The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies
Abstract
A methodology for conducting the case study of a management information system (MIS) is presented. Suitable for the study of a single case, the methodology also satisfies the standards of the natural science model of scientific research. This article provides an overview of the methodological problems involved in the study of a single case, describes scientific method, presents an elucidation of how a previously published MIS case study captures the major features of scientific method, responds to the problems involved in the study of a single case, and summarizes what a scientific methodology for MIS case studies does, and does not, involve. The article also has ramifications that go beyond matters of MIS case studies alone. For MIS researchers, the article might prove interesting for addressing such fundamental issues as whether MIS research must be mathematical, statistical, or quantitative in order to be called "scientific.” For MIS practitioners, the article’s view of scientific method might prove interesting for empowering them to identify, for themselves, the point at which scientific rigor is achieved in an MIS research effort, and beyond which further rigor can be called into question, especially if pursued at the expense of professional relevance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research
Kirk, J., & Miller, M. (1986) · doi:10.4135/9781412985659 · Cited by 1,462
Cited by
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems1
Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249410 · Cited by 5,263
Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering
Runeson, P., & Höst, M. (2009) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-008-9102-8 · Cited by 3,862
The business model ontology a proposition in a design science approach
Osterwalder, A. (2004) · Unknown · doi:10.22005/bcu.15985 · Cited by 1,932
Dubé, L., & Paré, G. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036550 · Cited by 976
Metadata
- Authors
- Lee, A. S.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 1989-03-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 33-50
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1527353115
- Cited by
- 1,300
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 31.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.