Crisis in the case study crisis: Marginal diminishing returns to scale in the quantitative-qualitative research debate

The quest for legitimation of research approaches preoccupies many information systems researchers. Researchers who have adopted various forms of ''qualitative'' research seem particularly concerned about legitimating their work. This desire for legitimation is stimulated in part by ongoing debates about the nature of human understanding and the way we come to know about the world. In healthy circumstances this produces a useful, self-critical discussion that heads to improvements in the development and execution of research projects. Often, however, these debates are facades. They cover an underlying political struggle for position within the broad patronage structure of the academic world. Certain approaches are seen as ''better'' - more scientific, more rigorous, more formal, more pure - while others are marginalized as weak, journalistic, and even ''atheoretical.'' These political dynamics are compounded by practical considerations (e.g., the length of time and cost required to conduct rigorous case research and the need for access to managers within companies) and the requirement for a researcher to have achieved a certain level of management and business sophistication to effectively collect and analyze qualitative data. These realities serve as powerful barriers to case research for all academics. For doctoral students and nontenured faculty, these obstacles are often insurmountable. As a result, few doctoral programs teach students to conduct rigorous qualitative research and the body of knowledge on how to conduct and evaluate such research is not well developed. It is no surprise that qualitative research is viewed as a privilege reserved for those with tenure. All of this comes at a time when the need for qualitative research is reaching crisis proportions. Faced with a fast-paced, rapidly-changing and complex environment, managers are placing increasing pressure on educational institutions to prepare students to deal with current business realities. Faculty are expected to be knowledgeable of the issues facing managers in the 1990s and to be able to offer solutions to these problems. They are expected to deal with these issues in a holistic manner, rather than segmenting knowledge along narrow functional and discipline-based lines. This type of knowledge is best developed through qualitative, field research that enables deep understanding of a complex phenomena. But, with the tenure clock ticking and a fundamental lack of the skills and understanding required to conduct this type of research, most untenured faculty are forced to fall back on traditional, quantitative research methods. This paper presents the dilemma faced by an untenured faculty member who is deeply interested in a research problem that is best explored through case research. Through the struggles of the new Assistant Professor, the paper explores the epistemological, political and methodological debates that surround qualitative, case research. The paper is constructed for academic legitimacy in the information systems field. The paper is constructed as a hypertext document and is available in full on the World Wide Web. Access pointers can be obtained from the web site www.isr.uci.edu and can be searched for by the word ''ducktest'' in any of the commonly used search engines.