Search results

The aim of this chapter is to introduce a methodology that enables researchers to employ a set of systematic comparative tools and techniques in their multiple case study research that allow them to move from drawing loose comparisons towards a more formalised type of analysis, while simultaneously paying attention to within-case complexities. This methodology stands between the qualitative and the quantitative methods and helps researchers to build middle-range theories (Mjoset, 2001) from small to intermediate numbers of cases. This methodology encompasses a number of techniques including crisp and fuzzy set-theoretic qualitative comparative analyses, which have been used in a wide range of social science disciplines. However, these techniques have not received sufficient attention from higher education scholars.

Research in entrepreneurship is increasingly exploring how archetypes, taxonomies, typologies, and configurations can help scholars understand complex entrepreneurial phenomena. We illustrate the potential for set-theoretic methods to inform this literature by offering best practices regarding how qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) can be used to explore research questions of interest to entrepreneurship scholars. Specifically, we introduce QCA, document how this approach has been used in management research, and provide step-by-step guidance to empower scholars to use this family of methods. We put a particular emphasis on the analytical procedures and offer solutions to dealing with potential pitfalls when using QCA-based methods and highlight opportunities for future entrepreneurship research.

This paper aims to describe how a fuzzy qualitative comparative analysis can be used to describe which combinations of academic factors are most influential for achieving success in college‐level mathematics. Using a fuzzy qualitative comparative analysis allows for the comparison of all possible combinations for a collection of predictor variables, as well as strategies for determining which configurations of these sets of variables are the most consistent with success in college‐level mathematics. Recent advances in fuzzy qualitative comparative analysis techniques have now integrated traditional qualitative comparative analysis strategies with formal statistical tests, thus allowing for the analysis and comparison of complex relationships that are difficult to describe with more traditional statistical methods such as regression analysis.

Data were collected from 259 full‐time, first‐time freshmen at a large state university in the USA. They were analysed using fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis (FQCA).

Findings from this study suggest that the most parsimonious configuration of college remediation status, spending less time away from mathematics, and doing better in high school mathematics are key to success in college‐level mathematics.

Although numerous studies have made great progress in describing the complex relationship between prior mathematics exposure in high school with success in college‐level mathematics, one limitation of many studies is that they rely on analytic methods that only estimate the net effect of a single predictor variable, or a very small collection of predictor variables. This study utilises fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis (FQCA) which can be used to analyze more complex interrelationships among a collection of predictor variables.

Purpose – This chapter examines the potential of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) for strategy research.

Methodology/approach – We introduce the set-theoretic framework of QCA and provide an overview of recent methodological developments.

Findings – We utilize a variety of examples relevant to strategy research to illustrate the action steps and key concepts involved in conducting a QCA study.

Originality/value of paper – We develop examples from core research areas in strategic management to illustrate QCA's potential for examining issues of causality and diversity in strategy research, and in settings involving medium-N samples. We conclude by emphasizing that QCA offers an alternative mode of inquiry to open and redirect important lines of strategy research.

The purpose of this paper is to provide meaningful information about sponsorship management in state-owned enterprises.

Qualitative and quantitative data from Germany are analyzed in a case study approach using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (Fs/QCA)—an analytic method relevant for describing configurational patterns of causal factors.

The case study of sponsorships from state-owned enterprises in Germany reveals four alternative configurations of top-management support, sponsee prominence, standardized processes, and sponsorship leverage explaining sponsor satisfaction.

The paper combines two underrepresented but important aspects of sponsorship research, i.e. sponsorship management in state-owned enterprises, in an empirical study. Further, present study adds to sponsorship literature by pointing to fuzzy-set Fs/QCA as a relatively novel method that can capture the phenomenon of complex causality.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the configuration of factors affecting the accuracy of triage decision-making. The contribution of the work is twofold: first, it develops a protocol for applying a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) in the context of triage decision-making, and second, it studies, through two pilot cases, the interplay between individual and organizational factors in determining the emergence of errors in different decisional situations.

The methodology adopted in this paper is the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). The fuzzy-set variant of QCA (fsQCA) is implemented. The data set has been collected during field research carried out in the Emergency Departments (EDs) of two Italian public hospitals.

The results of this study show that the interplay between individual and contextual/organizational factors determines the emergence of errors in triage assessment. Furthermore, there are some regularities in the patterns discovered in each of the investigated organizational contexts. These findings suggest that we should avoid isolating individual factors from the context in which nurses make their decisions.

Previous research on triage has mainly explored the impact of homogeneous groups of factors on the accuracy of the triage process, without considering the complexity of the phenomenon under investigation. This study outlines the need to consider the not-linear relationships among different factors in the study of triage’s decision-making. The definition and implementation of a protocol to apply fsQCA to the triage process in EDs further contributes to the originality of the research.

The purpose of this research is to examine why communities facing the same disaster recover differentially and determine pathways to successful disaster recovery in the research setting of New Orleans neighborhoods affected by Hurricane Katrina. While previous studies suggest that there are a variety of pathways to recovery, a broader cross-case comparison is necessary to generalize these pathways into a recovery framework. Specifically, this study seeks to determine what pre-disaster and post-disaster causal factors, alone or in combination, were important to recovery following Hurricane Katrina.

