Content uploaded by Sylvie Chetty
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sylvie Chetty on Apr 18, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
http://isb.sagepub.com/
International Small Business Journal
http://isb.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/01/28/0266242612471962
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/0266242612471962
published online 28 January 2013International Small Business Journal
Sylvie K. Chetty, Jukka Partanen, Erik S. Rasmussen and Per Servais
conducting a longitudinal cross-country case study
Contextualising case studies in entrepreneurship: A tandem approach to
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at:International Small Business JournalAdditional services and information for
http://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://isb.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
What is This?
- Jan 28, 2013OnlineFirst Version of Record >>
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
International Small Business Journal
0(0) 1 –12
© The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0266242612471962
isb.sagepub.com
S
mall Firms
is
b
j
471962ISB0010.1177/0266242612471962International Small Business JournalChetty et al.
2013
Corresponding author:
Sylvie K. Chetty, Centre for Entrepreneurship, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand.
Email: sylvie.chetty@otago.ac.nz
Contextualising case studies
in entrepreneurship: A tandem
approach to conducting a
longitudinal cross-country
case study
Sylvie K. Chetty
University of Otago, New Zealand and Uppsala University, Sweden
Jukka Partanen
Aalto University, Finland
Erik S. Rasmussen and Per Servais
University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
Abstract
Using predictive and effectuation logics as a framework, this research note explains how case study
research was conducted to demonstrate rigour and relevance. The study involves a longitudinal
cross-country case study on small and medium-sized firm growth and networks undertaken
by research teams in three countries (Finland, Denmark and New Zealand) involving 33 firms.
This research note outlines the implications of this research and provides valuable guidance and
reflections upon opportunities for future research regarding the conduct of contextual studies in
entrepreneurship without compromising validity and reliability.
Keywords
cross-country case study, effectuation logic, longitudinal qualitative study, small and medium-size
enterprises
Introduction
The case study approach to research offers a valuable opportunity to generate new theories and
provide in-depth understanding of complex phenomena (Eisenhardt, 1989; Jack et al., 2010; Yin,
1993). Theory building from case studies is especially useful for exploring longitudinal change
Article
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
2 International Small Business Journal 0(0)
processes (Van de Ven, 1992). As Eisenhardt and Graebner state, ‘papers that build theory from
cases are often regarded as the most interesting research’ (2007: 25). In addition, qualitative
research provides innovative insights (Gibbert et al., 2008) and tends to have the highest impact in
terms of citations (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Pratt, 2009). Entrepreneurial phenomena such
as new-venture creation (Wright and Marlow, 2012), internationalisation (Chetty and Campbell-
Hunt, 2003; Taylor and Jack, 2012), firm growth (McKelvie and Wiklund, 2010) and network
formation (Lockett et al., 2012) are complex processes. For small and medium-sized enterprise
(SME) researchers, this forms a well-grounded rationale for conducting longitudinal qualitative
case studies (Chetty, 1996; Perren and Ram, 2004).
In addition to the temporal dimension, entrepreneurship includes a spatial or contextual dimen-
sion (Plummer, 2010). That is, entrepreneurial phenomena are always linked to the cultural, geo-
graphical, political and commercial environment or site in which they occur (Plummer, 2010).
Zahra argues that contextualising research – effectively linking theory and objectives with the
research site – is especially important in entrepreneurship because:
Entrepreneurship researchers frequently apply theories developed in other disciplines with different
phenomena in mind. These theories are grounded in assumptions that reflect the nature of distant
phenomena, actors and sites. These assumptions may or may not apply to entrepreneurial contexts. A
mismatch between theory and context can result in false leads and inconclusive findings. (2007: 445)
Consequently, conducting longitudinal and contextual case studies pose significant challenges for
SME researchers. In particular, when the aim is to leverage the research to include several contexts,
research sites and/or countries without compromising its validity and reliability, the question of
how to access and manage a team of researchers becomes crucial (Coviello and Jones, 2004). Yet,
the current methodological literature on entrepreneurship offers little guidance on this topic.
