What is the Eisenhardt Method, really?

Abstract

This essay sharpens and refreshes the multi-case theory-building approach, sometimes termed The “Eisenhardt Method.” The Method’s singular aim is theory building, especially with multiple cases and theoretical logic. Its defining features (e.g. research questions without obvious answers, careful case selection, well-identified constructs and relationships, theoretical arguments, boundary conditions) reflect this aim. I begin with the influence of the 1980s, including grounded theorizing and case logic. Relying on exemplars, I illustrate the Method’s defining features. I also address common misconceptions (e.g. types of data, number of cases, performance emphasis). These miss the Method’s essence and imply a rigid template that does not exist. Instead, the Method’s relatively few defining features enable a wide variety of research possibilities. I conclude with what I would write today like a richer palette of research choices, more emphasis on time, and flexible philosophy of science. Yet the core message of theory building would remain.

Digital fabrication, BIM and early contractor involvement in design in construction projects: a comparative case study

“…To fill this gap, the authors undertook a comparative case study to investigate four DFAB design cases in four existing projects (Yin, 2017). This includes a descriptive analysis of each design case; and followed by a cross-case analysis to search for cross-case patterns using the polar types case design (Eisenhardt, 2021). In Section 4, the authors analyse and map the tasks, flows and values generation in the design process and the stakeholders involved in a swimlane diagram for each design case.…”

“…To answer the above, this work conducts a comparative case analysis (Yin, 2017) of four design cases in four different existing DFAB projects. Using a polar types case design (Eisenhardt, 2021), four cases are selected for the maximum variation with respect to the location, building function of use, building scale, building system design, delivery model, team size, fabrication approach and use of BIM, ECI and DFAB. However, the cases remain similar in their attempted outcome to design for a construction project that will use digital fabrication.…”

“…However, the cases remain similar in their attempted outcome to design for a construction project that will use digital fabrication. This polar types case selection is in particular useful for 'sharply illustrating stark differences across cases' (Eisenhardt, 2021).…”

“…The authors first sought to understand within each individual case how each design case adopted BIM and ECI to enable digital fabrication. The authors then compare across the four cases and draw cross-case patterns (Eisenhardt, 2021).…”

Putting qualitative international business research in context(s)

“…In particular, we have some reservations about the typology itself. We believe that it mischaracterizes certain case-oriented research methods, particularly those associated with Eisenhardt (1989) and Yin (2009); for a more recent discussion of case methods, see Eisenhardt (2020Eisenhardt ( , 2021 and Gehman, Glaser, Eisenhardt, Gioia, Langley, and Corley (2018). We are also confused by WPPP's notions of the transferability of findings based on qualitative methods because the distinctions they make do not seem to be mutually exclusive.…”