importance of case study in business policy

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading Change and Organizational Renewal
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

5 Benefits of Learning Through the Case Study Method

• 28 Nov 2023

While several factors make HBS Online unique —including a global Community and real-world outcomes —active learning through the case study method rises to the top.

In a 2023 City Square Associates survey, 74 percent of HBS Online learners who also took a course from another provider said HBS Online’s case method and real-world examples were better by comparison.

Here’s a primer on the case method, five benefits you could gain, and how to experience it for yourself.

Access your free e-book today.

What Is the Harvard Business School Case Study Method?

The case study method , or case method , is a learning technique in which you’re presented with a real-world business challenge and asked how you’d solve it. After working through it yourself and with peers, you’re told how the scenario played out.

HBS pioneered the case method in 1922. Shortly before, in 1921, the first case was written.

“How do you go into an ambiguous situation and get to the bottom of it?” says HBS Professor Jan Rivkin, former senior associate dean and chair of HBS's master of business administration (MBA) program, in a video about the case method . “That skill—the skill of figuring out a course of inquiry to choose a course of action—that skill is as relevant today as it was in 1921.”

Originally developed for the in-person MBA classroom, HBS Online adapted the case method into an engaging, interactive online learning experience in 2014.

In HBS Online courses , you learn about each case from the business professional who experienced it. After reviewing their videos, you’re prompted to take their perspective and explain how you’d handle their situation.

You then get to read peers’ responses, “star” them, and comment to further the discussion. Afterward, you learn how the professional handled it and their key takeaways.

HBS Online’s adaptation of the case method incorporates the famed HBS “cold call,” in which you’re called on at random to make a decision without time to prepare.

“Learning came to life!” said Sheneka Balogun , chief administration officer and chief of staff at LeMoyne-Owen College, of her experience taking the Credential of Readiness (CORe) program . “The videos from the professors, the interactive cold calls where you were randomly selected to participate, and the case studies that enhanced and often captured the essence of objectives and learning goals were all embedded in each module. This made learning fun, engaging, and student-friendly.”

If you’re considering taking a course that leverages the case study method, here are five benefits you could experience.

5 Benefits of Learning Through Case Studies

1. take new perspectives.

The case method prompts you to consider a scenario from another person’s perspective. To work through the situation and come up with a solution, you must consider their circumstances, limitations, risk tolerance, stakeholders, resources, and potential consequences to assess how to respond.

Taking on new perspectives not only can help you navigate your own challenges but also others’. Putting yourself in someone else’s situation to understand their motivations and needs can go a long way when collaborating with stakeholders.

2. Hone Your Decision-Making Skills

Another skill you can build is the ability to make decisions effectively . The case study method forces you to use limited information to decide how to handle a problem—just like in the real world.

Throughout your career, you’ll need to make difficult decisions with incomplete or imperfect information—and sometimes, you won’t feel qualified to do so. Learning through the case method allows you to practice this skill in a low-stakes environment. When facing a real challenge, you’ll be better prepared to think quickly, collaborate with others, and present and defend your solution.

3. Become More Open-Minded

As you collaborate with peers on responses, it becomes clear that not everyone solves problems the same way. Exposing yourself to various approaches and perspectives can help you become a more open-minded professional.

When you’re part of a diverse group of learners from around the world, your experiences, cultures, and backgrounds contribute to a range of opinions on each case.

On the HBS Online course platform, you’re prompted to view and comment on others’ responses, and discussion is encouraged. This practice of considering others’ perspectives can make you more receptive in your career.

“You’d be surprised at how much you can learn from your peers,” said Ratnaditya Jonnalagadda , a software engineer who took CORe.

In addition to interacting with peers in the course platform, Jonnalagadda was part of the HBS Online Community , where he networked with other professionals and continued discussions sparked by course content.

“You get to understand your peers better, and students share examples of businesses implementing a concept from a module you just learned,” Jonnalagadda said. “It’s a very good way to cement the concepts in one's mind.”

4. Enhance Your Curiosity

One byproduct of taking on different perspectives is that it enables you to picture yourself in various roles, industries, and business functions.

“Each case offers an opportunity for students to see what resonates with them, what excites them, what bores them, which role they could imagine inhabiting in their careers,” says former HBS Dean Nitin Nohria in the Harvard Business Review . “Cases stimulate curiosity about the range of opportunities in the world and the many ways that students can make a difference as leaders.”

Through the case method, you can “try on” roles you may not have considered and feel more prepared to change or advance your career .

5. Build Your Self-Confidence

Finally, learning through the case study method can build your confidence. Each time you assume a business leader’s perspective, aim to solve a new challenge, and express and defend your opinions and decisions to peers, you prepare to do the same in your career.

According to a 2022 City Square Associates survey , 84 percent of HBS Online learners report feeling more confident making business decisions after taking a course.

“Self-confidence is difficult to teach or coach, but the case study method seems to instill it in people,” Nohria says in the Harvard Business Review . “There may well be other ways of learning these meta-skills, such as the repeated experience gained through practice or guidance from a gifted coach. However, under the direction of a masterful teacher, the case method can engage students and help them develop powerful meta-skills like no other form of teaching.”

How to Experience the Case Study Method

If the case method seems like a good fit for your learning style, experience it for yourself by taking an HBS Online course. Offerings span seven subject areas, including:

• Business essentials
• Leadership and management
• Entrepreneurship and innovation
• Finance and accounting
• Business in society

No matter which course or credential program you choose, you’ll examine case studies from real business professionals, work through their challenges alongside peers, and gain valuable insights to apply to your career.

Are you interested in discovering how HBS Online can help advance your career? Explore our course catalog and download our free guide —complete with interactive workbook sections—to determine if online learning is right for you and which course to take.

About the Author

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

What the Case Study Method Really Teaches

• Nitin Nohria

Seven meta-skills that stick even if the cases fade from memory.

It’s been 100 years since Harvard Business School began using the case study method. Beyond teaching specific subject matter, the case study method excels in instilling meta-skills in students. This article explains the importance of seven such skills: preparation, discernment, bias recognition, judgement, collaboration, curiosity, and self-confidence.

During my decade as dean of Harvard Business School, I spent hundreds of hours talking with our alumni. To enliven these conversations, I relied on a favorite question: “What was the most important thing you learned from your time in our MBA program?”

• Nitin Nohria is the George F. Baker Jr. and Distinguished Service University Professor. He served as the 10th dean of Harvard Business School, from 2010 to 2020.

Partner Center

The Ultimate Guide to Qualitative Research - Part 1: The Basics

• Introduction and overview
• What is qualitative research?
• What is qualitative data?
• Examples of qualitative data
• Qualitative vs. quantitative research
• Mixed methods
• Qualitative research preparation
• Theoretical perspective
• Theoretical framework
• Literature reviews

Research question

• Conceptual framework
• Conceptual vs. theoretical framework

Data collection

• Qualitative research methods
• Focus groups
• Observational research

What is a case study?

Applications for case study research, what is a good case study, process of case study design, benefits and limitations of case studies.

• Ethnographical research
• Ethical considerations
• Confidentiality and privacy
• Power dynamics
• Reflexivity

Case studies

Case studies are essential to qualitative research , offering a lens through which researchers can investigate complex phenomena within their real-life contexts. This chapter explores the concept, purpose, applications, examples, and types of case studies and provides guidance on how to conduct case study research effectively.

Whereas quantitative methods look at phenomena at scale, case study research looks at a concept or phenomenon in considerable detail. While analyzing a single case can help understand one perspective regarding the object of research inquiry, analyzing multiple cases can help obtain a more holistic sense of the topic or issue. Let's provide a basic definition of a case study, then explore its characteristics and role in the qualitative research process.

Definition of a case study

A case study in qualitative research is a strategy of inquiry that involves an in-depth investigation of a phenomenon within its real-world context. It provides researchers with the opportunity to acquire an in-depth understanding of intricate details that might not be as apparent or accessible through other methods of research. The specific case or cases being studied can be a single person, group, or organization – demarcating what constitutes a relevant case worth studying depends on the researcher and their research question .

Among qualitative research methods , a case study relies on multiple sources of evidence, such as documents, artifacts, interviews , or observations , to present a complete and nuanced understanding of the phenomenon under investigation. The objective is to illuminate the readers' understanding of the phenomenon beyond its abstract statistical or theoretical explanations.

Characteristics of case studies

Case studies typically possess a number of distinct characteristics that set them apart from other research methods. These characteristics include a focus on holistic description and explanation, flexibility in the design and data collection methods, reliance on multiple sources of evidence, and emphasis on the context in which the phenomenon occurs.

Furthermore, case studies can often involve a longitudinal examination of the case, meaning they study the case over a period of time. These characteristics allow case studies to yield comprehensive, in-depth, and richly contextualized insights about the phenomenon of interest.

The role of case studies in research

Case studies hold a unique position in the broader landscape of research methods aimed at theory development. They are instrumental when the primary research interest is to gain an intensive, detailed understanding of a phenomenon in its real-life context.

In addition, case studies can serve different purposes within research - they can be used for exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory purposes, depending on the research question and objectives. This flexibility and depth make case studies a valuable tool in the toolkit of qualitative researchers.

Remember, a well-conducted case study can offer a rich, insightful contribution to both academic and practical knowledge through theory development or theory verification, thus enhancing our understanding of complex phenomena in their real-world contexts.

What is the purpose of a case study?

Case study research aims for a more comprehensive understanding of phenomena, requiring various research methods to gather information for qualitative analysis . Ultimately, a case study can allow the researcher to gain insight into a particular object of inquiry and develop a theoretical framework relevant to the research inquiry.

Why use case studies in qualitative research?

Using case studies as a research strategy depends mainly on the nature of the research question and the researcher's access to the data.

Conducting case study research provides a level of detail and contextual richness that other research methods might not offer. They are beneficial when there's a need to understand complex social phenomena within their natural contexts.

The explanatory, exploratory, and descriptive roles of case studies

Case studies can take on various roles depending on the research objectives. They can be exploratory when the research aims to discover new phenomena or define new research questions; they are descriptive when the objective is to depict a phenomenon within its context in a detailed manner; and they can be explanatory if the goal is to understand specific relationships within the studied context. Thus, the versatility of case studies allows researchers to approach their topic from different angles, offering multiple ways to uncover and interpret the data .

The impact of case studies on knowledge development

Case studies play a significant role in knowledge development across various disciplines. Analysis of cases provides an avenue for researchers to explore phenomena within their context based on the collected data.

This can result in the production of rich, practical insights that can be instrumental in both theory-building and practice. Case studies allow researchers to delve into the intricacies and complexities of real-life situations, uncovering insights that might otherwise remain hidden.

Types of case studies

In qualitative research , a case study is not a one-size-fits-all approach. Depending on the nature of the research question and the specific objectives of the study, researchers might choose to use different types of case studies. These types differ in their focus, methodology, and the level of detail they provide about the phenomenon under investigation.

Understanding these types is crucial for selecting the most appropriate approach for your research project and effectively achieving your research goals. Let's briefly look at the main types of case studies.

Exploratory case studies

Exploratory case studies are typically conducted to develop a theory or framework around an understudied phenomenon. They can also serve as a precursor to a larger-scale research project. Exploratory case studies are useful when a researcher wants to identify the key issues or questions which can spur more extensive study or be used to develop propositions for further research. These case studies are characterized by flexibility, allowing researchers to explore various aspects of a phenomenon as they emerge, which can also form the foundation for subsequent studies.

Descriptive case studies

Descriptive case studies aim to provide a complete and accurate representation of a phenomenon or event within its context. These case studies are often based on an established theoretical framework, which guides how data is collected and analyzed. The researcher is concerned with describing the phenomenon in detail, as it occurs naturally, without trying to influence or manipulate it.

Explanatory case studies

Explanatory case studies are focused on explanation - they seek to clarify how or why certain phenomena occur. Often used in complex, real-life situations, they can be particularly valuable in clarifying causal relationships among concepts and understanding the interplay between different factors within a specific context.

Intrinsic, instrumental, and collective case studies

These three categories of case studies focus on the nature and purpose of the study. An intrinsic case study is conducted when a researcher has an inherent interest in the case itself. Instrumental case studies are employed when the case is used to provide insight into a particular issue or phenomenon. A collective case study, on the other hand, involves studying multiple cases simultaneously to investigate some general phenomena.

Each type of case study serves a different purpose and has its own strengths and challenges. The selection of the type should be guided by the research question and objectives, as well as the context and constraints of the research.

The flexibility, depth, and contextual richness offered by case studies make this approach an excellent research method for various fields of study. They enable researchers to investigate real-world phenomena within their specific contexts, capturing nuances that other research methods might miss. Across numerous fields, case studies provide valuable insights into complex issues.

Critical information systems research

Case studies provide a detailed understanding of the role and impact of information systems in different contexts. They offer a platform to explore how information systems are designed, implemented, and used and how they interact with various social, economic, and political factors. Case studies in this field often focus on examining the intricate relationship between technology, organizational processes, and user behavior, helping to uncover insights that can inform better system design and implementation.

Health research

Health research is another field where case studies are highly valuable. They offer a way to explore patient experiences, healthcare delivery processes, and the impact of various interventions in a real-world context.

Case studies can provide a deep understanding of a patient's journey, giving insights into the intricacies of disease progression, treatment effects, and the psychosocial aspects of health and illness.

Asthma research studies

Specifically within medical research, studies on asthma often employ case studies to explore the individual and environmental factors that influence asthma development, management, and outcomes. A case study can provide rich, detailed data about individual patients' experiences, from the triggers and symptoms they experience to the effectiveness of various management strategies. This can be crucial for developing patient-centered asthma care approaches.

Other fields

Apart from the fields mentioned, case studies are also extensively used in business and management research, education research, and political sciences, among many others. They provide an opportunity to delve into the intricacies of real-world situations, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of various phenomena.

Case studies, with their depth and contextual focus, offer unique insights across these varied fields. They allow researchers to illuminate the complexities of real-life situations, contributing to both theory and practice.

Whatever field you're in, ATLAS.ti puts your data to work for you

Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti to turn your data into insights.

Understanding the key elements of case study design is crucial for conducting rigorous and impactful case study research. A well-structured design guides the researcher through the process, ensuring that the study is methodologically sound and its findings are reliable and valid. The main elements of case study design include the research question , propositions, units of analysis, and the logic linking the data to the propositions.

The research question is the foundation of any research study. A good research question guides the direction of the study and informs the selection of the case, the methods of collecting data, and the analysis techniques. A well-formulated research question in case study research is typically clear, focused, and complex enough to merit further detailed examination of the relevant case(s).

Propositions

Propositions, though not necessary in every case study, provide a direction by stating what we might expect to find in the data collected. They guide how data is collected and analyzed by helping researchers focus on specific aspects of the case. They are particularly important in explanatory case studies, which seek to understand the relationships among concepts within the studied phenomenon.

Units of analysis

The unit of analysis refers to the case, or the main entity or entities that are being analyzed in the study. In case study research, the unit of analysis can be an individual, a group, an organization, a decision, an event, or even a time period. It's crucial to clearly define the unit of analysis, as it shapes the qualitative data analysis process by allowing the researcher to analyze a particular case and synthesize analysis across multiple case studies to draw conclusions.

Argumentation

This refers to the inferential model that allows researchers to draw conclusions from the data. The researcher needs to ensure that there is a clear link between the data, the propositions (if any), and the conclusions drawn. This argumentation is what enables the researcher to make valid and credible inferences about the phenomenon under study.

Understanding and carefully considering these elements in the design phase of a case study can significantly enhance the quality of the research. It can help ensure that the study is methodologically sound and its findings contribute meaningful insights about the case.

Ready to jumpstart your research with ATLAS.ti?

Conceptualize your research project with our intuitive data analysis interface. Download a free trial today.

Conducting a case study involves several steps, from defining the research question and selecting the case to collecting and analyzing data . This section outlines these key stages, providing a practical guide on how to conduct case study research.

Defining the research question

The first step in case study research is defining a clear, focused research question. This question should guide the entire research process, from case selection to analysis. It's crucial to ensure that the research question is suitable for a case study approach. Typically, such questions are exploratory or descriptive in nature and focus on understanding a phenomenon within its real-life context.

Selecting and defining the case

The selection of the case should be based on the research question and the objectives of the study. It involves choosing a unique example or a set of examples that provide rich, in-depth data about the phenomenon under investigation. After selecting the case, it's crucial to define it clearly, setting the boundaries of the case, including the time period and the specific context.

Previous research can help guide the case study design. When considering a case study, an example of a case could be taken from previous case study research and used to define cases in a new research inquiry. Considering recently published examples can help understand how to select and define cases effectively.

Developing a detailed case study protocol

A case study protocol outlines the procedures and general rules to be followed during the case study. This includes the data collection methods to be used, the sources of data, and the procedures for analysis. Having a detailed case study protocol ensures consistency and reliability in the study.

The protocol should also consider how to work with the people involved in the research context to grant the research team access to collecting data. As mentioned in previous sections of this guide, establishing rapport is an essential component of qualitative research as it shapes the overall potential for collecting and analyzing data.

Collecting data

Gathering data in case study research often involves multiple sources of evidence, including documents, archival records, interviews, observations, and physical artifacts. This allows for a comprehensive understanding of the case. The process for gathering data should be systematic and carefully documented to ensure the reliability and validity of the study.

Analyzing and interpreting data

The next step is analyzing the data. This involves organizing the data , categorizing it into themes or patterns , and interpreting these patterns to answer the research question. The analysis might also involve comparing the findings with prior research or theoretical propositions.

Writing the case study report

The final step is writing the case study report . This should provide a detailed description of the case, the data, the analysis process, and the findings. The report should be clear, organized, and carefully written to ensure that the reader can understand the case and the conclusions drawn from it.

Each of these steps is crucial in ensuring that the case study research is rigorous, reliable, and provides valuable insights about the case.

The type, depth, and quality of data in your study can significantly influence the validity and utility of the study. In case study research, data is usually collected from multiple sources to provide a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case. This section will outline the various methods of collecting data used in case study research and discuss considerations for ensuring the quality of the data.

Interviews are a common method of gathering data in case study research. They can provide rich, in-depth data about the perspectives, experiences, and interpretations of the individuals involved in the case. Interviews can be structured , semi-structured , or unstructured , depending on the research question and the degree of flexibility needed.

Observations

Observations involve the researcher observing the case in its natural setting, providing first-hand information about the case and its context. Observations can provide data that might not be revealed in interviews or documents, such as non-verbal cues or contextual information.

Documents and artifacts

Documents and archival records provide a valuable source of data in case study research. They can include reports, letters, memos, meeting minutes, email correspondence, and various public and private documents related to the case.

These records can provide historical context, corroborate evidence from other sources, and offer insights into the case that might not be apparent from interviews or observations.

Physical artifacts refer to any physical evidence related to the case, such as tools, products, or physical environments. These artifacts can provide tangible insights into the case, complementing the data gathered from other sources.

Ensuring the quality of data collection

Determining the quality of data in case study research requires careful planning and execution. It's crucial to ensure that the data is reliable, accurate, and relevant to the research question. This involves selecting appropriate methods of collecting data, properly training interviewers or observers, and systematically recording and storing the data. It also includes considering ethical issues related to collecting and handling data, such as obtaining informed consent and ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of the participants.

Data analysis

Analyzing case study research involves making sense of the rich, detailed data to answer the research question. This process can be challenging due to the volume and complexity of case study data. However, a systematic and rigorous approach to analysis can ensure that the findings are credible and meaningful. This section outlines the main steps and considerations in analyzing data in case study research.

Organizing the data

The first step in the analysis is organizing the data. This involves sorting the data into manageable sections, often according to the data source or the theme. This step can also involve transcribing interviews, digitizing physical artifacts, or organizing observational data.

Categorizing and coding the data

Once the data is organized, the next step is to categorize or code the data. This involves identifying common themes, patterns, or concepts in the data and assigning codes to relevant data segments. Coding can be done manually or with the help of software tools, and in either case, qualitative analysis software can greatly facilitate the entire coding process. Coding helps to reduce the data to a set of themes or categories that can be more easily analyzed.

Identifying patterns and themes

After coding the data, the researcher looks for patterns or themes in the coded data. This involves comparing and contrasting the codes and looking for relationships or patterns among them. The identified patterns and themes should help answer the research question.

Interpreting the data

Once patterns and themes have been identified, the next step is to interpret these findings. This involves explaining what the patterns or themes mean in the context of the research question and the case. This interpretation should be grounded in the data, but it can also involve drawing on theoretical concepts or prior research.

Verification of the data

The last step in the analysis is verification. This involves checking the accuracy and consistency of the analysis process and confirming that the findings are supported by the data. This can involve re-checking the original data, checking the consistency of codes, or seeking feedback from research participants or peers.

Like any research method , case study research has its strengths and limitations. Researchers must be aware of these, as they can influence the design, conduct, and interpretation of the study.

Understanding the strengths and limitations of case study research can also guide researchers in deciding whether this approach is suitable for their research question . This section outlines some of the key strengths and limitations of case study research.