This paper presents a cross-case comparative study of neighborhood-level recovery. Based on prior work, which used the Delphi method to determine hypothesized causal factors and indicators of recovery, data was collected through publically available sources, including the US Census, the Greater New Orleans Community Data Center and previously completed studies for 18 damaged neighborhoods. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis was used due to its ability to analyze both quantitative and qualitative data for smaller case studies.

The results show that there are multiple pathways combining pre-disaster community factors and post-disaster actions that led to recovery, as measured by population return. For example, economic capacity is nearly sufficient for recovery, but a combination of low social vulnerability, post-disaster community participation, a high proportion of pre-World War II housing stock and high amounts of post-disaster funds also led to recovery.

This research uses a novel method to link pre-disaster measures of resilience and vulnerability to recovery outcomes and, through cross-case comparison, generates results that will enable researchers to develop a theory of sustainable community recovery.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate what drives people to show a willingness to mitigate the effects of climate change. To accomplish this goal, this research uses the theory of planned behaviour to examine whether attitude towards climate change, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control are potential determinants of a pro-environmental intention and thus a pro-environmental behaviour.

This explanatory paper applies a Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis to identify the key drivers of pro-environmental intention and behaviour. A non-probability convenience sample of 481 Egyptian respondents was collected.

This study finds that awareness combined with a willingness to pay to mitigate climate change are key drivers of pro-environmental intention. Moreover, personal responsibility and confidence in the ability to mitigate climate change also trigger climate-friendly intentions. Finally, it is found that societal engagement and willingness to take action increase the propensity to exhibit pro-environmental behaviour.

The results of our analysis cannot be generalized to the Egyptian population as a whole as our sample only comprises a sample of Egyptian students.

This paper is novel as it is the first that applies Qualitative Comparative Analysis to the Theory of Planned Behaviour. By doing so, the paper sheds light on the understanding of key cognitive, social-psychological and behavioural factors which lead to environmental actions. Hence, it provides policy-makers with a framework to support a more sustainable society.

Drawing upon the importance of research and development (R&D) alliances in driving firm innovation performance, extant research has analyzed individually the impact of R&D alliance partner attributes on firm innovation performance. Despite such analyzes, research has generally underestimated the configurations of partner attributes leading to firm innovation performance. This research gap is interesting to explore, as firms involved in R&D alliances usually face a combination of partner attributes. Moreover, gaining a better understanding of how R&D partner attributes tie into configurations is an issue that is attracting particular interest in coopetition research and alliance literature. This paper aims to obtain a better knowledge of this underrated, but important, aspect of alliances by exploring what configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes lead firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance. To tackle this question, first, this study reviews the extant literature on R&D alliances by relying on the knowledge-based view of alliances to identify the most impactful partner attributes on firms’ innovation performance. This paper then applies a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to explore the configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes that lead firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance.

This study selects 27 R&D alliances formed worldwide in the telecom industry. This paper explores the multiple configurations of partner attributes of these alliances by conducting a fsQCA.

The findings of the fsQCA show that the two alternate configurations of partner attributes guided the firms involved in these alliances to achieve high innovation performance: a configuration with extensive partner technological relatedness and coopetition, but no experience; and a configuration with extensive partner experience and competition, but no technological relatedness.

The research highlights the importance of how partner attributes (i.e. partner technological relatedness, partner competitive overlap, partner experience and partner relative size) tie, with regard to the firms’ access to external knowledge and consequently to their willingness to achieve high innovation performance. Moreover, this paper reveals the beneficial effect of competition on the innovation performance of the firms involved in R&D alliances when some of the other knowledge-based partner attributes are considered. Despite these insights for alliance and coopetition literature, some limitations are to be noted. First, some of the partners’ attributes considered could be further disentangled into sub-partner attributes. Second, other indicators might be used to measure firms’ innovation performance. Third, as anticipated this study applies fsQCA to explore the combinatory effects of partner attributes in the specific context of R&D alliances in the telecom industry worldwide and in a specific time window. This condition may question the extensibility of the results to other industries and times.

This study also bears two interesting implications for alliance managers. First, the paper suggests that R&D alliance managers need to be aware that potential alliance partners have multiple attributes leading to firm innovation performance. In this regard, partner competitive overlap is particularly important for gaining a better understanding of firm innovation performance. When looking for strategic partners, managers should try to ally with highly competitive enterprises so as to access their more innovative knowledge. Second, the results also highlight that this beneficial effect of coopetition in R&D alliances can be amplified in two ways. On the one hand, when the partners involved in the alliance have not yet developed experience in forming alliances. Partners without previous experience supply ideal stimuli to unlock more knowledge in the alliance because new approaches to access and develop knowledge in the alliance could be explored. On the other hand, this paper detects the situation when the allied partners are developing technologies and products in different areas. When partnering with firms coming from different technological areas, the knowledge diversity that can be leveraged in the alliances could drive alliance managers to generate synergies and economies of scope within the coopetitive alliance.

Extant research has analyzed individually the impact of R&D alliance partner attributes on firm innovation performance but has concurrently underestimated the configurations of partner attributes leading to firm innovation performance. Therefore, this paper differs from previous studies, as it provides an understanding of the specific configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes leading firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance.