S.TRUEMAN PhD THESIS 2016

131

for interpreting the findings relies on the four criteria outlined by Yin (2009); credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability, all discussed in chapter ten. 4.4.7 Criticisms of case study as a methodology The diversity of published case studies and current debates about the credible use of case study in qualitative research have arisen because researchers differ in their perspectives on case study methodology. This confusion fetters the development of a uniform, universal methodological understanding (Hyett et al., 2014). Other perceived case study limitations include whether case study is a methodology at all (Luck, Jackson & Usher, 2006; Meyer, 2001; Tight, 2010; Thomas, 2010). For example, Anthony and Jack (2009), Yin (2009) and Meier and Pugh (1986) regarded case studies as a research strategy, while others have argued that it is a teaching technique (Henning, Nielsen & Hauschildt, 2006; Kells & Koerner, 2005), and Lincoln and Guba (1985) referred to it as publishing the results of a naturalistic enquiry. The first rebuttal to these criticisms is that case study has been gratuitously debased by comparisons with statistical methods (Eisenhardt, 1989; Flyvbjerg, 2006, 2011; Jensen & Rodgers, 2001; Piekkari, Welch & Paavilainen, 2009; Tight, 2010; Yin, 1999), often described as the ‘the weak sibling’ (Yin, 2009, p. xiii). A case study is not statistical research, and hence is not comparative; a case study’s ‘aim is not to produce outcomes that are generalisable to all populations’ (Hyett et al., 2014, p. 4; Thomas, 2011). Case study and statistical research are fundamentally at odds in their approaches to qualitative research, and hence are not comparable. The reason for this is that the two approaches measure, assess and examine phenomena using different and incompatible means. This