Benefits include the following:

• Rich, detailed data: One of the main strengths of case study research is that it can generate rich, detailed data about the case. This can provide a deep understanding of the case and its context, which can be valuable in exploring complex phenomena.
• Flexibility: Case study research is flexible in terms of design , data collection , and analysis . A sufficient degree of flexibility allows the researcher to adapt the study according to the case and the emerging findings.
• Real-world context: Case study research involves studying the case in its real-world context, which can provide valuable insights into the interplay between the case and its context.
• Multiple sources of evidence: Case study research often involves collecting data from multiple sources , which can enhance the robustness and validity of the findings.

On the other hand, researchers should consider the following limitations:

• Generalizability: A common criticism of case study research is that its findings might not be generalizable to other cases due to the specificity and uniqueness of each case.
• Time and resource intensive: Case study research can be time and resource intensive due to the depth of the investigation and the amount of collected data.
• Complexity of analysis: The rich, detailed data generated in case study research can make analyzing the data challenging.
• Subjectivity: Given the nature of case study research, there may be a higher degree of subjectivity in interpreting the data , so researchers need to reflect on this and transparently convey to audiences how the research was conducted.

Being aware of these strengths and limitations can help researchers design and conduct case study research effectively and interpret and report the findings appropriately.

Ready to analyze your data with ATLAS.ti?

See how our intuitive software can draw key insights from your data with a free trial today.

What is the Case Study Method?

Overview Dropdown up

Overview dropdown down, celebrating 100 years of the case method at hbs.

The 2021-2022 academic year marks the 100-year anniversary of the introduction of the case method at Harvard Business School. Today, the HBS case method is employed in the HBS MBA program, in Executive Education programs, and in dozens of other business schools around the world. As Dean Srikant Datar's says, the case method has withstood the test of time.

Case Discussion Preparation Details Expand All Collapse All

In self-reflection in self-reflection dropdown down, in a small group setting in a small group setting dropdown down, in the classroom in the classroom dropdown down, beyond the classroom beyond the classroom dropdown down, how the case method creates value dropdown up, how the case method creates value dropdown down, in self-reflection, in a small group setting, in the classroom, beyond the classroom.

How Cases Unfold In the Classroom

How cases unfold in the classroom dropdown up, how cases unfold in the classroom dropdown down, preparation guidelines expand all collapse all, read the professor's assignment or discussion questions read the professor's assignment or discussion questions dropdown down, read the first few paragraphs and then skim the case read the first few paragraphs and then skim the case dropdown down, reread the case, underline text, and make margin notes reread the case, underline text, and make margin notes dropdown down, note the key problems on a pad of paper and go through the case again note the key problems on a pad of paper and go through the case again dropdown down, how to prepare for case discussions dropdown up, how to prepare for case discussions dropdown down, read the professor's assignment or discussion questions, read the first few paragraphs and then skim the case, reread the case, underline text, and make margin notes, note the key problems on a pad of paper and go through the case again, case study best practices expand all collapse all, prepare prepare dropdown down, discuss discuss dropdown down, participate participate dropdown down, relate relate dropdown down, apply apply dropdown down, note note dropdown down, understand understand dropdown down, case study best practices dropdown up, case study best practices dropdown down, participate, what can i expect on the first day dropdown down.

Most programs begin with registration, followed by an opening session and a dinner. If your travel plans necessitate late arrival, please be sure to notify us so that alternate registration arrangements can be made for you. Please note the following about registration:

HBS campus programs – Registration takes place in the Chao Center.

India programs – Registration takes place outside the classroom.

Other off-campus programs – Registration takes place in the designated facility.

What happens in class if nobody talks? Dropdown down

Professors are here to push everyone to learn, but not to embarrass anyone. If the class is quiet, they'll often ask a participant with experience in the industry in which the case is set to speak first. This is done well in advance so that person can come to class prepared to share. Trust the process. The more open you are, the more willing you’ll be to engage, and the more alive the classroom will become.

Does everyone take part in "role-playing"? Dropdown down

Professors often encourage participants to take opposing sides and then debate the issues, often taking the perspective of the case protagonists or key decision makers in the case.

View Frequently Asked Questions

Subscribe to Our Emails

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 09 October 2018

Using evidence to influence policy: Oxfam’s experience

• Ruth Mayne 1 ,
• Duncan Green 2 ,
• Irene Guijt 3 ,
• Martin Walsh 4 ,
• Richard English 5 &
• Paul Cairney 6  

Palgrave Communications volume  4 , Article number:  122 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

39k Accesses

37 Citations

114 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Development studies
• Politics and international relations

Policymaking is rarely ‘evidence-based’. Rather, policy can only be strongly evidence-informed if its advocates act effectively. Policy theories suggest that they can do so by learning the rules of political systems, and by forming relationships and networks with key actors to build up enough knowledge of their environment and trust from their audience. This knowledge allows them to craft effective influencing strategies, such as to tell a persuasive and timely story about an urgent policy problem and its most feasible solution. Empirical case studies help explain when, how, and why such strategies work in context. If analysed carefully, they can provide transferable lessons for researchers and advocates that are seeking to inform or influence policymaking. Oxfam Great Britain has become an experienced and effective advocate of evidence-informed policy change, offering lessons for building effective action. In this article, we combine insights from policy studies with specific case studies of Oxfam campaigns to describe four ways to promote the uptake of research evidence in policy: (1) learn how policymaking works, (2) design evidence to maximise its influence on specific audiences, (3) design and use additional influencing strategies such as insider persuasion or outsider pressure, and adapt the presentation of evidence and influencing strategies to the changing context, and (4) embrace trial and error. The supply of evidence is one important but insufficient part of this story.

Similar content being viewed by others

The evidence ecosystem in South Africa: growing resilience and institutionalisation of evidence use

Mapping the community: use of research evidence in policy and practice

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

Introduction.

Academic studies of the politics of evidence-based policymaking suggest that policymaking can never be 'evidence based’ (Cairney, 2016 ). At best, it is evidence-informed and subject to three factors. First, it is difficult to generate agreement on how to define evidence (even if adopting our focus on research evidence) and distinguish between high and low quality or relevant research (Nutley et al. 2007 ). Second, the world contains too much information for any actor to process comprehensively. Policymakers, unable to process all information relevant to policy, use cognitive and organisational shortcuts to process enough evidence to make decisions (Cairney and Kwiatkowski, 2017 ). Third, they do so in a policymaking environment over which they have limited control. There is no orderly ‘policy cycle’ in which a small number of powerful policymakers in government can gather the best evidence of a problem, select the most evidence-based solution, and make sure it is implemented, delivered, and evaluated. Rather, policymaking takes place in an unpredictable environment with many policymakers and influencers interacting at many levels and types of government. Further, each policymaking ‘venue’ (an arena or organisation in which people come together to make and influence authoritative decisions) produces its own formal and informal rules, networks, and dominant ways to define policy problems or respond to socioeconomic conditions and events (Cairney and Weible, 2017 ). Thus, policymaking resembles a complex system from which outcomes ‘emerge’, and in which the role of evidence is unclear (Geyer and Cairney, 2015 ).

The absence of an orderly and predictable policy process means that, to encourage the use of research evidence in policy-making, researchers and advocates need to better understand how policymaking works and how to respond. In this article, we combine academic and practitioner accounts to (a) generate a broad understanding of the role of evidence use in complex policymaking systems, and (b) learn lessons from an organisation that advocates for the uptake of research evidence in that context.

First, we synthesise key elements of policy theories to draw general lessons, such as adapting to the cognitive shortcuts of policymakers and dynamics of policymaking environments (Heikkila and Cairney, 2017 ). Common recommendations include telling a simple and persuasive story rather than bombarding policymakers with evidence, and engaging for the long term to identify: the right time to act, the actors with whom to form coalitions, the ‘rules of the game’, and the language of policy debate (Cairney and Weible, 2017 ).

In the series of articles devoted to this topic Footnote 1 , scholars and practitioners have written about key aspects of the role of evidence in policy making, including how to influence government ministers (Andrews, 2017 ), tell stories for policy impact (Davidson, 2017 ; Jones and Crow, 2017 ), and assess the impact of evidence on policy (Boswell and Smith, 2017 ). In most cases, scholars are describing how researchers can use the literature to develop skills for direct engagement.

A better strategy may be to work with, or learn lessons from, other actors with more experience. For example, many organisations are experienced influencers, intermediaries or knowledge brokers, including well-organised interest groups. Therefore, we draw on NGO experience of real world policy influencing to provide a wider source of lessons for research evidence advocates. We present practical examples that explain how experienced actors have engaged with the policy process effectively and how new actors can learn from their experience.

We draw on the experience of influencers and campaigners in Oxfam Great Britain: the UK affiliate of Oxfam International, a major international NGO devoted to reducing global poverty, human suffering, injustice, and inequalities relating to gender and other factors. Oxfam and its partners have been effective at evidence-informed policy change, usually as part of wider alliances and networks. It uses evidence to influence policy and to understand how to do so more effectively, via evaluation and lesson-learning. The article presents exemplar case studies of successful policy influencing by Oxfam staff and partners to highlight five tactics and strategies that have contributed to effectiveness including:

Learning how a political system works to understand what need to change to address an identified problem, who has the power to achieve change, and how to achieve change.

Designing, framing, timing and adapting the presentation of evidence to the changing context to maximise its influence on target audiences.

Using additional insider or outsider strategies to influence policy and practice.

Embracing trial and error.

Five of six authors are involved in research for influencing and campaigns, undertaking wider contextual research and/or conducting training for staff and partners on the use of evidence for influencing. The paper is based primarily on the authors’ reflections on several sources, including: a meta review of 24 independent, randomised, Effectiveness Reviews of Oxfam’s and partners national and regional influencing initiatives, using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (Shephard et al. 2018 ); 32 papers submitted to an Oxfam conference on Evidence for Influencing held in the Netherlands on 23-24 th October 2017; evaluations and internal learning workshops and reviews; Oxfam research and discussion papers; personal correspondence with campaigners and influencers within Oxfam; and the authors’ own research and influencing experience. This paper provides an overall narrative to identify effective policy influencing. However, not all influencing initiatives succeed, so in the final section we discuss the importance of embracing trial and error. While we focus primarily on influencing strategies , we note that an organisation’s also success depends on its actual and perceived trustworthiness and legitimacy . We therefore separate routine learning, based on continuous reflection on strategy, from fundamental learning, based on the need to respond to Oxfam and the sector's safeguarding crisis.

Insights from academic policy studies

Policy studies provide abstract insights. They can be applied to most contexts, but we need to make concrete sense of them in different ways for different cases. First, policymaking is never ‘evidence based’. Indeed, there is no agreed or common definition of evidence, policy, and policymaking (Cairney, 2016 ). While some policymakers maintain a ‘hierarchy’ of evidence to which they will respond based on particular research methods (such as randomised control trials) many do not (Oliver and Pearce, 2017 ). Many policymakers have a more eclectic view of evidence quality and are more interested in its relevance to policy problems (Nutley et al. 2007 ; 2013 ; Kenny et al. 2017 ). Further, this calculation differs markedly across policy areas, professions, levels of government, and according to how policymakers describe problems, such as urgent and salient or largely solved bar some technical aspects of delivery (Cairney, 2016 ; Cairney 2018a ). Therefore, advocates of research evidence need to look beyond their own assessment of ‘the evidence’ to find out how policymakers think about problems and decide what evidence is relevant to them.

Second, there is more information available than any individual or governing organisation could process. No policymaker can consider all evidence relevant to decisions. ‘Bounded rationality’ (Simon, 1976 ) plays a profound role, as policymakers do not have the cognitive ability to consider all issues for which they are responsible, prioritise their aims consistently, or anticipate all of the effects of their decisions. Instead, they combine cognitive shortcuts to prioritise and interpret a small number of problems while ignoring the rest (Cairney and Kwiatkowski, 2017 ; Baumgartner and Jones, 2009 , 2015 ).

Advocates of research evidence can respond effectively by identifying how policymakers process evidence: the methods they use to—in effect—ignore most information to allow themselves to make timely decisions. Researchers often make the mistake of addressing this situation by trying to increase the supply of high quality research evidence in a highly crowded environment. Such evidence matters, but its framing and the receptivity of policymakers to its implications are as important as scientific assessments of its quality. Effective advocates of research evidence frame information because they know that demand for evidence relates primarily to the necessarily simplified ways in which policymakers interpret complicated problems (Cairney et al. 2016 ). Therefore, an understanding of how policymakers apply cognitive shortcuts to information on policy problems can help evidence advocates design simple and persuasive stories, linked to their evidence base, rather than bombarding policymakers with evidence in the hope that they have an infinite capacity to process information.

Third, policy studies describe the environment or context in which this action takes place (Heikkila and Cairney, 2017 ; Cairney and Weible, 2017 ; Baumgartner et al, 2009 ). Policy actors operate in a messy environment over which central government policymakers often have limited control:

They share power with many other policymakers, and influencers such as interest groups, operating across many levels of government or in public, private, and third sector bodies delivering policy (Gaventa, 2006 ).

Policymaking organisations deal with their limited ability to process information by developing rules, norms, and standard operating procedures to simplify action.

Politicians delegate responsibility to civil servants and a range of other regulatory, standard-setting or delivery organisations who in turn seek information and advice from influencers such as interest groups. They form networks—or webs of influence—built on the trust that comes from regular exchanges of information (Braithwaite and Drahos, 2000 ; Maloney et al, 1994 ).

Policymaking tends to be dominated by ‘paradigms’ or ‘monopolies of understanding’ that can endure for decades because actors simplify their world by not questioning well-established ways of thinking based on beliefs, values, and ideology (Baumgartner et al. 2009 ).

Policymakers are subject to socioeconomic conditions (power relations, geographic, demographic, economic) and routine or unanticipated events (elections, crises), which influence their attention to problems, constrain (or enable) policy choices, and create windows of opportunities for evidence advocates (Kingdon, 1984 ).

The result is a context in which power is distributed unevenly and in which governments, other institutions, interest groups, networks, ideas, and socioeconomic conditions interact to generate—intended and unintended—policy outcomes. The literature, some of which is informed by NGO practice, suggests that advocates of research evidence for policy need to develop strategies to engage effectively in their policymaking environment, such as to:

identify which policymaking ‘venues’ are making key decisions, and the rules of those venues (Cairney and Weible, 2017 )

focus on influencing one venue or engage in ‘venue shopping’ to seek more sympathetic audiences (Baumgartner and Jones, 2009 )

emulate how interest groups use an effective mix of ‘insider’ and ‘outsider’ lobbying or campaigning strategies (Maloney et al. 1994 )

identify with whom to form coalitions based on shared aims or beliefs (Weible et al. 2012 )

learn from ‘policy entrepreneurs’ about how to exploit ‘windows of opportunity’ for policy change (Kingdon. 1984 ; Herweg et al. 2017 ; Jones et al. 2016 ; Cairney and Jones. 2016 ; Cairney, 2018b )

However, such general advice can only take us so far. We need to learn more about how researchers and policy advocates remain flexible and adaptive enough to turn general knowledge of policymaking into effective influencing strategies relevant to the issue and context. Those interested in research aimed at building more inclusive and sustainable societies can usefully learn from experienced interest groups, such as Oxfam. Such groups can offer more grounded, tried and tested practical insights which help turn abstract advice into concrete lessons.

How Oxfam uses evidence to promote radical changes to policy and policymaking

Oxfam is an international NGO devoted to reducing global poverty and injustice by providing urgent humanitarian support, supporting long-term development projects, and ‘influencing’ to address the root causes of poverty. It invests a growing proportion of spending on the latter, aiming to rebalance power relations in favour of poor and marginalised groups, and helping overcome structural influences that underpin poverty and injustice. Influencing in Oxfam entails systematic efforts to address: visible power expressed through observable rules, laws and institutions and decision-making processes; more hidden forms of power exercised by informal decision-makers and ‘influentials’ who operate behind the scenes; and ‘invisible power’ expressed through cultural beliefs and social norms (Rowlands, 1997 ; Gaventa, 2006 ). Its influencing strategies may seek to: change the policies and practices of governments and private companies; influence attitudes, beliefs, norms and behaviours of the public and officials; support and strengthen the capacity of marginalised individuals, groups and movements to claim their rights and participate in policy decision-making; and/or pioneer and scale up innovative development solutions.

We describe how Oxfam and partners uses research evidence to influence the policies and practices of public and private sector decision makers. This work is based on evaluations and experience that show that evidence is a necessary but often insufficient means to influence government and company policy and practice . Policy does not change simply because unequivocal evidence exists to demonstrate that particular practices ease or exacerbate human suffering. Rather, policy change is facilitated or hindered by powerful actors and factors reproducing the rules and dominant ideologies of political systems. For example, while there is a growing consensus from economists across the political spectrum that extreme levels of inequality are wrong and harm the economy, evidence-based action to reduce inequality is blocked by elites. Evidence on its own is unlikely to foster change unless accompanied by effective campaigning, political mobilisation and other forms of influencing.

There are four interacting ways in which campaigners and researchers in Oxfam seek to use evidence to influence government and company policy and practice.

Understanding political systems: what needs to change, who can achieve change, and how

Maximising the impact of evidence is only possible by learning how the wider political system works. In Oxfam, initiatives seek to maximise policy impact by investing in analysis and research to understand the key dimensions of change in a political system: (a) what needs to change to address poverty and injustice; (b) who has the power to achieve the desired change (and who or what influences them); (c) how to achieve change; and (d) wider contextual influences and trends. Oxfam staff use this information to inform its influencing and research strategy and also translates it into a range of knowledge-based influencing outputs: campaign reports, policy briefing papers, and creative resources such as social media posts, videos, posters and exhibitions.

(a) What needs to change

Like other NGOs, Oxfam and partners use participatory analytical tools, such as problem and solution trees (ODI, 2009 ) or PESTLE (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental Analysis, to help analyse context and hence understand ‘what’ needs to change to address poverty and social injustice. These tools provide an initial understanding of possible consequences, causes of, and solutions to poverty related problems such as displacement, poor health services, or declining wages. Causes may relate to unequal power relations, attitudes and beliefs, policies and practices, norms and behaviours, institutional practices and/or socio-economic factors.

When government or company policy is an important driver of an identified problem, Oxfam staff may also conduct additional research or analysis to: provide further evidence of policy discourses, implementation and impacts; or investigate and test policy solutions or alternatives. Oxfam internal guidelines stipulate that both analysis and research integrate gender analysis.

Oxfam then uses this analysis and research about what needs to change to (a) identify policy influencing aims and change objectives and (b) inform campaign reports and briefing papers to persuade governments about the need to achieve change. The latter combine evidence with compelling human stories and visualisations of evidence to highlight why these issues matter. They are used, alongside other influencing strategies, as tools to get an issue further up a global or national policy agenda, to shift the terms of the debate, or change or better implement policies. Some exemplars of this way of working are summarised in Table 1 .

Experience and evaluation suggest that this formula can work when combined with additional influencing strategies. For example, Oxfam research for the Behind the Brands campaign score card contributed to important changes in how global companies engage their supply chains (Sahan, 2016 ). The research for the Access to Medicines campaign from 2001 helped weaken the influence of the giant pharmaceutical companies over government policy and contributed—as part of a wider global campaign with allies—to major reductions in the prices of HIV/AIDs medicines (Coe et al. 2011 ; Mayne, 2002 ).

Other recent examples include Oxfam’s research showing that Unilever’s factory in Vietnam fell well short of paying a living wage (Wilshaw et al. 2013 ). Unilever subsequently improved the quality of jobs in the factory, reviewed its compensation policies and practices globally, and made many commitments to tackle labour issues in its global supply chain (Wilshaw et al. 2016 ). Further, policies such as the Scottish Government’s establishment of an Inequality Commissioner, business pledge, and modified performance framework followed Oxfam’s Humankind Index ( 2013a , 2013b ).

Careful research design can increase the impact of such research. One characteristic of Oxfam’s approach is the way it combines secondary data and analysis of macro trends and policies, with primary and participatory research about their human impacts on people. Primary research may entail focus group discussions, key informant interviews and case studies and other methods that offer a way for listening to people’s voices on their own terms. Its recent use of SenseMaker (Mager et al. 2018 ; Guijt, 2016 ), for example, captures thousands of people’s perspectives in ways that add analytical depth to generic statistics and quantitative assessments of qualitative insights.

Oxfam’s research also combines policy analysis and critique with policy recommendations or solutions. Internally, discussion is ongoing about the potential for increasing policy influence by providing more concrete and detailed proof of concept for recommended policy alternatives. For example, the GROW campaign helped shift the terms of debate on agricultural food chains, and contributed to positive policy gains for rural women and small producers in Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala, and Paraguay. An evaluation of GROW suggested that more detailed research on its policy proposals could have helped further strengthen outcomes (Watson, 2016 ). Oxfam’s work on a more human economy seeks to build an evidence-informed case for policy alternatives (Hardoon, 2017 ).

(b) Who has the power to achieve the desired change?

Power relations—whether visible, hidden or invisible (VeneKlasen and Miller, 2002 ; IDS 2010)—shape the potential for change in political, social or economic systems. To influence policy, strategies may need to target several audiences, including: visible and formal decision makers, such as MPs or people on government committees; hidden and informal influencers operating behind the scenes, such as corporate lobbyists or influential individuals; and, invisible cultural beliefs, social norms, and behaviours that constrain policy change or implementation, such as through broader media efforts.