The present study explores the process of longitudinal cross-country case study; in particular,
we focus upon how to access and manage a team of researchers and simultaneously, achieve reli-
ability and validity. The purpose of this article is to discuss the design and organisation of a longi-
tudinal cross-country case study on SME growth and networks spanning several years, with
research teams in three countries (Finland, Denmark and New Zealand) and 33 subject firms. The
motivation for this study is threefold. First, several scholars critically debate the rigour and validity
of qualitative research (Bansal and Corley, 2011; Gibbert et al., 2008; Pratt, 2009). For example,
qualitative research has been accused of being too descriptive, lacking clear protocols for analysing
data and providing very few arguments for sampling methodologies (see Rialp et al., 2005). This
criticism is particularly relevant for research drawing upon methods from other, more established
disciplines without developing or adapting them for the domain of entrepreneurship (Short et al.,
2010; Zahra, 2007). Second, while cross-country surveys have their own methodological nuances,
such as equivalence of the constructs, sampling design and instrumentation (Teagarden et al.,
1995), conducting contextual cross-country case studies poses a different set of challenges. As
Zahra states, ‘Reading recent entrepreneurship papers … one rarely gets a sense of the substance,
magnitude or dynamics of the research context. Readers have no sense of what the researchers
have observed, felt or thought’ (2007: 445). Third, there is a fundamental distinction that in qualita-
tive studies, researchers are not only data collectors and analysers, but actively influence the
research process (Easterby-Smith and Malina, 1999; Piekkari et al., 2009). Through their actions
and decisions they influence the overall validity and reliability of the research process (Easterby-
Smith and Malina, 1999; Gibbert et al., 2008).
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Chetty et al. 3
This study addresses these concerns by detailing an approach to case study research that draws
upon the entrepreneurship theory concepts of predictive and effectual logics (Sarasvathy, 2001). It
adopts effectual logic as a tool for theorising and contextualising the process of conducting qualita-
tive entrepreneurship research. However, the study goes beyond this by introducing a new concep-
tual perspective well suited to longitudinal cross-country case study research design: a tandem
approach that combines predictive and effectual logics. The study addresses methodological rigour
in cross-country research by providing details about managing international research teams and
procedures to maintain validity and reliability.
Prior literature
Contextualising cross-country case studies
Extending a case study to include several countries or research sites poses major challenges that
affect methodological rigour. It is recognised that the context in which the research occurs is an
important part of the research process (Easterby-Smith and Malina, 1999; Marschan-Piekkari and
Welch, 2004); the term ‘contextualisation’ helps to explain the surroundings where the research
takes place, such as country, organisation and research design. For example, Michailova (2004)
focuses on methodological contextualisation in her studies in Eastern Europe, explaining the
unique way in which she gained access into firms and the adaptations made in her research design.
Additional differences exist with individual and organisational contexts in cross-country studies that
influence the conduct of interviews (Easterby-Smith and Malina, 1999). The issues highlighted
above point towards some of the concerns surrounding the validity of cross-country research. Using
diverse languages in cross-country studies involves challenges (Marschan-Piekkari and Reis, 2004)
such as translation and back-translation, creating a danger that meanings become skewed or misin-
terpreted. The conceptualisation of validity becomes even more important in cross-country studies
given cultural differences between the respondent and the researcher (Easterby-Smith and Malina,
1999). Furthermore, validity in itself is a social construct that varies according to the cultural and
institutional context (Easterby-Smith and Malina, 1999; Teagarden et al., 1995), in that researcher
experiences, training and thinking patterns are instrumental influences.
Predictive versus effectual research process
Predictive process refers to a management textbook approach for any strategic process in an envi-
ronment where the future is predictable and thus, controllable (Sarasvathy and Dew, 2005).
Sarasvathy (2001) developed effectual logic to explain how new ventures emerge by reversing the
predictive logic approach. It is a specific logic for decision-making under conditions of uncertainty
(Read et al., 2009). Sarasvathy states that: ‘Effectuation processes take a set of means as given and
focus on selecting between possible effects that can be created with that set of means’ (2001: 245).
