, 46,

781–796.

Paradkar, A., Knight, J., & Hansen, P. (2015). Innovation in start-ups:

Ideas filling the void or ideas devoid of resources and capabilities?

Technovation, 41, 1–10.

Parlett, M. R., & Hamilton, D. (1972). Evaluation as illumination: A

new approach to the study of innovatory programs. Edinburgh,

Scotland: University of Edinburgh, Centre for Research in the

Educational Sciences.

Patton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of quali-

tative analysis. Health Services Research, 34, 1189.

Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van Hove, J. (2015). Undres-

tanding a new generation incubation model: The accelator. Tech-

novation, 50, 13–24.

Perry, C. (1998). Processes of a case study methodology for postgrad-

uate research in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 32,

785–802.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study: Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tellis, W. M. (1997). Application of a case study methodology. The

Qualitative Report, 3, 1–19.

Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N., & Frohlich, M. (2002). Case research in

operations management. International journal of operations &

production management, 22, 195–219.

Winterhalter, S., Zeschy, M. B., & Gassmann, O. (2015). Managing

dual business models in emerging markets: An ambidexterity per-

spective. R&D Management, 46, 464–476.

Yazan, B. (2015). Three approaches to case study methods in education:

Yin, Merriam, and Stake. The Qualitative Report, 20, 134–152.

Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Yin, R. (1993). Applications of case study research. Newbury Park,

California: Sage.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly

Hills, CA: Sage.

Yin, R. (1995). The art of case study research. London: Sage.

Yin, R. K., & Campbell, D. T. (1989). Case study research: Design

and methods. University of California: Sage.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. London:

Sage.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.).

Paper presented at the United States: Library of Congress

Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.

Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Los

Angeles, CA: Sage.

Zainal, Z. (2007). Case study as a research method. Journal Kemanu-

siaan, 9, 1–6.

Ebneyamini and Sadeghi Moghadam 11

<< /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Gray Gamma 2.2) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Warning /CompatibilityLevel 1.4 /CompressObjects /Off /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages false /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.1000 /ColorConversionStrategy /LeaveColorUnchanged /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams true /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize true /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness false /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Remove /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages false /ColorImageMinResolution 266 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Average /ColorImageResolution 175 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50286 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.40 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.76 /HSamples [2 1 1 2] /VSamples [2 1 1 2] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages false /GrayImageMinResolution 266 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Average /GrayImageResolution 175 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50286 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.40 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.76 /HSamples [2 1 1 2] /VSamples [2 1 1 2] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages false /MonoImageMinResolution 900 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Average /MonoImageResolution 175 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50286 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox false /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier (CGATS TR 001) /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org) /PDFXTrapped /Unknown /CreateJDFFile false /Description << /ENU <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> >> /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ << /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >> << /AllowImageBreaks true /AllowTableBreaks true /ExpandPage false /HonorBaseURL true /HonorRolloverEffect false /IgnoreHTMLPageBreaks false /IncludeHeaderFooter false /MarginOffset [ 0 0 0 0 ] /MetadataAuthor () /MetadataKeywords () /MetadataSubject () /MetadataTitle () /MetricPageSize [ 0 0 ] /MetricUnit /inch /MobileCompatible 0 /Namespace [ (Adobe) (GoLive) (8.0) ] /OpenZoomToHTMLFontSize false /PageOrientation /Portrait /RemoveBackground false /ShrinkContent true /TreatColorsAs /MainMonitorColors /UseEmbeddedProfiles false /UseHTMLTitleAsMetadata true >> << /AddBleedMarks false /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks false /AddPageInfo false /AddRegMarks false /BleedOffset [ 9 9 9 9 ] /ConvertColors /ConvertToRGB /DestinationProfileName (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /DestinationProfileSelector /UseName /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /ClipComplexRegions true /ConvertStrokesToOutlines false /ConvertTextToOutlines false /GradientResolution 300 /LineArtTextResolution 1200 /PresetName ([High Resolution]) /PresetSelector /HighResolution /RasterVectorBalance 1 >> /FormElements true /GenerateStructure false /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles true /MarksOffset 9 /MarksWeight 0.125000 /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /PageMarksFile /RomanDefault /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UseDocumentBleed false >> ] /SyntheticBoldness 1.000000 >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [288 288] /PageSize [612.000 792.000] >> setpagedevice