All new Oxfam campaign or policy positions are expected to begin with a power analysis with relevant stakeholders to assess: (1) what kind of power dynamics are at play in any change process, (2) who has what kind of power to support the desired change, (3) who and what influences them, and (4) who supports or blocks change. Power analysis informs research design, including the kind of evidence, narrative and methodology best suited to different potential audiences (Table 2 ).

It also informs wider influencing strategies by providing vital political intelligence about the position of different individuals and institutions within the system and the most effective mix of insider and outsider influencing strategies and tactics. These may involve using evidence to strengthen the arguments of advocates or weaken those of opponents, enroling influential allies to support policy requests, naming and shaming the powerful through the media, shifting public attitudes and beliefs and mobilising the public, or helping build pro-change coalitions.

Power analysis was important, for example, in informing the influencing strategy of the successful Arms Trade campaign, aimed at regulating the sale of conventional arms and ammunition. In this case, the analysis categorised governments by their relative support for the Treaty overall and their positions about individual elements (e.g., human rights or sustainable development) and was regularly updated in spreadsheets colour coded into ‘champions’, ‘progressive supporters’, ‘swing supporters’, ‘undecided’, and ‘sceptics’ (Green and MacDonald 2015 ).

Increasingly, power analysis conducted by Oxfam staff looks beyond formal and visible expressions of power to identify traditional/customary, informal and invisible power (Rowlands, 2016 ). Several programmes—including WeCare—now identify and address invisible power by seeking to transform the cultural beliefs and norms that prevent women’s full participation in economic and public life. However, while the acceptance, use and sophistication of power analysis is growing in Oxfam, the authors’ own reflections suggest that some staff do not use or update it frequently enough. Rather, campaigners can sometimes default to formulaic influencing tactics, such as digital petitions and/or fail to identify informal influencers or hidden and invisible sources of power. Additionally, staff sometimes forget to factor Oxfam’s power into the analysis.

If necessary, staff supplement power analysis with additional research about the positions or decision-making processes of target audiences. For example, Oxfam South Caucuses Country Programme used social network analysis to better understand the composition and workings of national networks working on food security and how to strengthen them (Kvintradze, 2016 ).

(c) Understanding how to achieve change

Effective influencing requires an understanding of how change might best be achieved in specific contexts and times: identifying what type, mix, timing and sequencing of evidence and other influencing tactics will most plausibly contribute to desired changes. Such judgements are informed by a mix of contextual analysis, power analysis, know-how accumulated from experience, and evaluations.

Increasingly Oxfam is also generating lessons from meta-reviews of its influencing initiatives with partners and allies. For example, it recently commissioned a review of its national and regional policy influencing initiatives (Shephard et al. 2018 ). The review used fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis to analyse 24 of Oxfam’s independent and randomised Effectiveness Reviews of national and regional influencing initiatives (which use process tracing to assess Oxfam’s contribution to identified outcomes). It investigated ‘what combination of strategies worked to change policy and expand civic space, and what role Oxfam played, in the different contexts where it works?’. The review defined Widening civic space as expanding political spaces within which civil society organisations and citizens can exert power and have their voices heard on policy topics and Changing policy as bringing about change in the programmes, policies, procedures or budgets of the government, public officials or politicians/parties at any level.

The review found that in 15 of 22 relevant cases (68%), Oxfam and partners successfully helped widen civic space and strengthen civil society participation and voice in policy making processes. In 8 of 15 relevant cases (53%) they successfully changed government policy on a range of issues from health, gender equality, climate change, land rights, and poverty. In the 13 relevant cases that sought to both expand space and change policy simultaneously, only one successfully changed policy without also having expanded space. In other words, in relevant cases, there was a strong link between widening civic space and encouraging policy change. The review also confirmed that insider influencing strategies - building relationships with policy makers, presenting evidence and engaging in dialogue - were a necessary but not sufficient condition for influencing policy. Successful initiatives combined insider strategies with: (a) capitalising on ‘windows of opportunity’, or (b) outsider strategies that use overt pressure via high profile media or public mobilisation (while recognising this may be risky or difficult in contexts with restricted civic space), alongside strategies to strengthen civil society.

Oxfam also seeks to learn from social science. Some of Oxfam’s policy influencing initiatives are explicitly informed by social and political science theories. For example, the global Enough Campaign is testing the effectiveness of strategies to change social norms that underpin violence against women and girls. Oxfam Novib also used behavioural insights to help inform its influencing messages on Dutch government aid allocations (Vlastuin, 2017 ). A recent Oxfam discussion paper reviewed learning from theory and practice about how to influence the gender, health, hygiene and environmental behaviours and practices of the public and government officials, and drew out the practical implications for strategy design (Mayne et al. 2018 ).

(d) Understanding and monitoring wider contextual trends

There is a risk of spending too much time and energy looking inward and asking ‘what we are going to do’, to the neglect of understanding how the wider complex system enables or constrains opportunities for change. This is particularly true of global organisations responding to different contexts in different countries. To address that weakness, Oxfam sometimes conducts research into wider systemic factors and contextual trends to inform or counter-balance the assumptions that campaign staff might otherwise make about how to achieve change (Green, 2016 ).

For example, Oxfam’s Enough campaign to End Violence Against Women and Girls conducts research about, and seeks to transform, social norms and behaviours that either directly affect the lives of poor and marginalised women and/or constrain the implementation of policies and laws by officials or the public. This includes, for example, social norms relating to the legitimisation of violence and racism against indigenous women in Guatemala; the acceptance of intimate partner violence in India; the restriction of women’s mobility in Pakistan; and early forced marriage in Indonesia.

Other recent contextual research investigated the profound effects of the rise of right wing populism (Galasso et al. 2017 ), as well as the narrowing effect and implications of civic space in some countries (Binh et al. 2016 ). The report highlighted implications for Oxfam’s framing and narratives and the need for Oxfam to invest more in strengthening civil society voice rather than its own direct advocacy.

Another recent piece of research by Oxfam on political systems in fragile and conflict affected states (Green, 2017 ) highlighted the importance of identifying and engaging with non-state actors and identity-based organisations whether regional, ethnic, religious. Achieving change in such contexts requires long term processes aimed at shifting values and norms.

Overall, these activities – examining the what, who, and how questions, and the wider context - demonstrate that maximising the impact of evidence requires learning how a political system works and who is powerful within it. It would be ineffective to focus narrowly on evidence supply when, for example, there is lack of clarity about the audience, how they process information, and which factors influence their decisions. Turning a 100-page report into a one-page briefing may improve communication but miss the point.

Designing, framing, and timing evidence

One of the least effective ways to use research for influence is to write a paper and then ask ‘right, who do I send it to?’. Anticipating the demand for evidence and influencing such demand presents an essential opportunity. Good practice initiatives in Oxfam try to increase research uptake and impact by integrating it with wider influencing strategies (see section 3 below), involving relevant stakeholders upstream in the research process, and carefully framing, communicating, and timing the release of research.

(a) Involving target audiences in the research process

Engaging stakeholders—whether partners, local communities, other allies, or target audiences—in research processes can increase the relevance, influence and impact of research, especially when they have been identified through a power analysis as key supporters or blockers of change. Oxfam requires all campaigns to adhere to an agreed set of program standards to build accountability and meaningful stakeholder participation into their design, implementation and review. Staff may establish reference groups – of partners, experts and staff - to guide the design, interpretation, and use of research. They may consult allies on policy positions. For example, in the run up to the G20 meetings in Turkey in 2015, Oxfam brought together civil society representatives from over 90 countries via online and offline platforms to discuss policy issues in relation to inequality, climate change, gender and governance. They may commission or involve academics to help strengthen the credibility and influence of research evidence. For example, Oxfam’s UK Poverty Policy Advisory Group is an external expertise (academic and parliamentary) and scrutiny mechanism to ensure a convincing evidence base for advocacy work.

Staff and partners may also engage government and private companies in the research process. To enhance ownership by the national government and increase their confidence in the data, Oxfam in Nigeria used data from the national bureau of statistics and the Federal Inland Revenue in the preparation of its country inequality report (Mayah, 2017 ). It also involved the Ministry of Budget and Planning, including a Minister, in the unveiling and launch of the report. The national parliament called for a joint sitting on measures to address inequality barely 3 weeks after the launch. Oxfam and the Vietnamese government are discussing potential cooperation on measuring SDG 10, such as developing indicators to measure inequality which could offer a useful influencing opportunity. Critical engagement with food companies was important to the success of Behind the Brands (Sahan, 2016 ). Oxfam staff gave companies the opportunity to feedback on Oxfam’s indicators for the score card. While not all company suggestions were taken up, the process enabled meaningful dialogue with them and experts on the extent to which their suggestions were relevant to all companies and/or could be verified with publicly available information. This dialogue helped identify some leading company practices that initial research had overlooked. It also increased company engagement with the campaign, as they could see that some indicators were shaped by the areas in which they demonstrated leadership. Engagement improved the quality of the scorecard and fostered relationships between Oxfam and the companies that would help shape progress, rather than alienating companies and prompting defensive responses.

(b) Framing and communicating research

Oxfam combines evidence with reasoned argument, strategic framing, and appeals to values, compassion and enlightened self-interest, to increase the salience and influence of research to its target audiences. Oxfam GB’s Market Insights team conducts regular audience research (tracking surveys and focus groups) into how the public, key supporters and decision-makers view Oxfam’s core campaign issues, which is in turn used to inform its communication and influencing messages and strategies. Where needed, this is supplemented by additional research. For example, the findings from a recent ten-country survey by Oxfam showed that informing people: (a) about the overall level of inequality and lack of social mobility, and (b) where they are situated in the income distribution, can increase support for certain types of government action (Hoy and Mager 2017 ).

One of the various framing tactics Oxfam uses to increase the influence of its research on target audiences is to humanise complex issues. Its research for the Arms Trade campaign is a powerful example (Hillier and Wood, 2003 ). The inclusion of survivors in campaign communications, UN delegations, regional meetings and gatherings meant that the campaign was able to stay focused on the ultimate humanitarian aim of the treaty, and ensure that those most affected by the issues had a say in the policy direction of the campaign (Green, 2016 ). Oxfam policy staff wrote the first NGO paper on tax havens in June 2002 which, by reframing tax as a development problem depriving developing countries of funding for health and education, catalysed the formation of the Global Tax Justice network and global campaigns on tax avoidance (Kimmis and Mayne, 2000 ). Oxfam also seeks to frame communication messages to appeal to the values of its core audiences and/or activate pro-social or environmental values in others (Crompton, 2010 ). For example, Oxfam GB is carrying out research to better understand and appeal to the concerns and values of its public audiences in relation to refugees. The effectiveness of such value-based framing has been demonstrated in campaigns on same-sex partnership in Ireland and US.

Second, the simple presentation of a few powerful but targeted facts can focus an audience on a profoundly critical issue. In recent years, Oxfam’s ‘killer facts’ (Table 1 ) about extreme and worsening global wealth inequality have become an institution at the annual World Economic Forum gathering in Davos. In 2014, initial research calculated that the 85 richest individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest half of the world’s population, 3.5 billion people (Fuentes-Nieves and Galasso, 2014 ). The ensuing media furore was startling and raised important issues on timing (a similar juxtaposition the previous year sank without trace) and framing. Subsequent annual updates of the statistics received similar levels of attention. Oxfam’s global inequality ‘killer fact’ has since been repeated in speeches by political leaders, including former US President Obama, and it has helped frame inequality debates on its severity, urgency and global relevance.

Third, visualisations help increase the accessibility of evidence. Oxfam’s ‘doughnut’ imagery encapsulates the challenges facing humanity to meet the needs of its population without exceeding the nine planetary boundaries (Raworth, 2012 ). This concept has gained widespread traction and prompted the author to develop a broader and acclaimed critique of the discipline of economics (Raworth, 2017 ).

Fourth, the messenger can be as important as the message. Oxfam works with and works with a range of influential people - from civil society leaders to experts, thought leaders, and celebrities - to help communicate its research findings and policy asks. It also enrols external voices to support is influencing efforts. For example, at the 2016 World Economic Forum, Oxfam delivered a letter signed by 300 of the world’s leading economists. It warned global leaders that tax havens cannot be economically justified as they undermine countries’ abilities to collect taxes, with poor countries proportionally the biggest losers. The letter helped open up space for Oxfam and partners’ influencing in several lower income countries and helped reinvigorate the call for more multilateral action on tax havens.

(c) Timing and adapting the presentation of evidence to changing contexts

Evidence is more likely to influence policymakers when presented to them during ‘windows of opportunity’, when they are motivated to pay attention to and solve a problem. Such windows may arise from critical junctures, such as regime change, to more subtle shifts, such as changes in public mood or media narratives. They may occur suddenly or unpredictably, requiring the capacity to detect and respond quickly. In these circumstances, there is rarely enough time to produce new research or work on novel solutions. Rather, Oxfam may repackage existing research to fit with the new policy framing and focus on getting evidence into the right hands at the right time. This approach resembles Kindgon’s ( 1984 ) ‘policy entrepreneurs’ and involves finding the right time to present solutions to a policymaker with a motive and opportunity to act (Cairney, 2018b ). Policymakers in the middle of a political change or crisis, and who are seeking advice, are also far likelier to pick up the phone to researchers they already know than to make new contacts or start reading unsolicited reports. Research advocates and policy influencers therefore need to invest in building links and relationships with decision makers in advance of such opportunities.

Most of Oxfam’s global campaigns start with a major piece of foundational research and campaign report which lays out basic analysis and policy recommendations which may then be followed by shorter briefings and/or media releases framed and timed to coincide with changing events and windows of opportunity. For instance, in the global Access to Medicines campaign, Oxfam’s policy briefings shifted from their initial focus on the practices of specific pharmaceutical companies, to a court case taken out by major companies against Mandela’s South African government’s drug policy, to WTO patent rules, to patent rules in Bilateral and Regional Free Trade Agreements, among others. Such reports and briefings are used to directly influence policy via advocacy and to guide and substantiate the content of Oxfam’s media, public campaigning and social media actions (Mayne, 2002 ).

The Robin Hood Tax campaign provides an effective example of the strategic use of a window of opportunity. In 1972, Nobel laureate economist James Tobin suggested introducing a small tax on all financial transactions between different currencies, to curb short-term speculation and raise money for good causes. The idea got nowhere until advocated by NGOs after the global financial crisis of 2008. Crushed by debt repayments, finance ministers sought new sources of revenue for their cash-strapped governments. The banks and currency traders who opposed the tax had suddenly become pariahs. A coalition of trade unions, church groups, and NGOs rebranded the Tobin Tax as the ‘Robin Hood Tax’ and waged public campaigns across Europe, backed up by rapid reaction research to rebut the claims invoked by opponents. By 2011 the European Commission had proposed a Europe-wide tax on financial transactions (although negotiations continue as of 2018, across only ten countries). Similarly, through good relationships with journalists, Oxfam was able to make use of the leaks of the Panama and Paradise papers. For example, it and allies used the release of the Panama papers to make tax avoidance a key issue on the agenda of the anti-Corruption Summit hosted by David Cameron in 2016. Another example is how an Oxfam-supported local NGO Fundación Jubileo took advantage of the election of Evo Morales, the approval of a new constitution, and the promotion of political participation and decentralisation (a window of opportunity shaped by previous civil society action), to influence the local government to pass a new law on social auditing in La Paz, Bolivia.

The type and presentation of research also needs to be tailored to the salience of a policy issue. Ideas may move from a fringe issue to public debate to a key policy issue. The type of research required to get something on the public agenda is different from research designed to influence specific pieces of legislation. Oxfam’s experience is that early entry into framing debates, including establishing normative principles while issues are still new and malleable, can have more influence than detailed research and influencing once an issue has moved to specifics and positions have hardened. For example, in the early stages of the discussion on the need for poor countries to adapt to climate change, a ‘back of an envelope’ 2007 calculation by Oxfam put the overall sum required at $50bn per year, a figure which was picked up and developed as the issue proceeded.

Such experiences suggest that the way in which evidence is co-produced, framed, timed and presented can be as important as its substance. Research quality matters, but can only have an impact if enough powerful actors are motivated to read it and have opportunities to act on the implications.

Combining evidence with additional influencing strategies

Oxfam’s experience shows that evidence is an important but rarely sufficient condition to achieve policy change. Maximising the influence of evidence on policy requires alliances of different actors using a combination of influencing strategies:

‘insider’ persuasion of policy makers by developing relations, providing evidence, lobby and dialogue; identifying, pioneering and presenting development or humanitarian solutions to problems; enrolment of expert or influential voices to support policy asks; convening and brokering between marginalised groups and target audiences.

‘outsider’ action, to create pressure on policy makers, including via public mobilisation, high profile media, working with allies.

taking advantage of windows of opportunity.

widening civic society space by strengthening civil society voice, supporting social movements or helping get marginalised voices or neglected issues on to the policy agenda.

local, national and international level influencing.

Staff, partners and allies adapt the mix, timing and sequencing of these influencing strategies to specific contexts and events. For example, public campaigns and protests targeting national governments may not be possible in contexts of restricted civic space so staff may focus more on the long-term work of building social movements and alternatives.

Oxfam also routinely considers and varies its own role according to the issue or context. On some global issues, where it is seeking to shift the terms of debate such as inequality, it retains a direct, bold and public voice. In many Global South contexts, it plays a supportive behind the scenes role due to its desire to support and not supplant local civil society voice or because of government sovereignty concerns (Shephard et al. 2018 ). The recent safeguarding crisis intensified internal reflection about whether and when to speak ‘as Oxfam’ and/or to work in coalition behind the scenes. It also re-emphasised the importance of (1) walking the talk i.e., ensuring that our internal institutional practices are aligned with our external influencing goals; (2) solid evidence to underpin influencing initiatives linked to people’s experiences of poverty and injustice and to counter challenge; and (3) ensuring that the framing of powerful public campaigning and media work, needed to hold powerful actors to account, focuses on their actions rather than stigmatising individuals and organisations, and allows for the possibility of improvement.

Embracing trial and error and wider reflection

Using evidence effectively for policy influencing requires trial and error. Many NGOs, including Oxfam, have developed creative ways to compensate for their limited research capacity and to maximise their limited resources. These include:

Good Narratives that turn evidence and research into messages that stick in the minds of decision makers and opinion formers. According to a senior UK Foreign Office official ‘We’re seeing more academics producing abstracts and executive summaries, but they are too often abstracts rather than elevator pitches. Senior officials may have only 30 seconds to get hooked (or not) on what you are trying to say.’

Agility and immediacy

NGOs are less tied down than academics driven by the timescales of academic funding and publication requirements. Civil society focus is often urgent, immediate, and in response to events. NGOs can move quickly and loudly, reaching as many people as possible with clear messages of change.

Incentives to engage

NGOs invest heavily in building relationships with decision makers. Relationships can greatly increase research impact, because policymakers often open up to new ideas when a crisis hits but remain most likely to contact people they know and trust. However, effective influencing may sometimes also require the use, or threat of, a ‘big stick’, as a last resort even though this may disrupt relationships in the short term (Braithwaite, 2004 ).

Learning from practice

Oxfam seeks to adapt its influencing positions, strategies and tactics in the light of reflection and experience. It aims for all major campaigns to conduct periodic ‘Action Reviews’ linked to the planning cycle, where stakeholders are brought together to monitor progress and adapt influencing positions, strategies and tactics in response to feedback and the changing context. It also encourages regular monitoring and conducts independent and randomised formal evaluations such as the ‘effectiveness reviews’ (Hutchings, 2014 ) and periodic organisational wide strategic reviews.

However, Oxfam is a big place, with no one size fits all approach about how to maximise influence of evidence on policy makers. Internally, debates include:

What mix of specialist and grass roots expertise should Oxfam use in its influencing efforts?

To what extent should Oxfam’s influencing seek to stay relevant to the media and policymakers by cycling rapidly between topics or maintaining a consistent long term focus on key themes?

To what extent should it focus research and influencing efforts on: (a) elucidating problems and bearing witness (b) changing the public terms of debate (c) putting neglected or marginalised issues on policy agendas and/or (d) identifying and promoting specific policy solutions?

What is the most effective mix, timing and sequencing of evidence and influencing tactics to maximise policy impact in a range of different contexts?

To what extent should Oxfam identify and advocate for generic policy solutions and process issues, or seek to support context specific solutions through local iteration and experimentation?

We have described what Oxfam regards as good practice, but it is not universally observed and there are still challenges and unanswered questions. Plenty of Oxfam activity fails to hit its mark because of poor power analysis, an unconvincing narrative, an inappropriate framing or format for the key audience or sub-optimal mix and sequencing of influencing strategies and tactics. Therefore, advocates of evidence-informed policy, including Oxfam, need to reflect continuously on the evidence of their own success and failure.