Thus, effectuation focuses on what one can do with existing means, rather than what one needs to
do to achieve pre-defined goals (Sarasvathy and Dew, 2005).
Method
Case study
The GrowthNet research project, described as the ‘FDN Project’, initially began in Finland but
now includes Denmark and New Zealand. In total the project includes 33 case firms with nine from
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
4 International Small Business Journal 0(0)
Finland, 14 from Denmark and 10 from New Zealand; the Finnish team initiated and led the proj-
ect. The FDN project examines how science and technology-driven SMEs can increase their
chances of successful commercialisation of an innovation and achieve rapid market growth through
networking. Investigating SME growth (Ireland et al., 2005) and networks (Halinen and Törnroos,
2005) together is an appropriate justification for conducting a longitudinal qualitative case study
(Jack et al., 2010).
Research process
Initially, we anticipated that conducting a cross-country case study would follow the predictive
process. This included finding research partners, disseminating case firm criteria and an inter-
view outline, building an international case story database for comparative analysis and writing
joint articles. Since we did not have existing contacts for international collaboration, our uncer-
tainty increased; this became a stimulus to adopt the effectual research process. We did not
consider ourselves as ‘effectual researchers’ at that time, but intuitively built our research pro-
cess on principles of effectuation. When we began to write about our experiences in an earlier
version of this research note, we identified the opportunity to conceptualise our research process.
We subsequently engaged with Sarasvathy’s model, and recognised that our research process
included key elements of effectual logic (e.g. who are you, what do you know, who do you know,
partnerships, affordable loss). However, when we analysed our research process (e.g. by discuss-
ing with the team members and assessing our email archives), we discovered that it was not
completely based on effectuation. Rather, it was apparent that the project had started in Finland
following the predictive research process, which laid the foundation for launching the research
into other countries. Consequently, we propose that to develop new theoretical insights from
rigorous longitudinal cross-country case data, as well as to establish and manage an international
team of researchers, it is appropriate to adopt a ‘tandem approach’ that combines predictive and
effectual logics.
Procedure
We identified an opportunity for a new research project when we noticed a call for research proj-
ects by a government funding agency that matched our research skills and interests. We developed
a research plan drawing upon the work of Eisenhardt (1989) and Yin (1993). This included identi-
fying the relevance of the topic, theoretical background, key concepts and initial framework as
well as developing a research design that included international comparative case study.
Data collection and sample
We commenced with a literature review and pilot study of expert interviews (managers of start-up
centres and industry associations), providing an in-depth understanding of the selected industries
as well as potential case firms. This was followed by a longitudinal in-depth case study of five
firms where we conducted several interviews with key individuals, including chief executive offi-
cers (CEOs), marketing managers and research and development managers. In addition, we con-
ducted retrospective interviews with former CEOs and employees and interviews with key partners,
and conducted follow-up interviews regularly during a period of 12–18 months. This allowed us to
capture SME growth in real time, and to understand the role of networks in contributing to their
development. Including real-time study of firm development also mitigates bias from retrospective
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Chetty et al. 5
sense-making (see Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). Finally, we conducted a mini case study of four
case firms operating in the same industry.
We used purposeful sampling according to the following criteria. First, we used different kinds
of awards relating to innovation, entrepreneurship and growth as a useful indicator for the innova-
tiveness and successfulness of firms. Second, we only considered SMEs which had been able to
commercialise their innovation, and as a result had a track record of their growth. This criterion
was essential, since innovative activity that actually leads to high growth is a fairly rare phenom-
enon (Coad and Rao, 2008).
We constructed a broad interview outline that covered the core themes of the research agenda.
The outline was a flexible guideline which could be adapted to the firm and country-specific con-
text. We developed two specific interview techniques as the fundamental basis for all cross-country
interviews. The first was a critical incident technique, suitable for investigating the development of
a complex phenomenon (Halinen et al., 1999). We addressed the growth path of the SMEs by asking
respondents to identify critical – both positive and negative – incidents within the history of the firm.
The second required respondents to draw network maps to describe their network environments
and related key actors. These maps provided triangulation when analysing the set of network rela-
tionships that each firm used in its innovation activities and growth efforts. Data analysis involved
comparing information relating to networks in the transcript with the maps, which provided more
detail about the networks and how they linked to the growth process. In addition to the primary
data, we collected a large set of secondary data such as business plans, memos, newsletters and
business magazine articles. Although the research began in Finland, we had committed ourselves
to conduct an international comparative case study. However, we discovered that it was difficult to
follow the predictive process to conduct a multi-country case study with international research
partners.
Findings and discussion
Leveraging research efforts into multiple countries by adopting the effectuation
process
The key constructs in the effectuation approach that we use as a framework to explain the research
process are means-oriented, partnerships, affordable loss, co-creation through new means and
leverage (Read et al., 2009; Sarasvathy and Dew, 2005). We explain each construct in detail as they
describe the research process.
Means-oriented: start with an inventory of resources. What do you have? What do you know?
Who do you know? Consistent with effectual logic, we assessed our means. What we had was a
Finnish team of researchers with funding, staff and a research plan. What we knew was theory
relating to networks and SME growth, as well as methodological experience from the Finnish
project. These experiences formed a basis for establishing and sharing a cross-country research
design, which covered the key aspects of qualitative case study, including criteria for case selection
and profiles of the respondents. In addition, we had experience in longitudinal research methods
such as retrospective interviews, critical incident technique, the role of secondary data and follow-
up interviews. Who we knew were connected to the leading professor of the Finnish team, who had
other academics in the field of network research in his professional and social network.
Partnerships: interact with people you know or meet. To use time efficiently, we carried out the
research in Finland concurrently with building collaborative ties with international research part-
ners. We built these ties by attending international conferences particularly, International Marketing
and Purchasing Group conferences. A special interest group ensured that all potential research
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
6 International Small Business Journal 0(0)
partners had a common theoretical background, shared vocabulary and similar research interests
(Halinen and Törnroos, 2005; Teagarden et al., 1995), which helped to gain their commitment.
We were able to arrange research meetings with potential research partners by relying on the
leading professor’s social networks and reputation. For these meetings we developed presentation
material, such as the original research plan and the preliminary framework. The framework was
important because it captured the theoretical background and key concepts (Eisenhardt and
Graebner, 2007) that provided a tool for communicating the core elements of the research to poten-
tial research partners. At these meetings we co-created the research process by sharing areas of
interest, discussing the core concepts of the research and developing preliminary joint targets for
the collaboration.
Affordable loss: interact with a portfolio of research partners. Consistent with effectual logic,
the originating research team had to consider affordable loss when approaching research partners.
Affordable loss in this context means that while the team invested time and energy in approaching
potential partners to participate, they were mindful that some of these partners may not complete
the research. Initially, the research collaboration had partners from five countries, but two eventu-
ally dropped out. As the research advanced further the most active partners, who were able to
conduct the fieldwork, were in Denmark and New Zealand.
Obtain partner commitments through co-creation. Gaining commitment from partners is impor-
tant when conducting cross-country research (Teagarden et al., 1995). We had to be creative in
designing this research by obtaining commitment from willing partners to co-create at least parts
of this research. Hence, the Danish and New Zealand partners decided how to gain funding for the
research and gain access to SMEs in their respective countries. Once these partners acquired
research funds, they had obligations to their funding agencies to commit to this research.
New means: expanding the cycle of resources. Our effectual research process generated new
means for building and managing a team of researchers.
Develop and share a start-up package. The coordinator from the Finnish team developed and
sent 30 pages of the case study protocol, in line with Gibbert et al. (2008), to guide the international
team members. It included the following:
• an initial theoretical framework;
• the research design of the Finnish study;
• selection criteria of the case firms;
• useful hints and learning that occurred when accessing the case firms;
• an interview outline;
• secondary data sources;
• initial case history structure;
• one case history as an example; and
• preliminary ideas for joint papers.
The Finnish team shared all the knowledge and experience that they gained from their study, which
was one or two years ahead in the research process.
