個案導向式之比較研究方法探索

A Journey of Case-Oriented Comparative Method

郭姿秀(Tzu-Hsiu Kuo)

指導教授 ： 蔡展維

國立屏東科技大學/管理學院/企業管理系所/碩士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6346/NPUST.2014.00091

摘要

在臺灣質性研究方法領域較少研究者鑽研，除了量化研究採用了繁複的統計方法致使研究較具說服力外，質性研究本身缺乏一套具代表性的研究方法亦是主因。在1990年代，為了改善缺乏研究方法與說服力之缺點並拓展質性研究之應用範圍，Eisenhardt(1989)以實證主義與多重個案研究法為出發點提出了個案導向式之比較研究方法。屬於詮釋主義或單一個案研究之質性研究者紛紛對此抱持著質疑的態度。特別是Dyer & Wilkins(1991)即撰文批評 Eisenhardt只是模仿量化研究之實證主義精神，他們擔心這種實證式個案研究法不僅無法傳達質性研究精神，反而違反了質化研究的詮釋性原則，使得質性研究所強調的真實經驗與啟發創建也隨之消失，會導致研究深度降低。對此Eisenhardt亦撰文進行反論。此一連串之爭辯我們將其稱為Dyer & Wilkins vs. Eisenhardt論爭。
本研究嘗試透過對論爭內容之整理梳理出兩種研究方法之異同點，並依此針對個案導向式之比較研究方法進行修正。本文以三家企業集團之策略選擇，策略變化及策略故事為例，透過檢討企業集團如何運用策略，探討個案導向式之比較研究法如何進行資料收集與理論建構。
藉由論爭整理與實證展演後我們發現：一、立意取樣可幫助我們建立樣本之特殊性及故事性；二、進入資料蒐集前帶入理論引導，可以概略地幫助觀察與分析現象，以建立個案與理論之配適性；三、分析資料以詮釋手法深入描述情節會使個案間交叉比較邏輯更深入呈現。最後，本文希望能提供一種質性研究方法參考，讓研究者能更全面性地瞭解現實的世界，並從中發展出有價值的理論。

關鍵字

個案導向式之比較研究方法 ； 研究方法 ； 策略故事

並列摘要

There are few researchers in Taiwan, who focus on the field of qualitative research. Besides, there is not a systematic research methods in the field of qualitative research, compared with qualitative research, qualitative research is less persuasive. In 1990s, in order to improve the shortcomings of qualitative research and to expand the usability of qualitative research, Eisenhardt (1989) offered Case-Oriented Comparative Method based on positivism and multiple case methodology. However, many qualitative researchers belonged to interpretative case study or multiple cases study doubted her opinion. In particular, Dyer & Wilkins (1991) criticized Eisenhardt just imitated the spirit of positivism from quantative research. They expressed that Case-Oriented Comparative Method not only cannot represent the spirit of qualitative research, but violates of the interpretation principle of qualitative research. It might cause true experience and inspiration, which qualitative research emphasizes, to disappear and decrease research depth. Eisenhardt also offered her arguments followed by their critics on her. The debate mentioned above was called ‘Dyer & Wilkins vs. Eisenhardt controversy.’
This study attempts to present the similarities and differences among two methodologies and to complement Case-Oriented Comparative Method.
We targeted three conglomerates and analyzed their Strategic Selection, Strategic Change and Narrative Strategy Story, followed by tried to explore how to conduct data collection and build framework by case-oriented comparative study.
Through arranging controversy and positive performances, we got three important findings. First, purposive sampling could help us to build the distinctiveness and narrative of sample. Second, it is better to follow theory guidance before conducting data collection, which could help us to observe and analyze the situation roughly. Third, using interpretation to describe the situation of case study would help researchers to present much complicated results in their study. At the last, we hope to offer some suggestions to the researchers of qualitative research in order to make them have better understanding toward the society and try to develp some valueable theories in the future.

並列關鍵字

Case-Oriented Comparative Method ； Methodology ； Narrative Strategy Story

參考文獻

侯勝宗(2012)，「見所未見：詮釋型個案研究方法探索」，組織與管理，第五卷第一期，頁111-153。

蔡敦浩、施進忠、利尚仁(2010)，「敘說創業故事:察覺、學習與再詮釋」，組織與管理 (TAOM)，第三卷第二期，頁67-91。

洪世章、譚丹琪、廖曉青(2007)，「企業成長、策略選擇與策略改變」，中山管理評論，第15卷，第1 期，頁11-15。

蔡展維(2012)，「策略故事之初探」，東吳經濟商業學報，78，69-108。

蔡敦浩、李慶芳(2008)，「情境知識的浮現：敘說探究半導體工程師的維修經驗」，管理學報，第二十五卷，第六期，頁699-716。