Although we have focused primarily on influencing strategies , an organisation’s success also depends on its actual and perceived trustworthiness and legitimacy . This is in turn linked to its perceived or actual legitimacy, authority, accountability, competence, integrity (values and practice), independence and quality of relationships, among other things (Oxfam internal market insights surveys; Lukes, 2005 ; Ezekiel, 2005 ; Mayne and Coe, 2008 ). The importance of trust, both generally, and for influencing work, was strongly reinforced by the 2018 sector wide safeguarding crisis, triggered by media articles about sexual misconduct by several of Oxfam’s humanitarian staff in post-earthquake Haiti in 2011. The ensuing media and public debate negatively affected perceptions of Oxfam, although the impact varied considerably between different geographies, issues and audiences. It also intensified existing internal reflection about, and efforts to, address gender injustice and power imbalances within Oxfam’s operations, and between Oxfam and partners, in particular in relation to the safety of ‘beneficiaries’. Addressing these issues, alongside the strengthening of safeguarding policy and practice, and improving Oxfam’s culture, ways of working and practices, are key aspects of Oxfam’s 10 Point Plan Footnote 2 which seeks to build and strengthen a ‘culture of zero tolerance’ towards harassment, abuse or exploitation within Oxfam and across the sector. Such measures build on Oxfam’s existing accountability and transparency measures such as regular public reporting, feedback and complaints mechanisms, diversity and inclusion measures, and efforts to improving internal practices (Oxfam, 2016 ). Routine learning about strategy is likely to be ineffective without such fundamental reflection on Oxfam’s overall role in the world.

Conclusions

The use of evidence for policy influencing has many ingredients: a robust evidence base, framing and persuasion, simple storytelling, building coalitions, learning the rules of the game in many different systems, the use of complementary influencing strategies, and a process of continuous reflection and change in light of experience and context.

Practical experiences, such as Oxfam’s, show that effective policy influencing requires a wide understanding of the role of research evidence. This message can be gleaned from a summary of the many steps from evidence to impact, as follows. Take a value and evidence based stance to identify the need for change in policy and policymaking. Identify the actors with the power to change policy, and the actors able to influence policymakers. Understand which strategies help produce most change, focusing on specific institutions and wider contextual trends. Identify people affected by the research and your target audiences, and work with them throughout relevant stages of research planning and production. Learn how to frame your evidence and provide it to your audience at the right time, using powerful visuals and well-known messengers. Test and adapt insider, outsider and other influencing strategies in light of experience, using trial and error across political systems and over time. Stay agile, engage with policymakers readily and continuously, respond quickly to events, test and learn from your strategies, and be prepared to trade-off accurate but ineffective versus simplified and effective messages. In other words, by showing the scale of this task, we show that evidence alone will not come close to making the difference.

The Politics of Evidence-Based Policymaking https://www.nature.com/collections/xhxktjgpjc/

https://www.oxfam.org/en/oxfams-commitment-stamping-out-sexual-harassment-and-abuse

Andrews L (2017) ‘How can we demonstrate the public value of evidence-based policy making when government ministers declare that the people ‘have had enough of experts’?’. Palgrave Commun 3:11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0013-4

Article   Google Scholar  

Bailey M, Mayne R, Smith M (2001) Fatal Side Effects: Patents under the microscope. Oxfam

Binh LQ, Nguyen Thi Thu N, Pham Quynh P, Pham Thanh T (2016) Benchmark Assessment of Civil Society Space in Vietnam. Hong Duc Publishing House, Vietnam

Google Scholar  

Baumgartner F, Jones B (2009) Agendas and Instability in American Politics, 1st and 2nd edn. Chicago University Press, Chicago

Baumgartner FR, Jones BD (2015) The Politics of Information: Problem Definition and the Course of Public Policy in America. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Baumgartner FR, Breunig C, Green-Pedersen C, Jones BD, Mortensen PB, Nuytemans M, Walgrave S (2009) Punctuated Equilibrium in Comparative Perspective. Am J Pol Sci 53(3):603–620

Boswell C, Smith K (2017) Rethinking policy ‘impact’: Four models of research-policy relations. Palgrave Commun 3:44. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0042-z

Braithwaite (2004) Methods of Power for Development: Weapons of the Weak, Weapons of the Strong, Michigan. J Int Law 26:297–330

Braithwaite J, Drahos P (2000) Global Business Regulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Cairney P (2016) The Politics of Evidence Based Policy Making. Palgrave Springer, London

Book   Google Scholar  

Cairney P, Jones M (2016) Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Approach: What Is the Empirical Impact of this Universal Theory? Policy Stud J 44(1):37–58

Cairney P, Kwiatkowski R (2017) How to communicate effectively with policymakers: combine insights from psychology and policy studies. Palgrave Commun 3:37. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0046-8

Cairney P, Weible C (2017) The New Policy Sciences. Policy Sci 50(4):619–27

Cairney P (2018a) The UK Government’s imaginative use of evidence. British Politics, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-017-0068-2

Cairney P (2018b) Three habits of successful policy entrepreneurs. Policy Polit 46(2):199–217

Cairney P, Oliver K, Wellstead A (2016) To Bridge the Divide between Evidence and Policy: Reduce Ambiguity as Much as Uncertainty. Public Adm Rev 76(3):399–402

Coe J, Smith J, Duckworth B, Tibbett S (2011) Access to Medicines Evaluation 2001-2011, Oxfam America Evaluation Report

Crompton T (2010) Common Cause: The Case for Working with our Values, Joint Agency Research Report, FOE, Oxfam, COIN, WWF, CPRE; WWF-UK

Davidson B (2017) Storytelling and evidence-based policy: Lessons from the grey literature. Palgrave Commun 3:17093. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.93

Ezekiel Z (2005) Rebuilding Trust in Canadian organisations: Governance and corporate social responsibility. The Conference Board of Canada, Deloitte, Canada

Fuentes-Nieves and Galasso (2014) Working for the Few. Political capture and economic inequality, Oxfam International, https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/working-few

Galasso N, Feroci G, Pfeifer K, Walsh M (2017) The rise of populism and its implicatinos for Development NGOs, Oxfam America, Research Backgrounder

Gaventa J (2006) Finding the spaces for Change: A Power. Anal, IDS Bull 37(6):23–33

Geyer R, Cairney P (eds.) (2015) Handbook on Complexity and Public Policy. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

Green D (2012) Creating killer facts and graphics, Oxfam GB. https://policypractice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/creating-killer-facts-and-graphics-253013

Green D, MacDonald A (2015) Power and Change: The Arms Trade Treaty, The Active Citizenship series, Oxfam International, http://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/oxfam/bitstream/10546/338471/1/cs-arms-tradetreaty-160115-en.pdf

Green D (2016) How Change Happens. Oxford University Press and Oxfam, Oxford, http://how-change-happens.com/

Green D (2017) Theories of Change for Promoting Empowerment and Accountability in Fragile and Conflict-Affected Settings. Oxfam, Action for Empowerment and Accountability, IDS. IDS Working Paper, Vol. 2017 No 499

Guijt I (2016) Innovation in Evaluation: Using SenseMaker to assess the inclusion of smallholder farmers in modern markets. In: Bell S, Aggleton P eds Evaluation in Health and Social Development: Interpretive and ethnographic perspectives. Routledge, UK

Hardoon D (2017) An Economy for the 99%. It’s time to build a human economy that benefits everyone, not just the privileged few, Oxfam Briefing Paper, Oxfam

Hastie R, Hoffler H (2015) Typhoon Haiyan, Community research into the relocation of internally displaced people in the Philippines, Oxfam Case Study, Oxfam International

Heikkila T, Cairney P (2017) A Comparison of Theories of the Policy Process. In: Weible C (ed.) Theories of the Policy Process 4th edn. Westview Press, Chicago

Herweg N, Zahariadis N, Zohlnhöfer R (2017) The Multiple Streams Framework: Foundations, Refinements, and Empirical Applications. In: Weible C, Sabatier P (eds) Theories of the Policy Process, 4th edn. Westview Press, Chicago

Hillier D, Wood B (2003) Shattered Lives: The case for tough international arms control, Campaign Report, Oxfam International

Hoffman B (2013) Behind the Brands: Food Justice and the ‘Big 10’ food and beverage companies, Oxfambriefing paper https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/behind-the-brands-food-justice-and-the-big-10-food-and-beverage-companies-270393

Hoy C, Mager F (2017) Cross country evidence about perceptions of inequality and support for redistribution. AEA RCT Registry

Hutchings C (2014) Balancing Accountability and Learning: A review of Oxfam GB’s global performance framework. J Dev Eff 6:4, Routledge

Jones MD, Holly LP, Jonathan JP, Nicole H, Amiel B, Holly LR, Nikolaos Z (2016) A River Runs Through It: A Multiple Streams Meta-Review. Policy Stud J 44(1):13–36

Jones M, Crow D (2017) How can we use the ‘science of stories’ to produce persuasive scientific stories? Palgrave Commun 3:53. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0047-7

Kenny C, Rose DC, Hobbs A, Tyler C, Blackstock J (2017) The Role of Research in the UK Parliament Volume One. Houses of Parliament, London, UK

Kingdon J (1984) Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies 1st and 2nd eds. Harper Collins, New York, NY, 1995

Kvintradze A (2016) Understanding Networks: The application of Social Network Analysis methodology in the South Caucasus context, MECIS case studies, Oxfam

Le Quang B, Nguyen Thi Thu N, Pham QP, Pham TT (undated) Benchmark Assessment of Civil Society Space in Vietnam. Hong Kong Publishing House

Lukes S (2005) Power: A Radical View. 2nd edn. Palgrave, London

Mayne R, Coe J (2008) The Right Ethos: Power and Change. NCVO, London

Mager F, Becca S, Guijt I (2018) How decent is decent work: using SenseMaker to understand workers’ experiences, Oxfam Research report

Maloney W, Jordan G, McLaughlin A (1994) Interest Groups and Public Policy: The Insider/Outsider Model Revisited. J Public Policy 14(1):17–38

Mayah E (2017) Inequality in Nigeria: Exploring the Drivers, Oxfam International

Kimmis J, Mayne R (2000) Tax Havens: Releasing the Hidden Billions for poverty eradication, Oxfam International, https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/taxhavens-releasing-the-hidden-billions-for-poverty-eradication-114611

Mayne R (2002) The Global Campaign on Patents and Access to Medicines; anOxfam perspective. In: Drahos P, Mayne R Eds Global Intellectual Property Rights: Knowledge, Access and Development. Palgrave Macmillan, UK, p 244–258. (2002)

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Mayne R, Kesmaecker-Wissing M, Mizniak J, Knight L (2018) Influencing Behaviours and Practices to Tackle Poverty and Injustice, Oxfam Discussion Paper, Oxfam

Nutley S, Walter I, Davies H (2007) Using evidence: how research can inform public services. The Policy Press, Bristol

Nutley S, Powell A, Davies H (2013) What counts as good evidence? Alliance for Useful Evidence, London

ODI (2009) Planning Tools: Problem Tree Analysis, Toolkits https://www.odi.org/publications/5258-problem-tree-analysis

Oliver K, Pearce W (2017) Three lessons from evidence-based medicine and policy. Palgrave Commun 3:43, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-017-0045-9

Oxfam (2013a) Oxfam Humankind Index: The new measure of Scotland’s Prosperity, second results, Oxfam GB. https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/oxfam-humankind-indexthe-new-measure-of-scotlands-prosperity-second-results-293743

Oxfam (2013b) The Journey to Sustainable Food: A three year update on the Behind the Brands campaign, Oxfam. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bpjourney-to-sustainable-food-btb-190416-en.pdf

Oxfam (2016) Oxfam Accountability Report 2015-16 https://accountablenow.org/accountability-in-practice/accountability-reports/oxfam-international/

Oxfam (undated) Tax at the Anti-Corruption Summit (ACS) – Oxfam’s priorities, Internal document

Raworth K (2012) A Safe and Just Space for Humanity: Can we live within the doughnut. Discussion Paper, Oxfam International. https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/asafe-and-just-space-for-humanity-can-we-live-within-the-doughnut-210490

Raworth K (2017) Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think like a 21st-Century Economist, Penguin

Rowland J (1997) Questioning Empowerment. Oxfam. https://policypractice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/questioning-empowerment-working-with-women-inhonduras-121185

Rowlands J (2016) Power in Practice: Bringing Understandings and Analysis of Power into Development Action in Oxfam. IDS Bull 47:No 5, (2016) http://bulletin.ids.ac.uk/idsbo/article/view/2796/ONLINE%20ARTICLE

Sahan E (2016) The Journey to Sustainable Food: A three year update on the Behind the Brands Campaign, Oxfam. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-journey-tosustainable-food-btb-190416-

Smith L (2016) Researching the Killer Fact that Highlighted Global Economic Inequality, Oxfam GB. https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/researching-the-killer-fact-thathighlighted-global-economic-inequality-620162

Shephard D, Meuer J, Ellersiek A, Rupietta C (2018) The Effectiveness of Oxfam’s Policy Influencing: Meta-Review using fsQCA, Oxfam Evaluation Report, https://policy28practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/influencing-policy-and-civic-space-a-meta-review-ofoxfams-policy-influence-cit-620462

Simon H (1976) Administrative Behavior, 3rd Edition. MacMillan, London

True JL, Jones BD, Baumgartner FR (2007) Punctuated Equilibrium Theory’. In: Sabatier P (ed.) Theories of the Policy Process 2nd Edition. Westview Press, Cambridge MA

VeneKlasen L, Miller V (2002) A new weave of power, people and politics; the action guide for advocacy and citizen participation. Stylus Publishing US or Practical Action Publishing, UK

Vlastuin J (2017) How we used behavioural insights for digital campaigning, Oxfam Views and Voices, Oxfam Influencing Blog, https://views-voices.oxfam.org.uk/author/jacco-vlastuin

Watson G (2016) GROW campaign in Latin America evaluation 20115-2016, Oxfam, internal document

Weible CM, Heikkila T, Sabatier PA (2012) Understanding and influencing the policy process. Policy Sci 45(1):1–21

Wilshaw R, Unger L, Chi DQ, Thuy PT (2013) Labour Rights in Unilever’s Supply Chain: from compliance to good practice. An Oxfam study of labour issues in Unilever’s Vietnam operations and supply chain, Oxfam. https://policypractice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/labour-rights-in-unilevers-supply-chain-from-complianceto-good-practice-an-oxf-267532

Wilshaw R, Chi DQ, Fowler P, Thuy PT (2016) Labour Rights in Vietnam: Unilever’s progress and systemic challenges, Oxfam Research Report, Oxfam. https://policypractice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/labour-rights-in-vietnam-unilevers-progress-and-systemicchallenges-614926

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Senior Researcher Influencing, Global Research Team, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK

Strategic Advisor, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK

Duncan Green

Head of Research, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK

Irene Guijt

Senior Researcher, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK

Martin Walsh

National Influencing Advisor, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK

Richard English

Professor of Politics and Public Policy, Division of History and Politics, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK94LA, Scotland

Paul Cairney

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Cairney .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

Five of the six authors are Oxfam staff. The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Mayne, R., Green, D., Guijt, I. et al. Using evidence to influence policy: Oxfam’s experience. Palgrave Commun 4 , 122 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0176-7

Download citation

Received : 29 March 2018

Accepted : 17 September 2018

Published : 09 October 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0176-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

How is the implementation of empirical research results documented in conflict-affected settings findings from a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature.

• Enrica Leresche
• Mazeda Hossain
• Neha S. Singh

Conflict and Health (2023)

Enhancing evidence-informed policymaking in medicine and healthcare: stakeholder involvement in the Commons Project for rare diseases in Japan

• Atsushi Kogetsu
• Moeko Isono
• Kazuto Kato

Research Involvement and Engagement (2023)

Research attitudes, practice and literacy among Kenyan palliative care healthcare professionals: an observational, cross-sectional online survey

• Cartmell KB

BMC Palliative Care (2022)

‘Getting our voices heard in research: a review of peer researcher’s roles and experiences on a qualitative study of adult safeguarding policy

• Lorna Montgomery
• Berni Kelly
• Lisamarie Wood

Research Involvement and Engagement (2022)

Integrating Systemic and Analytic Approaches to School Attendance Problems: Synergistic Frameworks for Research and Policy Directions

• Christopher A. Kearney

Child & Youth Care Forum (2021)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Problem-Solving in Business: CASE STUDIES

• ABOUT THIS LIBGUIDE
• PROBLEM-SOLVING DEFINED AND WHY IT IS IMPORTANT
• SKILLS AND QUALIFICATIONS NEEDED IN PROBLEM-SOLVING
• PROBLEM-SOLVING STEPS
• CASE STUDIES
• MORE HELPFUL RESOURCES
• << Previous: PROBLEM-SOLVING STEPS
• Next: MORE HELPFUL RESOURCES >>
• Last Updated: Mar 23, 2024 4:47 PM
• URL: https://libguides.nypl.org/problem_solving_in_business

7 Favorite Business Case Studies to Teach—and Why

Explore more.

• Case Teaching
• Course Materials

FEATURED CASE STUDIES

The Army Crew Team . Emily Michelle David of CEIBS

ATH Technologies . Devin Shanthikumar of Paul Merage School of Business

Fabritek 1992 . Rob Austin of Ivey Business School

Lincoln Electric Co . Karin Schnarr of Wilfrid Laurier University

Pal’s Sudden Service—Scaling an Organizational Model to Drive Growth . Gary Pisano of Harvard Business School

The United States Air Force: ‘Chaos’ in the 99th Reconnaissance Squadron . Francesca Gino of Harvard Business School

Warren E. Buffett, 2015 . Robert F. Bruner of Darden School of Business

To dig into what makes a compelling case study, we asked seven experienced educators who teach with—and many who write—business case studies: “What is your favorite case to teach and why?”

The resulting list of case study favorites ranges in topics from operations management and organizational structure to rebel leaders and whodunnit dramas.

1. The Army Crew Team

Emily Michelle David, Assistant Professor of Management, China Europe International Business School (CEIBS)

“I love teaching  The Army Crew Team  case because it beautifully demonstrates how a team can be so much less than the sum of its parts.

I deliver the case to executives in a nearby state-of-the-art rowing facility that features rowing machines, professional coaches, and shiny red eight-person shells.

After going through the case, they hear testimonies from former members of Chinese national crew teams before carrying their own boat to the river for a test race.

The rich learning environment helps to vividly underscore one of the case’s core messages: competition can be a double-edged sword if not properly managed.

Executives in Emily Michelle David’s organizational behavior class participate in rowing activities at a nearby facility as part of her case delivery.

Despite working for an elite headhunting firm, the executives in my most recent class were surprised to realize how much they’ve allowed their own team-building responsibilities to lapse. In the MBA pre-course, this case often leads to a rich discussion about common traps that newcomers fall into (for example, trying to do too much, too soon), which helps to poise them to both stand out in the MBA as well as prepare them for the lateral team building they will soon engage in.

Finally, I love that the post-script always gets a good laugh and serves as an early lesson that organizational behavior courses will seldom give you foolproof solutions for specific problems but will, instead, arm you with the ability to think through issues more critically.”

2. ATH Technologies

Devin Shanthikumar, Associate Professor of Accounting, Paul Merage School of Business

“As a professor at UC Irvine’s Paul Merage School of Business, and before that at Harvard Business School, I have probably taught over 100 cases. I would like to say that my favorite case is my own,   Compass Box Whisky Company . But as fun as that case is, one case beats it:  ATH Technologies  by Robert Simons and Jennifer Packard.

ATH presents a young entrepreneurial company that is bought by a much larger company. As part of the merger, ATH gets an ‘earn-out’ deal—common among high-tech industries. The company, and the class, must decide what to do to achieve the stretch earn-out goals.

ATH captures a scenario we all want to be in at some point in our careers—being part of a young, exciting, growing organization. And a scenario we all will likely face—having stretch goals that seem almost unreachable.

It forces us, as a class, to really struggle with what to do at each stage.

After we read and discuss the A case, we find out what happens next, and discuss the B case, then the C, then D, and even E. At every stage, we can:

see how our decisions play out,

figure out how to build on our successes, and

address our failures.

The case is exciting, the class discussion is dynamic and energetic, and in the end, we all go home with a memorable ‘ah-ha!’ moment.

I have taught many great cases over my career, but none are quite as fun, memorable, and effective as ATH .”

3. Fabritek 1992

Rob Austin, Professor of Information Systems, Ivey Business School

“This might seem like an odd choice, but my favorite case to teach is an old operations case called  Fabritek 1992 .

The latest version of Fabritek 1992 is dated 2009, but it is my understanding that this is a rewrite of a case that is older (probably much older). There is a Fabritek 1969 in the HBP catalog—same basic case, older dates, and numbers. That 1969 version lists no authors, so I suspect the case goes even further back; the 1969 version is, I’m guessing, a rewrite of an even older version.

There are many things I appreciate about the case. Here are a few:

It operates as a learning opportunity at many levels. At first it looks like a not-very-glamorous production job scheduling case. By the end of the case discussion, though, we’re into (operations) strategy and more. It starts out technical, then explodes into much broader relevance. As I tell participants when I’m teaching HBP's Teaching with Cases seminars —where I often use Fabritek as an example—when people first encounter this case, they almost always underestimate it.

It has great characters—especially Arthur Moreno, who looks like a troublemaker, but who, discussion reveals, might just be the smartest guy in the factory. Alums of the Harvard MBA program have told me that they remember Arthur Moreno many years later.

Almost every word in the case is important. It’s only four and a half pages of text and three pages of exhibits. This economy of words and sparsity of style have always seemed like poetry to me. I should note that this super concise, every-word-matters approach is not the ideal we usually aspire to when we write cases. Often, we include extra or superfluous information because part of our teaching objective is to provide practice in separating what matters from what doesn’t in a case. Fabritek takes a different approach, though, which fits it well.

It has a dramatic structure. It unfolds like a detective story, a sort of whodunnit. Something is wrong. There is a quality problem, and we’re not sure who or what is responsible. One person, Arthur Moreno, looks very guilty (probably too obviously guilty), but as we dig into the situation, there are many more possibilities. We spend in-class time analyzing the data (there’s a bit of math, so it covers that base, too) to determine which hypotheses are best supported by the data. And, realistically, the data doesn’t support any of the hypotheses perfectly, just some of them more than others. Also, there’s a plot twist at the end (I won’t reveal it, but here’s a hint: Arthur Moreno isn’t nearly the biggest problem in the final analysis). I have had students tell me the surprising realization at the end of the discussion gives them ‘goosebumps.’

Finally, through the unexpected plot twist, it imparts what I call a ‘wisdom lesson’ to young managers: not to be too sure of themselves and to regard the experiences of others, especially experts out on the factory floor, with great seriousness.”

4. Lincoln Electric Co.

Karin Schnarr, Assistant Professor of Policy, Wilfrid Laurier University

“As a strategy professor, my favorite case to teach is the classic 1975 Harvard case  Lincoln Electric Co.  by Norman Berg.

I use it to demonstrate to students the theory linkage between strategy and organizational structure, management processes, and leadership behavior.

This case may be an odd choice for a favorite. It occurs decades before my students were born. It is pages longer than we are told students are now willing to read. It is about manufacturing arc welding equipment in Cleveland, Ohio—a hard sell for a Canadian business classroom.

Yet, I have never come across a case that so perfectly illustrates what I want students to learn about how a company can be designed from an organizational perspective to successfully implement its strategy.

And in a time where so much focus continues to be on how to maximize shareholder value, it is refreshing to be able to discuss a publicly-traded company that is successfully pursuing a strategy that provides a fair value to shareholders while distributing value to employees through a large bonus pool, as well as value to customers by continually lowering prices.

However, to make the case resonate with today’s students, I work to make it relevant to the contemporary business environment. I link the case to multimedia clips about Lincoln Electric’s current manufacturing practices, processes, and leadership practices. My students can then see that a model that has been in place for generations is still viable and highly successful, even in our very different competitive situation.”

5. Pal’s Sudden Service—Scaling an Organizational Model to Drive Growth

Gary Pisano, Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School

“My favorite case to teach these days is  Pal’s Sudden Service—Scaling an Organizational Model to Drive Growth .

I love teaching this case for three reasons:

1. It demonstrates how a company in a super-tough, highly competitive business can do very well by focusing on creating unique operating capabilities. In theory, Pal’s should have no chance against behemoths like McDonalds or Wendy’s—but it thrives because it has built a unique operating system. It’s a great example of a strategic approach to operations in action.

2. The case shows how a strategic approach to human resource and talent development at all levels really matters. This company competes in an industry not known for engaging its front-line workers. The case shows how engaging these workers can really pay off.

3. Finally, Pal’s is really unusual in its approach to growth. Most companies set growth goals (usually arbitrary ones) and then try to figure out how to ‘backfill’ the human resource and talent management gaps. They trust you can always find someone to do the job. Pal’s tackles the growth problem completely the other way around. They rigorously select and train their future managers. Only when they have a manager ready to take on their own store do they open a new one. They pace their growth off their capacity to develop talent. I find this really fascinating and so do the students I teach this case to.”

6. The United States Air Force: ‘Chaos’ in the 99th Reconnaissance Squadron

Francesca Gino, Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School

“My favorite case to teach is  The United States Air Force: ‘Chaos’ in the 99th Reconnaissance Squadron .

The case surprises students because it is about a leader, known in the unit by the nickname Chaos , who inspired his squadron to be innovative and to change in a culture that is all about not rocking the boat, and where there is a deep sense that rules should simply be followed.

For years, I studied ‘rebels,’ people who do not accept the status quo; rather, they approach work with curiosity and produce positive change in their organizations. Chaos is a rebel leader who got the level of cultural change right. Many of the leaders I’ve met over the years complain about the ‘corporate culture,’ or at least point to clear weaknesses of it; but then they throw their hands up in the air and forget about changing what they can.

Chaos is different—he didn’t go after the ‘Air Force’ culture. That would be like boiling the ocean.

Instead, he focused on his unit of control and command: The 99th squadron. He focused on enabling that group to do what it needed to do within the confines of the bigger Air Force culture. In the process, he inspired everyone on his team to be the best they can be at work.

The case leaves the classroom buzzing and inspired to take action.”

7. Warren E. Buffett, 2015

Robert F. Bruner, Professor of Business Administration, Darden School of Business

“I love teaching   Warren E. Buffett, 2015  because it energizes, exercises, and surprises students.

Buffett looms large in the business firmament and therefore attracts anyone who is eager to learn his secrets for successful investing. This generates the kind of energy that helps to break the ice among students and instructors early in a course and to lay the groundwork for good case discussion practices.

Studying Buffett’s approach to investing helps to introduce and exercise important themes that will resonate throughout a course. The case challenges students to define for themselves what it means to create value. The case discussion can easily be tailored for novices or for more advanced students.

Either way, this is not hero worship: The case affords a critical examination of the financial performance of Buffett’s firm, Berkshire Hathaway, and reveals both triumphs and stumbles. Most importantly, students can critique the purported benefits of Buffett’s conglomeration strategy and the sustainability of his investment record as the size of the firm grows very large.

By the end of the class session, students seem surprised with what they have discovered. They buzz over the paradoxes in Buffett’s philosophy and performance record. And they come away with sober respect for Buffett’s acumen and for the challenges of creating value for investors.

Surely, such sobriety is a meta-message for any mastery of finance.”

More Educator Favorites

Emily Michelle David is an assistant professor of management at China Europe International Business School (CEIBS). Her current research focuses on discovering how to make workplaces more welcoming for people of all backgrounds and personality profiles to maximize performance and avoid employee burnout. David’s work has been published in a number of scholarly journals, and she has worked as an in-house researcher at both NASA and the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.

Devin Shanthikumar  is an associate professor and the accounting area coordinator at UCI Paul Merage School of Business. She teaches undergraduate, MBA, and executive-level courses in managerial accounting. Shanthikumar previously served on the faculty at Harvard Business School, where she taught both financial accounting and managerial accounting for MBAs, and wrote cases that are used in accounting courses across the country.

Robert D. Austin is a professor of information systems at Ivey Business School and an affiliated faculty member at Harvard Medical School. He has published widely, authoring nine books, more than 50 cases and notes, three Harvard online products, and two popular massive open online courses (MOOCs) running on the Coursera platform.

Karin Schnarr is an assistant professor of policy and the director of the Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA) program at the Lazaridis School of Business & Economics at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada where she teaches strategic management at the undergraduate, graduate, and executive levels. Schnarr has published several award-winning and best-selling cases and regularly presents at international conferences on case writing and scholarship.

Gary P. Pisano is the Harry E. Figgie, Jr. Professor of Business Administration and senior associate dean of faculty development at Harvard Business School, where he has been on the faculty since 1988. Pisano is an expert in the fields of technology and operations strategy, the management of innovation, and competitive strategy. His research and consulting experience span a range of industries including aerospace, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, specialty chemicals, health care, nutrition, computers, software, telecommunications, and semiconductors.

Francesca Gino studies how people can have more productive, creative, and fulfilling lives. She is a professor at Harvard Business School and the author, most recently, of  Rebel Talent: Why It Pays to Break the Rules at Work and in Life . Gino regularly gives keynote speeches, delivers corporate training programs, and serves in advisory roles for firms and not-for-profit organizations across the globe.

Robert F. Bruner is a university professor at the University of Virginia, distinguished professor of business administration, and dean emeritus of the Darden School of Business. He has also held visiting appointments at Harvard and Columbia universities in the United States, at INSEAD in France, and at IESE in Spain. He is the author, co-author, or editor of more than 20 books on finance, management, and teaching. Currently, he teaches and writes in finance and management.

Related Articles

We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience, including personalizing content. Learn More . By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies and revised Privacy Policy .

What Is a Case Study and Why You Should Use Them

Case studies can provide more insights into your business while helping you conduct further research with robust qualitative data analysis to learn more.

If you're in charge of running a company, then you're likely always looking for new ways to run your business more efficiently and increase your customer base while streamlining as many processes as possible.

Unfortunately, it can sometimes be difficult to determine how to go about implementing the proper program in order to be successful. This is why many business owners opt to conduct a case study, which can help significantly. Whether you've been struggling with brand consistency or some other problem, the right case study can identify why your problem exists as well as provide a way to rectify it.

A case study is a great tool that many businesses aren't even aware exists, and there are marketing experts like Mailchimp who can provide you with step-by-step assistance with implementing a plan with a case study. Many companies discover that not only do they need to start a blog in order to improve business, but they also need to create specific and relevant blog titles.

If your company already has a blog, then optimizing your blog posts may be helpful. Regardless of the obstacles that are preventing you from achieving all your professional goals, a case study can work wonders in helping you reverse this issue.

What is a case study?

A case study is a comprehensive report of the results of theory testing or examining emerging themes of a business in real life context. Case studies are also often used in the healthcare industry, conducting health services research with primary research interest around routinely collected healthcare data.

However, for businesses, the purpose of a case study is to help small business owners or company leaders identify the issues and conduct further research into what may be preventing success through information collection, client or customer interviews, and in-depth data analysis.

Knowing the case study definition is crucial for any business owner. By identifying the issues that are hindering a company from achieving all its goals, it's easier to make the necessary corrections to promote success through influenced data collection.

Why are case studies important?

Now that we've answered the questions, "what is a case study?" Why are case studies important? Some of the top reasons why case studies are important include:

• Understand complex issues: Even after you conduct a significant amount of market research , you might have a difficult time understanding exactly what it means. While you might have the basics down, conducting a case study can help you see how that information is applied. Then, when you see how the information can make a difference in business decisions, it could make it easier to understand complex issues.
• Collect data: A case study can also help with data tracking . A case study is a data collection method that can help you describe the information that you have available to you. Then, you can present that information in a way the reader can understand.
• Conduct evaluations: As you learn more about how to write a case study, remember that you can also use a case study to conduct evaluations of a specific situation. A case study is a great way to learn more about complex situations, and you can evaluate how various people responded in that situation. By conducting a case study evaluation, you can learn more about what has worked well, what has not, and what you might want to change in the future.
• Identify potential solutions: A case study can also help you identify solutions to potential problems. If you have an issue in your business that you are trying to solve, you may be able to take a look at a case study where someone has dealt with a similar situation in the past. For example, you may uncover data bias in a specific solution that you would like to address when you tackle the issue on your own. If you need help solving a difficult problem, a case study may be able to help you.

Remember that you can also use case studies to target your audience . If you want to show your audience that you have a significant level of expertise in a field, you may want to publish some case studies that you have handled in the past. Then, when your audience sees that you have had success in a specific area, they may be more likely to provide you with their business. In essence, case studies can be looked at as the original method of social proof, showcasing exactly how you can help someone solve their problems.

What are the benefits of writing a business case study?

Although writing a case study can seem like a tedious task, there are many benefits to conducting one through an in depth qualitative research process.

• Industry understanding: First of all, a case study can give you an in-depth understanding of your industry through a particular conceptual framework and help you identify hidden problems that are preventing you from transcending into the business world.
• Develop theories: If you decide to write a business case study, it provides you with an opportunity to develop new theories. You might have a theory about how to solve a specific problem, but you need to write a business case study to see exactly how that theory has unfolded in the past. Then, you can figure out if you want to apply your theory to a similar issue in the future.
• Evaluate interventions: When you write a business case study that focuses on a specific situation you have been through in the past, you can uncover whether that intervention was truly helpful. This can make it easier to figure out whether you want to use the same intervention in a similar situation in the future.
• Identify best practices: If you want to stay on top of the best practices in your field, conducting case studies can help by allowing you to identify patterns and trends and develop a new list of best practices that you can follow in the future.
• Versatility: Writing a case study also provides you with more versatility. If you want to expand your business applications, you need to figure out how you respond to various problems. When you run a business case study, you open the door to new opportunities, new applications, and new techniques that could help you make a difference in your business down the road.
• Solve problems: Writing a great case study can dramatically improve your chances of reversing your problem and improving your business.
• These are just a few of the biggest benefits you might experience if you decide to publish your case studies. They can be an effective tool for learning, showcasing your talents, and teaching some of your other employees. If you want to grow your audience , you may want to consider publishing some case studies.

What are the limitations of case studies?

Case studies can be a wonderful tool for any business of any size to use to gain an in-depth understanding of their clients, products, customers, or services, but there are limitations.

One limitation of case studies is the fact that, unless there are other recently published examples, there is nothing to compare them to since, most of the time, you are conducting a single, not multiple, case studies.

Another limitation is the fact that most case studies can lack scientific evidence.

Types of case studies

There are specific types of case studies to choose from, and each specific type will yield different results. Some case study types even overlap, which is sometimes more favorable, as they provide even more pertinent data.

Here are overviews of the different types of case studies, each with its own theoretical framework, so you can determine which type would be most effective for helping you meet your goals.

Explanatory case studies

Explanatory case studies are pretty straightforward, as they're not difficult to interpret. This type of case study is best if there aren't many variables involved because explanatory case studies can easily answer questions like "how" and "why" through theory development.

Exploratory case studies

An exploratory case study does exactly what its name implies: it goes into specific detail about the topic at hand in a natural, real-life context with qualitative research.

The benefits of exploratory case studies are limitless, with the main one being that it offers a great deal of flexibility. Having flexibility when writing a case study is important because you can't always predict what obstacles might arise during the qualitative research process.

Collective case studies

Collective case studies require you to study many different individuals in order to obtain usable data.

Case studies that involve an investigation of people will involve many different variables, all of which can't be predicted. Despite this fact, there are many benefits of collective case studies, including the fact that it allows an ongoing analysis of the data collected.

Intrinsic case studies

This type of study differs from the others as it focuses on the inquiry of one specific instance among many possibilities.

Many people prefer these types of case studies because it allows them to learn about the particular instance that they wish to investigate further.

Instrumental case studies

An instrumental case study is similar to an intrinsic one, as it focuses on a particular instance, whether it's a person, organization, or something different.

One thing that differentiates instrumental case studies from intrinsic ones is the fact that instrumental case studies aren't chosen merely because a person is interested in learning about a specific instance.

Tips for writing a case study

If you have decided to write case studies for your company, then you may be unsure of where to start or which type to conduct.

However, it doesn't have to be difficult or confusing to begin conducting a case study that will help you identify ways to improve your business.

Here are some helpful tips for writing your case studies:

1. Your case study must be written in the proper format

When writing a case study, the format that you should be similar to this:

Administrative summary

The executive summary is an overview of what your report will contain, written in a concise manner while providing real-life context.

Despite the fact that the executive summary should appear at the beginning of your case studies, it shouldn't be written until you've completed the entire report because if you write it before you finish the report, this summary may not be completely accurate.

Key problem statement

In this section of your case study, you will briefly describe the problem that you hope to solve by conducting the study. You will have the opportunity to elaborate on the problem that you're focusing on as you get into the breadth of the report.

Problem exploration

This part of the case study isn't as brief as the other two, and it goes into more detail about the problem at hand. Your problem exploration must include why the identified problem needs to be solved as well as the urgency of solving it.

Additionally, it must include justification for conducting the problem-solving, as the benefits must outweigh the efforts and costs.

Proposed resolution

This case study section will also be lengthier than the first two. It must include how you propose going about rectifying the problem. The "recommended solution" section must also include potential obstacles that you might experience, as well as how these will be managed.

Furthermore, you will need to list alternative solutions and explain the reason the chosen solution is best. Charts can enhance your report and make it easier to read, and provide as much proof to substantiate your claim as possible.

Overview of monetary consideration

An overview of monetary consideration is essential for all case studies, as it will be used to convince all involved parties why your project should be funded. You must successfully convince them that the cost is worth the investment it will require. It's important that you stress the necessity for this particular case study and explain the expected outcome.

Execution timeline

In the execution times of case studies, you explain how long you predict it will take to implement your study. The shorter the time it will take to implement your plan, the more apt it is to be approved. However, be sure to provide a reasonable timeline, taking into consideration any additional time that might be needed due to obstacles.

Always include a conclusion in your case study. This is where you will briefly wrap up your entire proposal, stressing the benefits of completing the data collection and data analysis in order to rectify your problem.

2. Make it clear and comprehensive

You want to write your case studies with as much clarity as possible so that every aspect of the report is understood. Be sure to double-check your grammar, spelling, punctuation, and more, as you don't want to submit a poorly-written document.

Not only would a poorly-written case study fail to prove that what you are trying to achieve is important, but it would also increase the chances that your report will be tossed aside and not taken seriously.

3. Don't rush through the process

Writing the perfect case study takes time and patience. Rushing could result in your forgetting to include information that is crucial to your entire study. Don't waste your time creating a study that simply isn't ready. Take the necessary time to perform all the research necessary to write the best case study possible.

Depending on the case study, conducting case study research could mean using qualitative methods, quantitative methods, or both. Qualitative research questions focus on non-numerical data, such as how people feel, their beliefs, their experiences, and so on.

Meanwhile, quantitative research questions focus on numerical or statistical data collection to explain causal links or get an in-depth picture.

It is also important to collect insightful and constructive feedback. This will help you better understand the outcome as well as any changes you need to make to future case studies. Consider using formal and informal ways to collect feedback to ensure that you get a range of opinions and perspectives.

4. Be confident in your theory development

While writing your case study or conducting your formal experimental investigation, you should have confidence in yourself and what you're proposing in your report. If you took the time to gather all the pertinent data collected to complete the report, don't second-guess yourself or doubt your abilities. If you believe your report will be amazing, then it likely will be.

5. Case studies and all qualitative research are long

It's expected that multiple case studies are going to be incredibly boring, and there is no way around this. However, it doesn't mean you can choose your language carefully in order to keep your audience as engaged as possible.

If your audience loses interest in your case study at the beginning, for whatever reason, then this increases the likelihood that your case study will not be funded.

Case study examples

If you want to learn more about how to write a case study, it might be beneficial to take a look at a few case study examples. Below are a few interesting case study examples you may want to take a closer look at.

• Phineas Gage by John Martin Marlow : One of the most famous case studies comes from the medical field, and it is about the story of Phineas Gage, a man who had a railroad spike driven through his head in 1848. As he was working on a railroad, an explosive charge went off prematurely, sending a railroad rod through his head. Even though he survived this incident, he lost his left eye. However, Phineas Gage was studied extensively over the years because his experiences had a significant, lasting impact on his personality. This served as a case study because his injury showed different parts of the brain have different functions.
• Kitty Genovese and the bystander effect : This is a tragic case study that discusses the murder of Kitty Genovese, a woman attacked and murdered in Queens, New York City. Shockingly, while numerous neighbors watched the scene, nobody called for help because they assumed someone else would. This case study helped to define the bystander effect, which is when a person fails to intervene during an emergency because other people are around.
• Henry Molaison and the study of memory : Henry Molaison lost his memory and suffered from debilitating amnesia. He suffered from childhood epilepsy, and medical professionals attempted to remove the part of his brain that was causing his seizures. He had a portion of his brain removed, but it completely took away his ability to hold memories. Even though he went on to live until the age of 82, he was always forced to live in the present moment, as he was completely unable to form new memories.

Case study FAQs

When should you do a case study.

There are several scenarios when conducting a case study can be beneficial. Case studies are often used when there's a "why" or "how" question that needs to be answered. Case studies are also beneficial when trying to understand a complex phenomenon, there's limited research on a topic, or when you're looking for practical solutions to a problem.

How can case study results be used to make business decisions?

You can use the results from a case study to make future business decisions if you find yourself in a similar situation. As you assess the results of a case study, you can identify best practices, evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention, generate new and creative ideas, or get a better understanding of customer needs.

How are case studies different from other research methodologies?

When compared to other research methodologies, such as experimental or qualitative research methodology, a case study does not require a representative sample. For example, if you are performing quantitative research, you have a lot of subjects that expand your sample size. If you are performing experimental research, you may have a random sample in front of you. A case study is usually designed to deliberately focus on unusual situations, which allows it to shed new light on a specific business research problem.

Writing multiple case studies for your business

If you're feeling overwhelmed by the idea of writing a case study and it seems completely foreign, then you aren't alone. Writing a case study for a business is a very big deal, but fortunately, there is help available because an example of a case study doesn't always help.

Mailchimp, a well-known marketing company that provides comprehensive marketing support for all sorts of businesses, can assist you with your case study, or you can review one of their own recently published examples.

Mailchimp can assist you with developing the most effective content strategy to increase your chances of being as successful as possible. Mailchimp's content studio is a great tool that can help your business immensely.