Co-creation of the research design. In order to overcome some initial challenges relating to data
analysis, we decided to focus on identifying and analysing the critical incidents of the growth paths
of the case firms. The research design was adapted slightly to suit the country context and unique
skills that the international team members brought to the research. For example, the team members
were in varying stages of their academic careers (e.g. doctoral students, associate professors and
full professors), which provided a rich mixture of skills to co-create the research.
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Chetty et al. 7
Co-creation through constant workshops and communication. We co-created the research pro-
cess through constant dialogue and regular meetings at international conferences and during six
workshops. Workshops lasted for one or two days and were held regularly in Denmark, Finland or
New Zealand, and proved crucial in several ways. First, research partners were updated on the
project status. Second, workshop discussions clarified key concepts and theoretical models. Third,
workshops provided learning opportunities through sharing experiences. Fourth, workshops helped
to fine-tune the research and facilitate the abductive (Dubois and Gadde, 2002) cross-country
research process. In the abductive approach, ‘the theoretical framework, empirical fieldwork and
case analysis evolve simultaneously’ (Dubois and Gadde, 2002: 554). Thus, the ambiguity and
uncertainty that we faced during the research process led to creativity and new insights on how to
deal with problems. Finally, the workshops provided a platform for reporting preliminary findings
from each country to discover novel insights. Overall, this co-creation through constant communi-
cation and workshops achieved researcher triangulation in cross-country research settings. After
each workshop the project coordinator produced and distributed a report which summarised the
main topics, outcomes and research implications. The project coordinator played a crucial role in
managing the process and overseeing the whole project. The long duration of the research allowed
us to understand how to complement each other’s skills. Consistent with Easterby-Smith and
Malina (1999), as researchers from different contextual backgrounds we learned and developed a
common understanding.
New goals through leverage: benefits from surprise and turning the unexpected into new
opportunities. Our multi-country case study was an adaptive and evolving process with positive
surprises that led to unexpected opportunities. The first unexpected benefit was that the three
remaining partners were from small open economies, which provided an excellent opportunity
to examine the phenomenon in comparable economic contexts. As Sarasvathy (2001) states, the
partners who commit shape the project, and so we turned this surprise into an opportunity to
focus on such economies. The second was that by having several research partners with various
backgrounds, we benefited from synergy of the team’s complementary skills. For example, one
partner had research expertise in international business, which helped us expand into the field of
international entrepreneurship. Third, continuous interaction between the research partners
spurred us on to constantly co-create and implement new ideas for joint articles. Finally, one
unexpected opportunity emerged because of the different time zones in which the researchers
lived, enabling us to work on the project 24 hours a day. Table 1 conceptualises our research
process using effectuation logic.
Conclusion
We use the entrepreneurial context to illustrate how to build and manage an international team of
researchers without compromising rigour. While predictive logic maybe suitable for research in a
single country setting or research site, longitudinal cross-country research is non-predictable and
dynamic in nature, and hence requires a tandem approach. A qualitative study over a long dura-
tion, and topics that are not easy to operationalise, demand a process that is simultaneously
rigid yet flexible. We achieved this by allowing for adaptation, creativity and open-minded-
ness. We concur with Pratt that: ‘There is no accepted “boilerplate” for writing up qualitative
methods and determining quality’ (2009: 856). Similar to the entrepreneurial process, a longi-
tudinal cross-country case study is a research process that occurs under conditions of uncer-
tainty. Some of the practical empirical challenges and their avoidance may be difficult to
predict and solve before conducting the actual fieldwork. We concur with Piekkari et al. (2009)
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
8 International Small Business Journal 0(0)
that a design logic – the blueprint for research design as proposed by Eisenhardt (1989) and Yin
(1993) – creates ‘tension between fixing the boundaries of the case study as early as possible
and responding to emerging insights and opportunities’(2009: 572). By using effectuation
logic we show how we dealt with these tensions, because we start with our means.
We focus upon two main challenges in qualitative research: time and resources, and reliability
and validity. In line with effectuation logic and resource and time constraints, we had to ‘do more
for less’ (Read et al., 2009: 15) while simultaneously maintaining reliability and validity (Gibbert
et al., 2008). Although the research partners brought unique skills and benefits to the research, we
had to balance these new insights from surprises with reliability and validity. We considered cross-
country differences as creating opportunities to explore the unknown, instead of using rigour to
stifle creativity and new insights.
Table 1. Conceptualisation of the effectual process for longitudinal cross-country case study
Elements of the effectual process What actually happened in the FDN research
project?
Assess means Who are we? An originating team of researchers with funding,
staff and a research plan that includes cross-
country case study
What we know? Network theories, growth models and fieldwork
experience from the Finnish project
Who we know? Network theory researchers through the
professional and social networks of a distinguished
Finnish professor with reputation asset
Partners interact with
people we know or meet
Attend conferences to strengthen relationships
with research partners and to convince partners
to get involved
Gain access to research partners through the
leading professor
Develop presentation material and sell the idea
to research partners with original research plan
Communicate and share research interests;
develop joint targets
Obtain partner
commitments
through co-creation
New means Select a portfolio of researchers to ensure
affordable loss
Develop and share a start-up package
Co-create research design for country-specific
adaptations
Co-create approaches and solutions during the
research process through constant workshops and
communication (project coordinator)
Unexpected surprises
and new goals
Benefit from small open economies context
Benefit from synergy of the team’s complementary
skills and backgrounds
Constant co-creation of new ideas for joint
articles
Benefit from time zones
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Chetty et al. 9
Implications for future research
One of the challenges that we faced was unpacking validity and reliability in longitudinal cross-
country research. What exactly is rigour in such research? The main criticism of qualitative research
is rigour, and that validity and reliability are questionable (Gibbert et al., 2008; Short et al., 2010).
To facilitate future research using cross-country case studies, and to address the ongoing critical
debate about rigour in entrepreneurship research (Short et al., 2010), we highlight the challenges
faced and how we dealt with them in Table 2. In addition, there are opportunities for SME
Table 2. Key methodological issues, challenges, solutions and implications for SME researchers conducting
a longitudinal cross-country case study
Key issues Challenges Solutions and implications
Research
context
Overcoming language barriers/
liability of foreignness
Use native researchers who can conduct the
interview in their own languages
Gaining access to local firms
Overcoming the liability of
outsidership
Use native researchers who can use their
personal and professional networks and
knowledge of local institutions to open doors
Adapting the research design
for different contexts
Allow minor adaptations (e.g. for gaining access)
in the research design
Visit each other’s institutions to gain an
understanding of country context
Validity and
reliability
Ensuring internal validity Develop an initial research plan, including
theoretical framework and key concepts
Select research partners within the same
theoretical domain
Initiate the research in one pilot country:
subsequently share experiences and understanding
to ensure consistency, rigour, validity and
outcome from the research
Perform constant cross-country comparison of
data through workshops and meetings
Move back and forth between theory and data
and adapt theory
Be open to challenge the initial theoretical
framework
Ensuring construct validity Share interview protocol and agree on specific
research techniques and chain of evidence
Review of transcripts by key informants
Agree on the role of secondary data and
triangulation
Ensuring external validity Agree on similar criteria as rationale for sampling
of cases and respondents
Select several cases from each country
Ensuring reliability Develop a case study protocol to make the
procedures for doing the case studies transparent
Build a case study database with transcripts, case
studies and secondary data with real names of
firms for replication
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
10 International Small Business Journal 0(0)
researchers to develop this further, in order to advance our understanding about contextualising
case studies in entrepreneurship to achieve rigour in research findings. Consistent with Bansal and
Corley, ‘by describing the who, what, where, when and how’ (2011: 236) of our experiences con-
ducting longitudinal cross-country research, we employ methodological rigour that future research-
ers can advance.
The tandem research process that this article develops is a case study in itself. To ensure validity
we provide a systematic approach to the tandem research process that other SME researchers can
replicate or extend. The tandem research process can be useful for SME researchers who aim to
contextualise a longitudinal cross-country case study; we used our collaborative research skills to
alleviate the biases that occur when the methodological approach of one country (e.g. what consti-
tutes validity?) dominates the research. Since we had good coordination mechanisms, we could
closely monitor the process of validity and reliability in each country to maintain rigour. Future
SME researchers could test and develop the tandem approach further by transferring it to different
contexts such as research collaborations with a larger number of countries, a large number of dif-
ferent cultural and institutional contexts and countries at varying stages in their economic
development.
The tandem approach provides pathways for SME researchers to apply this new conceptual
perspective wherever an element of flexibility needs to be built into the research design. This might
apply to single-country settings involving uncertainty, as well as complex and sensitive topics such
as the sexual orientation of entrepreneurs (Galloway, 2011) or business failures (Shepherd, 2003).
Future SME researchers could start by assessing their means, which will help to reconceptualise
how they approach their research. Our advice to SME researchers is that ‘given who you are, what
you know and whom you know’ (Sarasvathy 2001: 258), consider what type of research you would
want to create and develop.
Funding
This work was supported by the New Zealand Foundation for Research Science and Technology (grant no.
VICX0302) and the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation (grant no. 40400/03).
References
Bansal P and Corley K (2011) From the editors – The coming of age for qualitative research: Embracing the
diversity of qualitative methods. Academy of Management Journal 54(2): 233–237.
Chetty S (1996) The case study method for research in small and medium-sized firms. International Small
Business Journal 15(1): 73–85.
Chetty S and Campbell-Hunt C (2003) Explosive international growth and problems of success amongst small
to medium-sized firms. International Small Business Journal 21(1): 61–81.
Coad A and Rao R (2008) Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach.
Research Policy 37(4): 633–648.
Coviello NE and Jones MV (2004) Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research. Journal
of Business Venturing 19(4): 485–508.
Dubois A and Gadde L-E (2002) Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of
Business Research 55(7): 553–560.
Easterby-Smith M and Malina D (1999) Cross-cultural collaborative research: Toward reflexivity. Academy
of Management Journal 42(1): 76–86.
Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14(4):
532–550.
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Chetty et al. 11
Eisenhardt KM and Graebner ME (2007) Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy
of Management Journal 50(1): 25–32.
Galloway L (2011) The experiences of male gay business owners in the UK. International Small Business
Journal. Epub ahead of print, 9 May 2011. DOI: 10.1177/0266242610391324.
Gibbert M, Ruigrok W and Wicki B (2008) What passes as a rigorous case study? Strategic Management
Journal 29(13): 1465–1474.
Halinen A and Törnroos J-Å (2005) Using case methods in the study of contemporary business networks.
Journal of Business Research 58(9): 1285–1297.
Halinen A, Salmi A and Havila V (1999) From dyadic change to changing business networks: An analytical
framework. Journal of Management Studies 36(6): 779–794.
Ireland RD, Reutzel CR and Webb JW (2005) From the editors: Entrepreneurship research in AMJ: What
has been published, and what might the future hold? Academy of Management Journal 48(4): 556–564.
Jack S, Moult S, Anderson AR, et al. (2010) An entrepreneurial network evolving: Patterns of change. Inter-
national Small Business Journal 28(4): 315–337.
Lockett N, Jack S and Larty J (2012) Motivation and challenges of network formation: Entrepreneur and
intermediary perspectives. International Small Business Journal. Epub ahead of print, 29 June 2012. DOI:
10.1177/0266242612448383.
McKelvie A and Wiklund J (2010) Advancing firm growth research: A focus on growth mode instead of
growth rate. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 34(2): 261–288.
Marschan-Piekkari R and Reis C (2004) Language and languages in cross-cultural interviewing. In: Marschan-
Piekkari R and Welch C (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research: Methods for International Business.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp.224–243.
Marschan-Piekkari R and Welch C (eds) (2004) Handbook of Qualitative Research: Methods for Interna-
tional Business. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Michailova S (2004) Contextualising fieldwork: Reflections on conducting research in Eastern Europe. In:
Marschan-Piekkari R and Welch C (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research: Methods for International
Business. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp.365–383.
Perren L and Ram M (2004) Case-study method in small business and entrepreneurial research: Mapping
boundaries and perspectives. International Small Business Journal 22(1): 83–101.
Piekkari R, Welch C and Paavilainen E (2009) The case study as disciplinary convention: Evidence from
international business journals. Organizational Research Methods 12(3): 567–589.
Pratt MG (2009) For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Acad-
emy of Management Journal 53(5): 856–862.
Plummer LA (2010) Spatial dependence in entrepreneurship research: Challenges and methods. Organiza-
tional Research Methods 13(1): 146–175.
Read S, Dew N, Sarasvathy SD, et al. (2009) Marketing under uncertainty: The logic of effectual approach.
Journal of Marketing 73(3): 1–18.
Rialp A, Rialp J and Knight GA (2005) The phenomenon of early internationalizing firms: What do we know
after a decade (1993–2003) of scientific inquiry? International Business Review 14(2): 147–166.
Sarasvathy S (2001) Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to
entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review 26(2): 243–263.
Sarasvathy S and Dew N (2005) Entrepreneurial logics for a technology of foolishness. Scandinavian Journal
of Management 21(4): 385–406.
Shepherd DA (2003) Learning from business failure: Propositions of grief recovery for the self-employed.
Academy of Management Review 28(2): 318–328.
Short JC, Ketchen DJ Jr, Combs JG, et al. (2010) Research methods in entrepreneurship: Opportunities and
challenges. Organizational Research Methods 13(1): 6–15.
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
12 International Small Business Journal 0(0)
Taylor M and Jack R (2012) Understanding the pace, scale and pattern of firm internationalization: An exten-
sion of the ‘born global’ concept. International Small Business Journal. Epub ahead of print, 18 January
2012. DOI: 10.1177/0266242611431992.
Teagarden MB, von Glinow MA, Bowen DE, et al. (1995) Toward a theory of comparative management
research: An idiographic case study of the best international human resources management project. Acad-
emy of Management Journal 38(5): 1261–1287.
Van de and Ven AH (1992) Longitudinal methods for studying the process of entrepreneurship. In: Sexton DL
and Kasandra JD (eds) The State of the Art of Entrepreneurship Research. Boston, MA: PWS Kent,
pp.214–242.
Wright M and Marlow S (2012) Entrepreneurial activity in the venture creation and development process.
International Small Business Journal 30(2): 107–114.
Yin RK (1993) Applications of Case Study Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Zahra SA (2007) Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing
22(3): 443–452.
Sylvie K. Chetty is the Dunedin City Chair of Entrepreneurship and Director of the Centre for Entrepreneurship,
University of Otago, and a research associate at Uppsala University. Her research interests are in the interna-
tionalisation process of SMEs, business networks, industry clusters and learning. She has published in jour-
nals such as Journal of International Business Studies, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Journal of
World Business, Management International Review, Regional Studies, European Journal of Marketing,
Journal of International Marketing, International Business Review and International Marketing Review. Her
work has also been published in several book chapters. She is a member of a number of journal editorial
boards.
Jukka Partanen is a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Marketing, Aalto University. His recent
work has been published in such journals as Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice and Industrial Marketing
Management. His research interests include strategic networks and alliances, SME networks, high-growth
firms, industrial service business and innovation.
Erik S. Rasmussen is an associate professor in the Department of Marketing and Management, University of
Southern Denmark. His research focuses on international entrepreneurship and Born Global firms. In recent
years he has studied in particular international entrepreneurs that are able to avoid domestic path dependence.
He has published in several journals including International Journal of Innovation Management, Journal of
Small Business and Enterprise Development, Journal of Management and Governance and in several books.
Per Servais is Associate Professor of Marketing at the Department of Marketing & Management, University
of Southern Denmark. His research interests are international entrepreneurship, the formation and growth of
international new ventures, buying behaviour in small industrial firms, branding in industrial markets and
internationalisation of the firm. He has published a number of book chapters and articles in Industrial
Marketing Management, International Marketing Review, Journal of International Marketing, Advances in
International Marketing and International Business Review.
at University of Otago Library on February 10, 2013isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