Business Policy and Strategic Management

Business policy and strategic management are key concepts in business studies and entrepreneurship. They refer to the processes, frameworks, and methodologies that an organization uses to ensure they meet its goals and objectives, and they can help the business to become more efficient and competitive in its marketplace. Here’s a bit more about each:

• Business Policy : This refers to the set of rules and guidelines that an organization follows to make consistent and efficient decisions. The business policy helps to create a framework within which all employees can understand their roles and responsibilities. These policies can cover everything from human resources and finance to operations and marketing. Business policies can help improve the decision-making process, increase transparency, and ensure that all actions align with the organization’s goals. Business Policy: Meaning, Types, and Examples
• Strategic Management : This broader concept encompasses an organization’s overall strategy. Strategic management involves setting objectives, analyzing the competitive environment, analyzing the internal organization, evaluating strategies, and ensuring that the strategies are rolled out across the organization. Strategic management is typically divided into five stages: goal-setting, analysis, strategy formation, implementation, and monitoring. Everything you need to know about “strategic management”

Both business policy and strategic management play critical roles in the success of an organization. Policies ensure consistency and fairness, while strategic management ensures that the organization is moving in the right direction and that all actions and policies support the organization’s overarching goals.

Relationship between business policy and strategic management

Business policy and strategic management are inherently intertwined concepts, each serving to guide and inform the other. The relationship between these two aspects of business can be thought of as both sequential and cyclical.

• Sequential Relationship : At the highest level, strategic management usually comes first. Management begins by setting strategic goals and plans for the organization, often in response to external market conditions and internal capabilities. Once the strategic goals have been established, business policies are developed to help implement these strategies. Policies provide guidelines and rules that govern the behavior of individuals and units within the organization, helping to align daily operations and decisions with the strategic objectives.
• Cyclical Relationship : Over time, business policies and strategic management feed into each other, creating a continuous cycle of improvement and adaptation. As business policies are implemented, their effectiveness in achieving strategic goals is monitored and evaluated. This feedback can then inform strategic management, leading to adjustments in strategic goals and new or revised policies.

In essence, strategic management gives the organization its direction and purpose, while business policies provide the concrete steps needed to get there. Strategic management defines ‘what’ the organization aims to achieve, and business policy determines ‘how’ it will do so.

However, this is not a one-way relationship. Business policies, once in place, can also influence strategic management. The lessons learned from implementing policies, their successes and failures, can influence the future strategic direction of an organization.

For instance, if a certain policy led to significant efficiency gains in a particular department, strategic management might choose to focus more resources on this area and adjust their strategy accordingly. Conversely, if a policy doesn’t produce the desired results or leads to unforeseen issues, strategic management might need to reassess its goals or strategies to reach them. This constant feedback loop ensures the organization remains adaptable and responsive to both internal and external changes.

Example of business policy in strategic management

Suppose a technology company, TechCo, has set a strategic goal to become the market leader in its sector within five years. As part of their strategic management process, they identify that innovation and customer satisfaction are key areas they need to excel in to achieve this goal.

Now comes the part where business policies come into play:

• Innovation : To foster innovation, TechCo implements a policy allowing employees to spend 20% of their work time on personal projects related to the company’s interests. Similar policies at companies like Google inspire this. The idea behind this policy is that giving employees the freedom to explore new ideas will foster creativity and potentially lead to the development of new products or services.
• Customer Satisfaction : To increase customer satisfaction, TechCo implements a policy to address customer complaints within 24 hours. Additionally, they introduce a policy to conduct regular customer satisfaction surveys and incorporate customer feedback into product development.

These business policies are not standalone decisions but are aligned with the strategic goal of becoming a market leader. They provide a structured way for the company to work towards its strategic objectives.

Over time, TechCo will evaluate the effectiveness of these policies. If the innovation policy results in new product ideas and the customer satisfaction policy leads to higher customer retention rates, the company will know it’s on the right track. If not, it might be time to rethink the strategies or the policies designed to implement them.

This example illustrates how strategic management defines what a company wants to achieve, and business policy outlines how it plans to achieve it. The policies provide a roadmap for employees and teams, guiding their actions and decisions toward the strategic goals.

Case study of successful business policy in strategic management

A well-known example of a successful business policy in strategic management is the “Think Different” policy initiated by Apple Inc. under Steve Jobs.

In the late 1990s, Apple was struggling. They had a slew of products but lacked direction and focus, and they were losing market share to competitors. When Steve Jobs returned to Apple as CEO in 1997, he implemented a business policy that would forever change the company’s trajectory.

Strategic Goal:  Jobs’ strategy was to reestablish Apple as an innovative company capable of disrupting markets and offering consumers intuitive, design-led technology products.

Business Policy:  Jobs implemented a business policy of simplification and focus. He drastically reduced the number of Apple’s products from about 350 to just 10 . This policy was a departure from the then-common practice of offering a wide range of products to cater to every possible customer segment.

Jobs believed that by focusing on a select few products, Apple could dedicate more resources to ensuring that those products were innovative, well-designed, and user-friendly. This policy is applied across the entire organization, from product design to marketing.

Result:  The policy was tremendously successful. The iMac, released in 1998, was the first product of this new policy. Its unique design and user-friendly interface were a hit with consumers, and it marked the beginning of a series of successful products, including the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. These successes turned Apple into one of the most valuable companies in the world and a leader in multiple technology markets.

This case study shows how business policy can drive strategic goals. Steve Jobs’ decision to simplify and focus Apple’s product line was a bold policy decision that directly supported his strategic goal of reestablishing Apple as an innovative, design-led company. Through a clear and decisive policy, Apple could align all aspects of the organization behind this strategy and execute it successfully.

Related Posts

LinkedIn marketing strategy for small business

Business Performance Analysis

Demand Based Pricing: Meaning | Examples | Types

B2B2C: Meaning | Examples | Business Model | Marketing

Inventory Management Techniques

How do you design the strategy of your PowerPoint?

The Art of Persuasion: Techniques for Influencing Buying Decisions

Organizational Culture: Defining | Improving | Examples

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• BMC Med Res Methodol

The case study approach

Sarah crowe.

1 Division of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Kathrin Cresswell

2 Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Ann Robertson

3 School of Health in Social Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Anthony Avery

Aziz sheikh.

The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.

Introduction

The case study approach is particularly useful to employ when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context. Our aim in writing this piece is to provide insights into when to consider employing this approach and an overview of key methodological considerations in relation to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation and reporting of case studies.

The illustrative 'grand round', 'case report' and 'case series' have a long tradition in clinical practice and research. Presenting detailed critiques, typically of one or more patients, aims to provide insights into aspects of the clinical case and, in doing so, illustrate broader lessons that may be learnt. In research, the conceptually-related case study approach can be used, for example, to describe in detail a patient's episode of care, explore professional attitudes to and experiences of a new policy initiative or service development or more generally to 'investigate contemporary phenomena within its real-life context' [ 1 ]. Based on our experiences of conducting a range of case studies, we reflect on when to consider using this approach, discuss the key steps involved and illustrate, with examples, some of the practical challenges of attaining an in-depth understanding of a 'case' as an integrated whole. In keeping with previously published work, we acknowledge the importance of theory to underpin the design, selection, conduct and interpretation of case studies[ 2 ]. In so doing, we make passing reference to the different epistemological approaches used in case study research by key theoreticians and methodologists in this field of enquiry.

This paper is structured around the following main questions: What is a case study? What are case studies used for? How are case studies conducted? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided? We draw in particular on four of our own recently published examples of case studies (see Tables ​ Tables1, 1 , ​ ,2, 2 , ​ ,3 3 and ​ and4) 4 ) and those of others to illustrate our discussion[ 3 - 7 ].

Example of a case study investigating the reasons for differences in recruitment rates of minority ethnic people in asthma research[ 3 ]

Example of a case study investigating the process of planning and implementing a service in Primary Care Organisations[ 4 ]

Example of a case study investigating the introduction of the electronic health records[ 5 ]

Example of a case study investigating the formal and informal ways students learn about patient safety[ 6 ]

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that is used to generate an in-depth, multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context. It is an established research design that is used extensively in a wide variety of disciplines, particularly in the social sciences. A case study can be defined in a variety of ways (Table ​ (Table5), 5 ), the central tenet being the need to explore an event or phenomenon in depth and in its natural context. It is for this reason sometimes referred to as a "naturalistic" design; this is in contrast to an "experimental" design (such as a randomised controlled trial) in which the investigator seeks to exert control over and manipulate the variable(s) of interest.

Definitions of a case study

Stake's work has been particularly influential in defining the case study approach to scientific enquiry. He has helpfully characterised three main types of case study: intrinsic , instrumental and collective [ 8 ]. An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon, which distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue.

These are however not necessarily mutually exclusive categories. In the first of our examples (Table ​ (Table1), 1 ), we undertook an intrinsic case study to investigate the issue of recruitment of minority ethnic people into the specific context of asthma research studies, but it developed into a instrumental case study through seeking to understand the issue of recruitment of these marginalised populations more generally, generating a number of the findings that are potentially transferable to other disease contexts[ 3 ]. In contrast, the other three examples (see Tables ​ Tables2, 2 , ​ ,3 3 and ​ and4) 4 ) employed collective case study designs to study the introduction of workforce reconfiguration in primary care, the implementation of electronic health records into hospitals, and to understand the ways in which healthcare students learn about patient safety considerations[ 4 - 6 ]. Although our study focusing on the introduction of General Practitioners with Specialist Interests (Table ​ (Table2) 2 ) was explicitly collective in design (four contrasting primary care organisations were studied), is was also instrumental in that this particular professional group was studied as an exemplar of the more general phenomenon of workforce redesign[ 4 ].

What are case studies used for?

According to Yin, case studies can be used to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur[ 1 ]. These can, for example, help to understand and explain causal links and pathways resulting from a new policy initiative or service development (see Tables ​ Tables2 2 and ​ and3, 3 , for example)[ 1 ]. In contrast to experimental designs, which seek to test a specific hypothesis through deliberately manipulating the environment (like, for example, in a randomised controlled trial giving a new drug to randomly selected individuals and then comparing outcomes with controls),[ 9 ] the case study approach lends itself well to capturing information on more explanatory ' how ', 'what' and ' why ' questions, such as ' how is the intervention being implemented and received on the ground?'. The case study approach can offer additional insights into what gaps exist in its delivery or why one implementation strategy might be chosen over another. This in turn can help develop or refine theory, as shown in our study of the teaching of patient safety in undergraduate curricula (Table ​ (Table4 4 )[ 6 , 10 ]. Key questions to consider when selecting the most appropriate study design are whether it is desirable or indeed possible to undertake a formal experimental investigation in which individuals and/or organisations are allocated to an intervention or control arm? Or whether the wish is to obtain a more naturalistic understanding of an issue? The former is ideally studied using a controlled experimental design, whereas the latter is more appropriately studied using a case study design.

Case studies may be approached in different ways depending on the epistemological standpoint of the researcher, that is, whether they take a critical (questioning one's own and others' assumptions), interpretivist (trying to understand individual and shared social meanings) or positivist approach (orientating towards the criteria of natural sciences, such as focusing on generalisability considerations) (Table ​ (Table6). 6 ). Whilst such a schema can be conceptually helpful, it may be appropriate to draw on more than one approach in any case study, particularly in the context of conducting health services research. Doolin has, for example, noted that in the context of undertaking interpretative case studies, researchers can usefully draw on a critical, reflective perspective which seeks to take into account the wider social and political environment that has shaped the case[ 11 ].

Example of epistemological approaches that may be used in case study research

How are case studies conducted?

Here, we focus on the main stages of research activity when planning and undertaking a case study; the crucial stages are: defining the case; selecting the case(s); collecting and analysing the data; interpreting data; and reporting the findings.

Defining the case

Carefully formulated research question(s), informed by the existing literature and a prior appreciation of the theoretical issues and setting(s), are all important in appropriately and succinctly defining the case[ 8 , 12 ]. Crucially, each case should have a pre-defined boundary which clarifies the nature and time period covered by the case study (i.e. its scope, beginning and end), the relevant social group, organisation or geographical area of interest to the investigator, the types of evidence to be collected, and the priorities for data collection and analysis (see Table ​ Table7 7 )[ 1 ]. A theory driven approach to defining the case may help generate knowledge that is potentially transferable to a range of clinical contexts and behaviours; using theory is also likely to result in a more informed appreciation of, for example, how and why interventions have succeeded or failed[ 13 ].

Example of a checklist for rating a case study proposal[ 8 ]

For example, in our evaluation of the introduction of electronic health records in English hospitals (Table ​ (Table3), 3 ), we defined our cases as the NHS Trusts that were receiving the new technology[ 5 ]. Our focus was on how the technology was being implemented. However, if the primary research interest had been on the social and organisational dimensions of implementation, we might have defined our case differently as a grouping of healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors and/or nurses). The precise beginning and end of the case may however prove difficult to define. Pursuing this same example, when does the process of implementation and adoption of an electronic health record system really begin or end? Such judgements will inevitably be influenced by a range of factors, including the research question, theory of interest, the scope and richness of the gathered data and the resources available to the research team.

Selecting the case(s)

The decision on how to select the case(s) to study is a very important one that merits some reflection. In an intrinsic case study, the case is selected on its own merits[ 8 ]. The case is selected not because it is representative of other cases, but because of its uniqueness, which is of genuine interest to the researchers. This was, for example, the case in our study of the recruitment of minority ethnic participants into asthma research (Table ​ (Table1) 1 ) as our earlier work had demonstrated the marginalisation of minority ethnic people with asthma, despite evidence of disproportionate asthma morbidity[ 14 , 15 ]. In another example of an intrinsic case study, Hellstrom et al.[ 16 ] studied an elderly married couple living with dementia to explore how dementia had impacted on their understanding of home, their everyday life and their relationships.

For an instrumental case study, selecting a "typical" case can work well[ 8 ]. In contrast to the intrinsic case study, the particular case which is chosen is of less importance than selecting a case that allows the researcher to investigate an issue or phenomenon. For example, in order to gain an understanding of doctors' responses to health policy initiatives, Som undertook an instrumental case study interviewing clinicians who had a range of responsibilities for clinical governance in one NHS acute hospital trust[ 17 ]. Sampling a "deviant" or "atypical" case may however prove even more informative, potentially enabling the researcher to identify causal processes, generate hypotheses and develop theory.

In collective or multiple case studies, a number of cases are carefully selected. This offers the advantage of allowing comparisons to be made across several cases and/or replication. Choosing a "typical" case may enable the findings to be generalised to theory (i.e. analytical generalisation) or to test theory by replicating the findings in a second or even a third case (i.e. replication logic)[ 1 ]. Yin suggests two or three literal replications (i.e. predicting similar results) if the theory is straightforward and five or more if the theory is more subtle. However, critics might argue that selecting 'cases' in this way is insufficiently reflexive and ill-suited to the complexities of contemporary healthcare organisations.

The selected case study site(s) should allow the research team access to the group of individuals, the organisation, the processes or whatever else constitutes the chosen unit of analysis for the study. Access is therefore a central consideration; the researcher needs to come to know the case study site(s) well and to work cooperatively with them. Selected cases need to be not only interesting but also hospitable to the inquiry [ 8 ] if they are to be informative and answer the research question(s). Case study sites may also be pre-selected for the researcher, with decisions being influenced by key stakeholders. For example, our selection of case study sites in the evaluation of the implementation and adoption of electronic health record systems (see Table ​ Table3) 3 ) was heavily influenced by NHS Connecting for Health, the government agency that was responsible for overseeing the National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT)[ 5 ]. This prominent stakeholder had already selected the NHS sites (through a competitive bidding process) to be early adopters of the electronic health record systems and had negotiated contracts that detailed the deployment timelines.

It is also important to consider in advance the likely burden and risks associated with participation for those who (or the site(s) which) comprise the case study. Of particular importance is the obligation for the researcher to think through the ethical implications of the study (e.g. the risk of inadvertently breaching anonymity or confidentiality) and to ensure that potential participants/participating sites are provided with sufficient information to make an informed choice about joining the study. The outcome of providing this information might be that the emotive burden associated with participation, or the organisational disruption associated with supporting the fieldwork, is considered so high that the individuals or sites decide against participation.

In our example of evaluating implementations of electronic health record systems, given the restricted number of early adopter sites available to us, we sought purposively to select a diverse range of implementation cases among those that were available[ 5 ]. We chose a mixture of teaching, non-teaching and Foundation Trust hospitals, and examples of each of the three electronic health record systems procured centrally by the NPfIT. At one recruited site, it quickly became apparent that access was problematic because of competing demands on that organisation. Recognising the importance of full access and co-operative working for generating rich data, the research team decided not to pursue work at that site and instead to focus on other recruited sites.

Collecting the data

In order to develop a thorough understanding of the case, the case study approach usually involves the collection of multiple sources of evidence, using a range of quantitative (e.g. questionnaires, audits and analysis of routinely collected healthcare data) and more commonly qualitative techniques (e.g. interviews, focus groups and observations). The use of multiple sources of data (data triangulation) has been advocated as a way of increasing the internal validity of a study (i.e. the extent to which the method is appropriate to answer the research question)[ 8 , 18 - 21 ]. An underlying assumption is that data collected in different ways should lead to similar conclusions, and approaching the same issue from different angles can help develop a holistic picture of the phenomenon (Table ​ (Table2 2 )[ 4 ].

Brazier and colleagues used a mixed-methods case study approach to investigate the impact of a cancer care programme[ 22 ]. Here, quantitative measures were collected with questionnaires before, and five months after, the start of the intervention which did not yield any statistically significant results. Qualitative interviews with patients however helped provide an insight into potentially beneficial process-related aspects of the programme, such as greater, perceived patient involvement in care. The authors reported how this case study approach provided a number of contextual factors likely to influence the effectiveness of the intervention and which were not likely to have been obtained from quantitative methods alone.

In collective or multiple case studies, data collection needs to be flexible enough to allow a detailed description of each individual case to be developed (e.g. the nature of different cancer care programmes), before considering the emerging similarities and differences in cross-case comparisons (e.g. to explore why one programme is more effective than another). It is important that data sources from different cases are, where possible, broadly comparable for this purpose even though they may vary in nature and depth.

Analysing, interpreting and reporting case studies

Making sense and offering a coherent interpretation of the typically disparate sources of data (whether qualitative alone or together with quantitative) is far from straightforward. Repeated reviewing and sorting of the voluminous and detail-rich data are integral to the process of analysis. In collective case studies, it is helpful to analyse data relating to the individual component cases first, before making comparisons across cases. Attention needs to be paid to variations within each case and, where relevant, the relationship between different causes, effects and outcomes[ 23 ]. Data will need to be organised and coded to allow the key issues, both derived from the literature and emerging from the dataset, to be easily retrieved at a later stage. An initial coding frame can help capture these issues and can be applied systematically to the whole dataset with the aid of a qualitative data analysis software package.

The Framework approach is a practical approach, comprising of five stages (familiarisation; identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; mapping and interpretation) , to managing and analysing large datasets particularly if time is limited, as was the case in our study of recruitment of South Asians into asthma research (Table ​ (Table1 1 )[ 3 , 24 ]. Theoretical frameworks may also play an important role in integrating different sources of data and examining emerging themes. For example, we drew on a socio-technical framework to help explain the connections between different elements - technology; people; and the organisational settings within which they worked - in our study of the introduction of electronic health record systems (Table ​ (Table3 3 )[ 5 ]. Our study of patient safety in undergraduate curricula drew on an evaluation-based approach to design and analysis, which emphasised the importance of the academic, organisational and practice contexts through which students learn (Table ​ (Table4 4 )[ 6 ].

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. They may establish, strengthen or weaken historical explanations of a case and, in certain circumstances, allow theoretical (as opposed to statistical) generalisation beyond the particular cases studied[ 12 ]. These theoretical lenses should not, however, constitute a strait-jacket and the cases should not be "forced to fit" the particular theoretical framework that is being employed.

When reporting findings, it is important to provide the reader with enough contextual information to understand the processes that were followed and how the conclusions were reached. In a collective case study, researchers may choose to present the findings from individual cases separately before amalgamating across cases. Care must be taken to ensure the anonymity of both case sites and individual participants (if agreed in advance) by allocating appropriate codes or withholding descriptors. In the example given in Table ​ Table3, 3 , we decided against providing detailed information on the NHS sites and individual participants in order to avoid the risk of inadvertent disclosure of identities[ 5 , 25 ].

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided?

The case study approach is, as with all research, not without its limitations. When investigating the formal and informal ways undergraduate students learn about patient safety (Table ​ (Table4), 4 ), for example, we rapidly accumulated a large quantity of data. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted on the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. This highlights a more general point of the importance of avoiding the temptation to collect as much data as possible; adequate time also needs to be set aside for data analysis and interpretation of what are often highly complex datasets.

Case study research has sometimes been criticised for lacking scientific rigour and providing little basis for generalisation (i.e. producing findings that may be transferable to other settings)[ 1 ]. There are several ways to address these concerns, including: the use of theoretical sampling (i.e. drawing on a particular conceptual framework); respondent validation (i.e. participants checking emerging findings and the researcher's interpretation, and providing an opinion as to whether they feel these are accurate); and transparency throughout the research process (see Table ​ Table8 8 )[ 8 , 18 - 21 , 23 , 26 ]. Transparency can be achieved by describing in detail the steps involved in case selection, data collection, the reasons for the particular methods chosen, and the researcher's background and level of involvement (i.e. being explicit about how the researcher has influenced data collection and interpretation). Seeking potential, alternative explanations, and being explicit about how interpretations and conclusions were reached, help readers to judge the trustworthiness of the case study report. Stake provides a critique checklist for a case study report (Table ​ (Table9 9 )[ 8 ].

Potential pitfalls and mitigating actions when undertaking case study research

Stake's checklist for assessing the quality of a case study report[ 8 ]

Conclusions

The case study approach allows, amongst other things, critical events, interventions, policy developments and programme-based service reforms to be studied in detail in a real-life context. It should therefore be considered when an experimental design is either inappropriate to answer the research questions posed or impossible to undertake. Considering the frequency with which implementations of innovations are now taking place in healthcare settings and how well the case study approach lends itself to in-depth, complex health service research, we believe this approach should be more widely considered by researchers. Though inherently challenging, the research case study can, if carefully conceptualised and thoughtfully undertaken and reported, yield powerful insights into many important aspects of health and healthcare delivery.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AS conceived this article. SC, KC and AR wrote this paper with GH, AA and AS all commenting on various drafts. SC and AS are guarantors.

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/100/prepub

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants and colleagues who contributed to the individual case studies that we have drawn on. This work received no direct funding, but it has been informed by projects funded by Asthma UK, the NHS Service Delivery Organisation, NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, and Patient Safety Research Portfolio. We would also like to thank the expert reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Allison Worth who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

• Yin RK. Case study research, design and method. 4. London: Sage Publications Ltd.; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Keen J, Packwood T. Qualitative research; case study evaluation. BMJ. 1995; 311 :444–446. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheikh A, Halani L, Bhopal R, Netuveli G, Partridge M, Car J. et al. Facilitating the Recruitment of Minority Ethnic People into Research: Qualitative Case Study of South Asians and Asthma. PLoS Med. 2009; 6 (10):1–11. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pinnock H, Huby G, Powell A, Kielmann T, Price D, Williams S, The process of planning, development and implementation of a General Practitioner with a Special Interest service in Primary Care Organisations in England and Wales: a comparative prospective case study. Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D (NCCSDO) 2008. http://www.sdo.nihr.ac.uk/files/project/99-final-report.pdf
• Robertson A, Cresswell K, Takian A, Petrakaki D, Crowe S, Cornford T. et al. Prospective evaluation of the implementation and adoption of NHS Connecting for Health's national electronic health record in secondary care in England: interim findings. BMJ. 2010; 41 :c4564. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pearson P, Steven A, Howe A, Sheikh A, Ashcroft D, Smith P. the Patient Safety Education Study Group. Learning about patient safety: organisational context and culture in the education of healthcare professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010; 15 :4–10. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009052. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Harten WH, Casparie TF, Fisscher OA. The evaluation of the introduction of a quality management system: a process-oriented case study in a large rehabilitation hospital. Health Policy. 2002; 60 (1):17–37. doi: 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00187-7. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stake RE. The art of case study research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R. Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002; 52 (482):746–51. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• King G, Keohane R, Verba S. Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1996. [ Google Scholar ]
• Doolin B. Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretative research on information systems. Journal of Information Technology. 1998; 13 :301–311. doi: 10.1057/jit.1998.8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• George AL, Bennett A. Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Eccles M. the Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group (ICEBeRG) Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implementation Science. 2006; 1 :1–8. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-1-1. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, Sheikh A. Ethnic variations in UK asthma frequency, morbidity, and health-service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005; 365 (9456):312–7. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Lasserson T, Netuveli G. Recruitment of ethnic minorities to asthma studies. Thorax. 2004; 59 (7):634. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hellström I, Nolan M, Lundh U. 'We do things together': A case study of 'couplehood' in dementia. Dementia. 2005; 4 :7–22. doi: 10.1177/1471301205049188. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Som CV. Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2005; 18 :463–477. doi: 10.1108/09513550510608903. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1985. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barbour RS. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ. 2001; 322 :1115–1117. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mays N, Pope C. Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000; 320 :50–52. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mason J. Qualitative researching. London: Sage; 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brazier A, Cooke K, Moravan V. Using Mixed Methods for Evaluating an Integrative Approach to Cancer Care: A Case Study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2008; 7 :5–17. doi: 10.1177/1534735407313395. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miles MB, Huberman M. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 2. CA: Sage Publications Inc.; 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N. Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative research in health care. BMJ. 2000; 320 :114–116. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cresswell KM, Worth A, Sheikh A. Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010; 10 (1):67. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-10-67. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Malterud K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001; 358 :483–488. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yin R. Case study research: design and methods. 2. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing; 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yin R. Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999; 34 :1209–1224. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Green J, Thorogood N. Qualitative methods for health research. 2. Los Angeles: Sage; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Howcroft D, Trauth E. Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, Theory and Application. Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Blakie N. Approaches to Social Enquiry. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
• Doolin B. Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Info Systems J. 2004; 14 :343–362. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00176.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bloomfield BP, Best A. Management consultants: systems development, power and the translation of problems. Sociological Review. 1992; 40 :533–560. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shanks G, Parr A. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. Naples; 2003. Positivist, single case study research in information systems: A critical analysis. [ Google Scholar ]

The Importance of a Case Study in Business

by Hristina Efinska

Why is a case study important for your business? First of all, gaining the trust of potential clients can be a struggle. Then, before you can even expect to earn their trust and become their partner, you need to show your ability to deliver on what you promise. One of the most effective ways to do so, is by creating a case study. 

In this article, we would like to walk you through the creation of a successful case study for your business. A case study that positions your company as an authority on the market, explains your problem-solving mindset and provides social proof.

What is a case study?

By definition, a case study is an in-depth research method that consists of a detailed investigation of a specific subject of study. The reason why we create case studies is to bring a complex topic closer to a broader audience. Case studies make it easier for us to connect the dots and have a better understanding of a specific subject matter. 

The case study has been used as a research method for a long time, especially in social sciences. It has been applied in various disciplines examining real-time life situations and providing a foundation for numerous ideas.   

Benefits of Preparing a Case Study

1. you get to tell a story of success.

When you think about it, storytelling plays a crucial part in selling your product or service. That’s why you need to present your case studies as success stories. First, you introduce your characters (the clients or customers), then you describe the problem they faced, how you helped them fight the specific conflict, and then you wrap everything up in a conclusion. Remember, you need to show everyone that your customers are the heroes here, not you. You are what helps them save the day, the wind in their back. This is what makes case studies engaging, readable and relatable.

2.Your client comes first

The biggest benefit of publishing case studies for your business is that they represent your customer’s and client’s voice, not your company’s. All of the content that comes from your marketing and sales teams, like webinars, blog posts, podcasts, social media posts, are often viewed as self-serving, so people tend to be slightly more skeptical of them. Contrary to that, the case studies come directly from the client, which means they act as a third-party endorsement.

Key elements of an engaging business case study

There are a number of ways you can write a case study in business. While there is no straightforward answer to how to do it, here are some key elements that you need to consider: 

• Info about the client 

An outline of the business case study

• The proposed solution 
• The results 

Info about the client

Introducing your client to the audience is one of the fundamental parts of a well-prepared business case study. By doing so, readers can get a grasp of the situation. They will meet the client and have a better understanding of how they are facing their problem. Here, the readers can even relate and feel as if the case study was written about them. If you achieve this, half of the work is done.

It’s important to have a clear outline that is easy to read and understand. You can apply various forms and techniques such as a blog post, a short video, or an infographic. It doesn’t really matter which form you choose for the case study because what makes the click is setting the right expectations for your audience. You can do this simply by listing what you will cover in what follows.

The client’s challenge

Well, you are off to tackling the main reason why you are writing the business case study in the first place. Meaning, you need to be careful and make it easy to understand. Presenting the challenge in a simple way is maybe the most challenging part. Keep it short and to the point. The more focused you make it, the more people will read it. Always have your audience in mind and do it in an easy-to-grasp manner.

The proposed solution

Business case studies are like stories. First, you introduce your client, then you describe the problems they had and at the end you give the solution you provided for the problem. When putting forward the ways you helped the client, do it so with the client as a key figure. Your client needs to provide inspiring stories so that your next prospect will hire you.

The results

Solidifying a strong working relationship with your existing customers is one of the key purposes of a case study in business. If a customer is happy and supported by you, they are likely to work with you again, By making your customers look good, you will attract prospects that crave the same outcome for their business.

How to get testimonials from your clients?

First thing’s first, you need to get your clients to provide inspiring testimonials for your good service. Resist the temptation to consider just any client for a case study testimonial. Case studies for business should address the issues that potential clients might have, so be selective.

1. Ask your most loyal clients

The best place to start is with your company’s most loyal clients. You know, the ones that have been with you since the beginning, and you know you have brought them success. Typically, these clients have had positive experiences with your service, and as a result, are willing to share their story of success.

Next up, check which of your clients have had recent wins. Speak to people who’ve done some hands-on work on the clients to identify a list of your best candidates so you can approach them first to participate in a case study.

2. Do your homework before you approach them

Before you reach out to your existing clients, think carefully about the timing of your request. Take time to do your research, so you understand the possible theme of the specific case study may be. For extra points, you can also research the specific person you’ll be reaching out to if you’re not already familiar with them. That’s how you’ll identify who can make an introduction, or at least help you personalize your request.

3. Explain why it is a win-win situation

Before you reach out to your clients, make it clear what’s involved if they agree to participate. Outline the whole process ( be specific and make it understandable), how much time it will take, and how you’ll be using the case study once it’s finalized. Make it clear that by participating in this, they’re assisting your company, but they have benefits as well. Being profiled in such a study can become a valuable tool for them to scale their profile and potentially position themselves as an authority in their industry.

At the end of the day, you work hard at what you do. But eventually, you have to show it to the world — and, most importantly, to your potential clients. Make sure you follow the aforementioned steps that will showcase your work is effectively communicated. For an easy start, head on to our case studies link , and learn how we brought success to our clients by hiring dedicated teams for their needs.

Leave a reply

By using this form you agree with the storage and handling of your data by this website. For further details on handling user data, see our Privacy Policy . *

• All , Business Analysis

The Importance of Case Studies

Case studies are, arguably, one of the most essential components of any marketing or communications strategy. They may take time and effort, but the payoffs are well worth their effort and have been seen time and again, from organizations both big and small.

As Business Analysts, we’re often involved in creating or contributing to case studies, so it is important we understand what they are, the purpose they serve, and the benefits that they can bring. 

What Are Case Studies?

In essence, a case study is a report published by a company that highlights its approach to a challenge, the strategy used to solve the issue(s), and the effectiveness of the solution. It presents a holistic, in-depth review with valuable information about the costs involved, the expertise of the company employed, and the benefits achieved.

The Many Benefits of Case Studies

Case studies have a huge range of benefits, from insight to influence. They are used in nearly every industry, from finance to health care and they offer organizations the ability to convert observations into useable data.

But that barely scratches the surface of the many benefits of case studies. Let’s dig a little deeper and look at some of the long-lasting effects that case studies can have.

1. Boost Customer Confidence

Case studies are an excellent way to display your team’s skill and expertise in action. It’s one thing to propose a plan for improvement, or a solution to a challenge, but some customers may be skeptical of your team’s ability to follow through or produce the appealing results you’re promising. 

Case studies are exactly the type of proof they need to help push them past skepticism and into belief, and possibly, across the finish line to approval of your partnership. If it’s an internal project, case studies could be enough to convince decision-makers to pursue your solution to a challenge.

2. Improve Brand Awareness and Reputation

The reality of the world today is that every company in every industry has competition. Consumers are also becoming smarter about marketing tactics and messaging, so providing proof and backing up claims is essential for presenting your company as genuine in its promises. That’s where case studies come in. 

Case studies are social proof that the promises and claims that your company is making are true. They provide facts and statistics to show how your company improved productivity for your clients by ‘x’ amount, increased profits by ‘x’ amount, or implemented ‘x’ solution to combat a specific issue. 

Providing such proof of expertise bolsters your reputation and can increase brand awareness. Case studies can be published and distributed to current customers to remind them of why they partnered with you initially, and can help increase your company’s reputation and brand image as new potential customers discover you. 

3. Provide a Strategic Solution

No customer wants to partner with a company that acts erratically or thoughtlessly. Case studies provide insight into real challenges and an in-depth look at how your company goes about solving them. They give you a chance to display your strategic thinking and approach, your expertise and innovation, and your ability to follow through on your promised solution. 

4. Assist with Furthering Research

A case study helps show how different aspects of your business work together. They highlight a problem and how the executed solution provided value. They can also play a role in broader research. As you explore and analyze new ideas, other theories and methods can surface. This additional information can help you refine your strategies and further grow the value you provide. Case studies make great reference points that can show, not only how innovative, productive, and proficient your company and teams have become, but how trends have unfolded within your customers and services.

Final Thoughts

As you can see, case studies play a crucial role in the communication of how your team and you, as a Business Analyst, face challenging situations head-on and provide strategic, value-driven solutions for your customers. Once you have a better understanding of case studies and the deep benefits they provide to you and your brand, it’s easy to justify the time and effort that goes into creating them. As you create your next case study, use it as a reminder to take pride in the hard work you’ve done and the results you’ve achieved.

– Written by Jeremy Aschenbrenner, The BA Guide

Join the Conversation Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Featured Posts

Lessons Learned and Wisdom Gained: Reflections from Experienced Business Analysts

• All , Business Analysis Community

Top Business Analysis Tools and Software for Success

• All , Business Analysis , Tools and Techniques

How Business Analysis Creates Valuable Customer Experiences: Part 2

How Business Analysis Creates Valuable Customer Experiences: Part 1

Check out our self-paced courses on business analysis

Related articles.

Choosing the Right Framework for Your Business Analysis Projects: Predictive vs. Adaptive

• Business Analysis

Analyzing Market Trends: A Guide for Business Analysts

• Business Analysis , Data and Analytics , Tools and Techniques

Business Process Modeling: Streamlining Operations for Improved Efficiency

• Business Analysis , Tools and Techniques

Root Cause Analysis: Uncovering the Source of Business Problems

• All , Tools and Techniques

Check out our recommended courses

Project Management Techniques and Tools for the Business Analyst

Software Testing Processes and Techniques

Become an Agile Business Analyst

Essential Modeling Skills and Techniques

Agile Fundamentals: Including Scrum and Kanban

Land Your First Business Analysis Position

Never miss an article.

Sign up now to receive our latest blog posts directly in your inbox. Each article is a trove of insights, tips, and practical knowledge, curated by experts to enhance your business analysis understanding and skills.

Seriously, it’s free learning, don’t miss out!

We’re committed to your privacy. TheBAGUIDE uses the information you provide to us to contact you about our relevant content, products, and services. You may unsubscribe from these communications at any time. For more information, check out our privacy policy .

Let's Connect!

Copyright © 2023 – BA Guide LLC   Privacy Policy   |  Terms & Conditions

International Business Policy: A Primer

• First Online: 26 August 2022

Cite this chapter

• Ari Van Assche 2  

Part of the book series: Contributions to Management Science ((MANAGEMENT SC.))

741 Accesses

1 Citations

Despite a large academic interest in the topic of international business policy in recent years, there remains substantial ambiguity about its meaning. In this chapter, we define international business policy as the mix of actions that a public authority takes to shape international business with the goal of addressing societal challenges. We use this definition to delineate the field of international business policy and to demonstrate its distinctive characteristics. We discuss the central role that traditional international business research can play in the development of new studies on international business policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Ambos, B., Brandl, K., Perri, A., Scalera, V. G., & Van Assche, A. (2021). The nature of innovation in global value chains. Journal of World Business, 56 (4), 101221.

Article   Google Scholar  

Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., & Hanson, G. H. (2013). The China syndrome: Local labor market effects of import competition in the United States. American Economic Review, 103 (6), 2121–2168.

Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., Hanson, G. H., & Song, J. (2014). Trade adjustment: Worker-level evidence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129 (4), 1799–1860.

Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., & Hanson, G. H. (2016). The China shock: Learning from labor-market adjustment to large changes in trade. Annual Review of Economics, 8 , 205–240.

Bown, C. P. (2020). How the United States marched the semiconductor industry into its trade war with China. East Asian Economic Review, 24 (4), 349–388.

Bown, C. P., & Irwin, D. A. (2019). Trump’s assault on the global trading system: And why decoupling from China will change everything. Foreign Affairs, 98 , 125.

Google Scholar  

Bu, M., & Wagner, M. (2016). Racing to the bottom and racing to the top: The crucial role of firm characteristics in foreign direct investment choices. Journal of International Business Studies, 47 (9), 1032–1057.

Buchholz, M., Bathelt, H., & Cantwell, J. A. (2020). Income divergence and global connectivity of US urban regions. Journal of International Business Policy, 3 (3), 229–248.

Buckley, P. J., Doh, J. P., & Benischke, M. H. (2017). Towards a renaissance in international business research? Big questions, grand challenges, and the future of IB scholarship. Journal of International Business Studies, 48 (9), 1045–1064.

Cano-Kollmann, M., Cantwell, J., Hannigan, T. J., Mudambi, R., & Song, J. (2016). Knowledge connectivity: An agenda for innovation research in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 47 (3), 255–262.

Casadei, P., & Iammarino, S. (2021). Trade policy shocks in the UK textile and apparel value chain: Firm perceptions of Brexit uncertainty. Journal of International Business Policy, 4 (2), 262–285.

Clegg, J. (2019). From the editor: International business policy: What it is, and what it is not. Journal of International Business Policy, 2 (2), 111–118.

Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2018). Thanks but no thanks: State-owned multinationals from emerging markets and host-country policies. Journal of International Business Policy, 1 (3), 128–156.

Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Inkpen, A., Musacchio, A., & Ramaswamy, K. (2014). Governments as owners: State-owned multinational companies. Journal of International Business Studies, 45 (8), 919–942.

Dallas, M. P., Horner, R., & Li, L. (2021). The mutual constraints of states and global value chains during COVID-19: The case of personal protective equipment. World Development, 139 , 105324.

DeLeon, P. (2006). The historical roots of the field. In The Oxford handbook of public policy .

DeTombe, D. J. (2002). Complex societal problems in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research, 140 (2), 232–240.

Didier, T., & Pinat, M. (2017). The nature of trade and growth linkages. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, (8168).

Doh, J. P. (2005). Offshore outsourcing: Implications for international business and strategic management theory and practice. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (3), 695–704.

Eden, L., & Wagstaff, M. F. (2021). Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 gender equality. Journal of International Business Policy, 4 (1), 28–57.

Evenett, S., Hoekman, B, Rocha, N., & Ruta, M. (2021). The Covid-19 vaccine production Club: Will value chains temper nationalism? World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 9565.

Evenett, S. J. (2019). Protectionism, state discrimination, and international business since the onset of the global financial crisis. Journal of International Business Policy, 2 (1), 9–36.

Evenett, S. J. (2020). Chinese whispers: COVID-19, global supply chains in essential goods, and public policy. Journal of International Business Policy, 3 (4), 408–429.

George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A., & Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59 (6), 1880–1895.

Gereffi, G. (2019). Global value chains and international development policy: Bringing firms, networks and policy-engaged scholarship back in. Journal of International Business Policy, 2 (3), 195–210.

Gereffi, G. (2020). What does the COVID-19 pandemic teach us about global value chains? The case of medical supplies. Journal of International Business Policy, 3 (3), 287–301.

Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. (2005). The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 12 (1), 78–104.

Gereffi, G., Lim, H. C., & Lee, J. (2021). Trade policies, firm strategies, and adaptive reconfigurations of global value chains. Journal of International Business Policy , 1–17.

Goerzen, A., Iskander, S. P., & Hofstetter, J. (2021). The effect of institutional pressures on business-led interventions to improve social compliance among emerging market suppliers in global value chains. Journal of International Business Policy, 4 (3), 347–367.

Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (2018). Growth, trade, and inequality. Econometrica, 86 (1), 37–83.

Horner, R. (2017). Beyond facilitator? State roles in global value chains and global production networks. Geography Compass, 11 (2), e12307.

Jaax, A., & Miroudot, S. (2021). Capturing value in GVCs through intangible assets: The role of the trade–investment–intellectual property nexus. Journal of International Business Policy , 1–20.

Knill, C., & Tosun, J. (2020). Public policy: A new introduction . Red Globe Press.

Kobrin, S. J. (1987). Testing the bargaining hypothesis in the manufacturing sector in developing countries. International Organization, 41 (4), 609–638.

Kobrin, S. J. (2020). How globalization became a thing that goes bump in the night. Journal of International Business Policy, 3 (3), 280–286.

Kolk, A., Rivera-Santos, M., & Rufín, C. (2018). Multinationals, international business, and poverty: A cross-disciplinary research overview and conceptual framework. Journal of International Business Policy, 1 (1), 92–115.

Li, J., Van Assche, A., Li, L., & Qian, G. (2021). Foreign direct investment along the belt and road: A political economy perspective. Journal of International Business Studies , 1–18.

Locke, R., Amengual, M., & Mangla, A. (2009). Virtue out of necessity? Compliance, commitment, and the improvement of labor conditions in global supply chains. Politics and Society, 37 (3), 319–351.

Lorenzen, M., Mudambi, R., & Schotter, A. (2020). International connectedness and local disconnectedness: MNE strategy, city-regions and disruption. Journal of International Business Studies, 51 (8), 1199–1222.

Lundan, S., & Assche, A. (2021). From the editors: Reflections on the nexus of complementarity between international business research and the policy practitioner community. Journal of International Business Policy, 4 (2), 201–205.

Lundan, S. M. (2018). From the editor: Engaging international business scholars with public policy issues.

Miroudot, S. (2020). Reshaping the policy debate on the implications of COVID-19 for global supply chains. Journal of International Business Policy, 3 (4), 430–442.

Moons, S. J., & van Bergeijk, P. A. (2017). Does economic diplomacy work? A meta-analysis of its impact on trade and investment. The World Economy, 40 (2), 336–368.

Patala, S., Juntunen, J. K., Lundan, S., & Ritvala, T. (2021). Multinational energy utilities in the energy transition: A configurational study of the drivers of FDI in renewables. Journal of International Business Studies, 52 (5), 930–950.

Pietrobelli, C., Rabellotti, R., & Van Assche, A. (2021). Making sense of global value chain-oriented policies: The trifecta of tasks, linkages, and firms. Journal of International Business Policy., 4 (3).

Ramamurti, R. (2001). The obsolescing ‘bargaining model’? MNC-host developing country relations revisited. Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (1), 23–39.

Rodrik, D. (2018). Populism and the economics of globalization. Journal of international business policy, 1 (1), 12–33.

Rodrik, D. (2020). Putting global governance in its place. The World Bank Research Observer, 35 (1), 1–18.

Rossi, A. (2019). Applying the GVC framework to policy: The ILO experience. Journal of International Business Policy, 2 (3), 211–216.

Ruger, J. P., & Yach, D. (2009). The global role of the World Health Organization. Global Health Governance, 2 (2), 1–11.

Sauvant, K. P. (2021). Improving the distribution of FDI benefits: The need for policy-oriented research, advice, and advocacy. Journal of International Business Policy, 4 (2), 244–261.

Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48 (4), 899–931.

Singhania, M., & Saini, N. (2021). Demystifying pollution haven hypothesis: Role of FDI. Journal of Business Research, 123 , 516–528.

Smith, K. B., & Larimer, C. W. (2018). The public policy theory primer . Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Tavares-Lehmann, A. T., Toledano, P., Johnson, L., & Sachs, L. (Eds.). (2016). Rethinking investment incentives: Trends and policy options . Columbia University Press.

Timmer, M. P., Miroudot, S., & de Vries, G. J. (2019). Functional specialisation in trade. Journal of Economic Geography, 19 (1), 1–30.

Ting, A., & Gray, S. J. (2019). The rise of the digital economy: Rethinking the taxation of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 50 (9), 1656–1667.

Turkina, E., & Van Assche, A. (2018). Global connectedness and local innovation in industrial clusters. Journal of International Business Studies, 49 (6), 706–728.

Van Assche, A. (2018). From the editor: Steering a policy turn in international business–opportunities and challenges.

Van Assche, A. (2020). Trade, investment and intangibles: The ABCs of global value chain-oriented policies (No. 242) . OECD Publishing.

Van Assche, A., & Gangnes, B. (2019a). Global value chains and the fragmentation of trade policy coalitions. Transnational Corporations Journal, 26 (1).

Van Assche, A., & Gangnes, B. (2019b). Production switching and vulnerability to protectionism. In International business in a VUCA world: The changing role of states and firms . Emerald Publishing Limited.

Van Assche, A., & Lundan, S. (2020). From the editor: COVID-19 and international business policy. Journal of International Business Policy, 3 (3), 273–279.

Van Tulder, R., Rodrigues, S. B., Mirza, H., & Sexsmith, K. (2021). The UN’s sustainable development goals: Can multinational enterprises lead the decade of action?

Van Zanten, J. A., & Van Tulder, R. (2018). Multinational enterprises and the sustainable development goals: An institutional approach to corporate engagement. Journal of International Business Policy, 1 (3), 208–233.

Vernon, R. (1971). Sovereignty at bay (pp. 44–59). Pelican.

Wettstein, F., Giuliani, E., Santangelo, G. D., & Stahl, G. K. (2019). International business and human rights: A research agenda. Journal of World Business, 54 (1), 54–65.

Zhan, J. X. (2021). GVC transformation and a new investment landscape in the 2020s: Driving forces, directions, and a forward-looking research and policy agenda. Journal of International Business Policy, 4 (2), 206–220.

Zhao, S., Gooderham, P., Papanastassiou, M., & Harzing, A. W. (2021). Guest editorial [Special Issue: Do multinational enterprise contribute to, or reduce global inequality?]. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 17 (1), 1–7.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

HEC Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

Ari Van Assche

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ari Van Assche .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

St. Petersburg campus, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, FL, USA

Hemant Merchant

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Van Assche, A. (2022). International Business Policy: A Primer. In: Merchant, H. (eds) The New Frontiers of International Business. Contributions to Management Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06003-8_8

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06003-8_8

Published : 26 August 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-06002-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-06003-8

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• All Headlines

Top 40 Most Popular Case Studies of 2021

Two cases about Hertz claimed top spots in 2021's Top 40 Most Popular Case Studies

Two cases on the uses of debt and equity at Hertz claimed top spots in the CRDT’s (Case Research and Development Team) 2021 top 40 review of cases.

Hertz (A) took the top spot. The case details the financial structure of the rental car company through the end of 2019. Hertz (B), which ranked third in CRDT’s list, describes the company’s struggles during the early part of the COVID pandemic and its eventual need to enter Chapter 11 bankruptcy. 

The success of the Hertz cases was unprecedented for the top 40 list. Usually, cases take a number of years to gain popularity, but the Hertz cases claimed top spots in their first year of release. Hertz (A) also became the first ‘cooked’ case to top the annual review, as all of the other winners had been web-based ‘raw’ cases.

Besides introducing students to the complicated financing required to maintain an enormous fleet of cars, the Hertz cases also expanded the diversity of case protagonists. Kathyrn Marinello was the CEO of Hertz during this period and the CFO, Jamere Jackson is black.

Sandwiched between the two Hertz cases, Coffee 2016, a perennial best seller, finished second. “Glory, Glory, Man United!” a case about an English football team’s IPO made a surprise move to number four.  Cases on search fund boards, the future of malls,  Norway’s Sovereign Wealth fund, Prodigy Finance, the Mayo Clinic, and Cadbury rounded out the top ten.

Other year-end data for 2021 showed:

• Online “raw” case usage remained steady as compared to 2020 with over 35K users from 170 countries and all 50 U.S. states interacting with 196 cases.
• Fifty four percent of raw case users came from outside the U.S..
• The Yale School of Management (SOM) case study directory pages received over 160K page views from 177 countries with approximately a third originating in India followed by the U.S. and the Philippines.
• Twenty-six of the cases in the list are raw cases.
• A third of the cases feature a woman protagonist.
• Orders for Yale SOM case studies increased by almost 50% compared to 2020.
• The top 40 cases were supervised by 19 different Yale SOM faculty members, several supervising multiple cases.

CRDT compiled the Top 40 list by combining data from its case store, Google Analytics, and other measures of interest and adoption.

All of this year’s Top 40 cases are available for purchase from the Yale Management Media store .

And the Top 40 cases studies of 2021 are:

1.   Hertz Global Holdings (A): Uses of Debt and Equity

2.   Coffee 2016

3.   Hertz Global Holdings (B): Uses of Debt and Equity 2020

4.   Glory, Glory Man United!

5.   Search Fund Company Boards: How CEOs Can Build Boards to Help Them Thrive

6.   The Future of Malls: Was Decline Inevitable?

7.   Strategy for Norway's Pension Fund Global

8.   Prodigy Finance

9.   Design at Mayo

10. Cadbury

11. City Hospital Emergency Room

13. Volkswagen

14. Marina Bay Sands

15. Shake Shack IPO

16. Mastercard

17. Netflix

18. Ant Financial

19. AXA: Creating the New CR Metrics

20. IBM Corporate Service Corps

21. Business Leadership in South Africa's 1994 Reforms

22. Alternative Meat Industry

23. Children's Premier

24. Khalil Tawil and Umi (A)

25. Palm Oil 2016

26. Teach For All: Designing a Global Network

27. What's Next? Search Fund Entrepreneurs Reflect on Life After Exit

28. Searching for a Search Fund Structure: A Student Takes a Tour of Various Options

30. Project Sammaan

31. Commonfund ESG

32. Polaroid

33. Connecticut Green Bank 2018: After the Raid

34. FieldFresh Foods

35. The Alibaba Group

36. 360 State Street: Real Options

37. Herman Miller

38. AgBiome

39. Nathan Cummings Foundation

40. Toyota 2010

The state of AI in early 2024: Gen AI adoption spikes and starts to generate value

If 2023 was the year the world discovered generative AI (gen AI) , 2024 is the year organizations truly began using—and deriving business value from—this new technology. In the latest McKinsey Global Survey  on AI, 65 percent of respondents report that their organizations are regularly using gen AI, nearly double the percentage from our previous survey just ten months ago. Respondents’ expectations for gen AI’s impact remain as high as they were last year , with three-quarters predicting that gen AI will lead to significant or disruptive change in their industries in the years ahead.

About the authors

This article is a collaborative effort by Alex Singla , Alexander Sukharevsky , Lareina Yee , and Michael Chui , with Bryce Hall , representing views from QuantumBlack, AI by McKinsey, and McKinsey Digital.

Organizations are already seeing material benefits from gen AI use, reporting both cost decreases and revenue jumps in the business units deploying the technology. The survey also provides insights into the kinds of risks presented by gen AI—most notably, inaccuracy—as well as the emerging practices of top performers to mitigate those challenges and capture value.

AI adoption surges

Interest in generative AI has also brightened the spotlight on a broader set of AI capabilities. For the past six years, AI adoption by respondents’ organizations has hovered at about 50 percent. This year, the survey finds that adoption has jumped to 72 percent (Exhibit 1). And the interest is truly global in scope. Our 2023 survey found that AI adoption did not reach 66 percent in any region; however, this year more than two-thirds of respondents in nearly every region say their organizations are using AI. 1 Organizations based in Central and South America are the exception, with 58 percent of respondents working for organizations based in Central and South America reporting AI adoption. Looking by industry, the biggest increase in adoption can be found in professional services. 2 Includes respondents working for organizations focused on human resources, legal services, management consulting, market research, R&D, tax preparation, and training.

Also, responses suggest that companies are now using AI in more parts of the business. Half of respondents say their organizations have adopted AI in two or more business functions, up from less than a third of respondents in 2023 (Exhibit 2).

Gen AI adoption is most common in the functions where it can create the most value

Most respondents now report that their organizations—and they as individuals—are using gen AI. Sixty-five percent of respondents say their organizations are regularly using gen AI in at least one business function, up from one-third last year. The average organization using gen AI is doing so in two functions, most often in marketing and sales and in product and service development—two functions in which previous research  determined that gen AI adoption could generate the most value 3 “ The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier ,” McKinsey, June 14, 2023. —as well as in IT (Exhibit 3). The biggest increase from 2023 is found in marketing and sales, where reported adoption has more than doubled. Yet across functions, only two use cases, both within marketing and sales, are reported by 15 percent or more of respondents.

Gen AI also is weaving its way into respondents’ personal lives. Compared with 2023, respondents are much more likely to be using gen AI at work and even more likely to be using gen AI both at work and in their personal lives (Exhibit 4). The survey finds upticks in gen AI use across all regions, with the largest increases in Asia–Pacific and Greater China. Respondents at the highest seniority levels, meanwhile, show larger jumps in the use of gen Al tools for work and outside of work compared with their midlevel-management peers. Looking at specific industries, respondents working in energy and materials and in professional services report the largest increase in gen AI use.

Investments in gen AI and analytical AI are beginning to create value

The latest survey also shows how different industries are budgeting for gen AI. Responses suggest that, in many industries, organizations are about equally as likely to be investing more than 5 percent of their digital budgets in gen AI as they are in nongenerative, analytical-AI solutions (Exhibit 5). Yet in most industries, larger shares of respondents report that their organizations spend more than 20 percent on analytical AI than on gen AI. Looking ahead, most respondents—67 percent—expect their organizations to invest more in AI over the next three years.

Where are those investments paying off? For the first time, our latest survey explored the value created by gen AI use by business function. The function in which the largest share of respondents report seeing cost decreases is human resources. Respondents most commonly report meaningful revenue increases (of more than 5 percent) in supply chain and inventory management (Exhibit 6). For analytical AI, respondents most often report seeing cost benefits in service operations—in line with what we found last year —as well as meaningful revenue increases from AI use in marketing and sales.

Inaccuracy: The most recognized and experienced risk of gen AI use

As businesses begin to see the benefits of gen AI, they’re also recognizing the diverse risks associated with the technology. These can range from data management risks such as data privacy, bias, or intellectual property (IP) infringement to model management risks, which tend to focus on inaccurate output or lack of explainability. A third big risk category is security and incorrect use.

Respondents to the latest survey are more likely than they were last year to say their organizations consider inaccuracy and IP infringement to be relevant to their use of gen AI, and about half continue to view cybersecurity as a risk (Exhibit 7).

Conversely, respondents are less likely than they were last year to say their organizations consider workforce and labor displacement to be relevant risks and are not increasing efforts to mitigate them.

In fact, inaccuracy— which can affect use cases across the gen AI value chain , ranging from customer journeys and summarization to coding and creative content—is the only risk that respondents are significantly more likely than last year to say their organizations are actively working to mitigate.

Some organizations have already experienced negative consequences from the use of gen AI, with 44 percent of respondents saying their organizations have experienced at least one consequence (Exhibit 8). Respondents most often report inaccuracy as a risk that has affected their organizations, followed by cybersecurity and explainability.

Our previous research has found that there are several elements of governance that can help in scaling gen AI use responsibly, yet few respondents report having these risk-related practices in place. 4 “ Implementing generative AI with speed and safety ,” McKinsey Quarterly , March 13, 2024. For example, just 18 percent say their organizations have an enterprise-wide council or board with the authority to make decisions involving responsible AI governance, and only one-third say gen AI risk awareness and risk mitigation controls are required skill sets for technical talent.

Bringing gen AI capabilities to bear

The latest survey also sought to understand how, and how quickly, organizations are deploying these new gen AI tools. We have found three archetypes for implementing gen AI solutions : takers use off-the-shelf, publicly available solutions; shapers customize those tools with proprietary data and systems; and makers develop their own foundation models from scratch. 5 “ Technology’s generational moment with generative AI: A CIO and CTO guide ,” McKinsey, July 11, 2023. Across most industries, the survey results suggest that organizations are finding off-the-shelf offerings applicable to their business needs—though many are pursuing opportunities to customize models or even develop their own (Exhibit 9). About half of reported gen AI uses within respondents’ business functions are utilizing off-the-shelf, publicly available models or tools, with little or no customization. Respondents in energy and materials, technology, and media and telecommunications are more likely to report significant customization or tuning of publicly available models or developing their own proprietary models to address specific business needs.

Respondents most often report that their organizations required one to four months from the start of a project to put gen AI into production, though the time it takes varies by business function (Exhibit 10). It also depends upon the approach for acquiring those capabilities. Not surprisingly, reported uses of highly customized or proprietary models are 1.5 times more likely than off-the-shelf, publicly available models to take five months or more to implement.

Gen AI high performers are excelling despite facing challenges

Gen AI is a new technology, and organizations are still early in the journey of pursuing its opportunities and scaling it across functions. So it’s little surprise that only a small subset of respondents (46 out of 876) report that a meaningful share of their organizations’ EBIT can be attributed to their deployment of gen AI. Still, these gen AI leaders are worth examining closely. These, after all, are the early movers, who already attribute more than 10 percent of their organizations’ EBIT to their use of gen AI. Forty-two percent of these high performers say more than 20 percent of their EBIT is attributable to their use of nongenerative, analytical AI, and they span industries and regions—though most are at organizations with less than $1 billion in annual revenue. The AI-related practices at these organizations can offer guidance to those looking to create value from gen AI adoption at their own organizations.

To start, gen AI high performers are using gen AI in more business functions—an average of three functions, while others average two. They, like other organizations, are most likely to use gen AI in marketing and sales and product or service development, but they’re much more likely than others to use gen AI solutions in risk, legal, and compliance; in strategy and corporate finance; and in supply chain and inventory management. They’re more than three times as likely as others to be using gen AI in activities ranging from processing of accounting documents and risk assessment to R&D testing and pricing and promotions. While, overall, about half of reported gen AI applications within business functions are utilizing publicly available models or tools, gen AI high performers are less likely to use those off-the-shelf options than to either implement significantly customized versions of those tools or to develop their own proprietary foundation models.

What else are these high performers doing differently? For one thing, they are paying more attention to gen-AI-related risks. Perhaps because they are further along on their journeys, they are more likely than others to say their organizations have experienced every negative consequence from gen AI we asked about, from cybersecurity and personal privacy to explainability and IP infringement. Given that, they are more likely than others to report that their organizations consider those risks, as well as regulatory compliance, environmental impacts, and political stability, to be relevant to their gen AI use, and they say they take steps to mitigate more risks than others do.

Gen AI high performers are also much more likely to say their organizations follow a set of risk-related best practices (Exhibit 11). For example, they are nearly twice as likely as others to involve the legal function and embed risk reviews early on in the development of gen AI solutions—that is, to “ shift left .” They’re also much more likely than others to employ a wide range of other best practices, from strategy-related practices to those related to scaling.

In addition to experiencing the risks of gen AI adoption, high performers have encountered other challenges that can serve as warnings to others (Exhibit 12). Seventy percent say they have experienced difficulties with data, including defining processes for data governance, developing the ability to quickly integrate data into AI models, and an insufficient amount of training data, highlighting the essential role that data play in capturing value. High performers are also more likely than others to report experiencing challenges with their operating models, such as implementing agile ways of working and effective sprint performance management.

About the research

The online survey was in the field from February 22 to March 5, 2024, and garnered responses from 1,363 participants representing the full range of regions, industries, company sizes, functional specialties, and tenures. Of those respondents, 981 said their organizations had adopted AI in at least one business function, and 878 said their organizations were regularly using gen AI in at least one function. To adjust for differences in response rates, the data are weighted by the contribution of each respondent’s nation to global GDP.

Alex Singla and Alexander Sukharevsky  are global coleaders of QuantumBlack, AI by McKinsey, and senior partners in McKinsey’s Chicago and London offices, respectively; Lareina Yee  is a senior partner in the Bay Area office, where Michael Chui , a McKinsey Global Institute partner, is a partner; and Bryce Hall  is an associate partner in the Washington, DC, office.

They wish to thank Kaitlin Noe, Larry Kanter, Mallika Jhamb, and Shinjini Srivastava for their contributions to this work.

This article was edited by Heather Hanselman, a senior editor in McKinsey’s Atlanta office.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Moving past gen AI’s honeymoon phase: Seven hard truths for CIOs to get from pilot to scale

A generative AI reset: Rewiring to turn potential into value in 2024

Implementing generative AI with speed and safety

Your cart is empty.

Sorry, there is insufficient stock for your cart.

Remove a Product

Without this product, applied coupon or promotion code cannot be redeemed. Are you sure to remove this product?

Privacy Policy

Tick this box to proceed to Samsung.com.

Samsung.com Services and marketing information, new product and service announcements as well as special offers, events and newsletters.

Check Preferences

Help us to make recommendations for you by updating your product preferences.

What are you looking for?

No suggestions, suggested searches, popular keyword, search history, recommended search.

Samsung for Business

Transforming businesses. Empowering owners.

Find the right solutions and exclusive benefits for businesses of all sizes.

See how Samsung makes an impact

Samsung's devices and solutions create tangible results.

Schneider needed a provider that could integrate its proprietary software with relevant third-party applications for connected fleets.

Duty Free Americas

Duty Free Americas, the largest duty-free retailer in the Americas, began its digital transformation a few years ago.

Lucid Motors

The design team at Lucid Motors was looking for a new, state-of-the-art display to take their design process to the next level.

Take the next step

Get connected today with volume discount offers on employee smartphones, monitors, displays, digital signage, appliances and more.

Stay in the know

* By submitting your email, you agree to receive periodic emails from Samsung on exclusive discounts, new product announcements, our latest technology insights, special events and more. Please consult our Privacy Policy to understand how we protect your privacy

Contact a sales expert

Get in touch with our sales team to discuss tailored solutions for your business. You can call (866) 726-4249 to talk to an expert now, or use the form below to submit your requests.

Get product support

Find manuals, downloads, warranty information and more. We also offer FAQs and demos to help with business product questions.

We will help you find the right solution for your business.

Sales Enquiries

Technical support, you are entering.

By selecting CONTINUE, you will be entering a website of

website is governed by its own privacy policy, level of security and terms of use

Your enquiry has been successfully submitted. We will get back to you shortly.