How can you ensure the validity of your case study findings?

The better the results and the higher the quality of the product, the more certain the findings of the problem can be. This happens when you examine several credible sources and simulate them to come up with your idea. I suggest you share your findings with the authors of the same articles and ask for their feedback on your results. For example, today, Albert Einstein's opinions are criticized and their creative ideas are exposed to other researchers so that they can reach more accurate results about Einstein's thoughts and increase the credibility of their work.

Clearly defining the scope of your case study is foundational. For example, if your case study is about the sustainability practices of a corporation, you should define the specific practices you are examining, such as waste management or energy efficiency. This clarity prevents scope creep and ensures that your findings directly address your research question.

The selection of subjects or cases significantly impacts the validity of your study. For instance, if you're examining the impact of a new environmental policy, choosing a diverse range of businesses affected by the policy—from small startups to large corporations—can help ensure that your findings are comprehensive and representative.

Employing a mix of data collection methods can enhance the richness and depth of your data. For example, combining in-depth interviews with direct observations and document analysis in a study about workplace sustainability practices provides a more dimensional understanding of how those practices are implemented and perceived within the company.

From the perspective of Data Collection, always make sure that the data you are using is relevant. There are a few things that can distract from gathering relevant data. The first is personal bias put onto the validity of data from the people that collected it. Paraphrasing Richard Feynman, "it doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, if it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong". I have seen this waste peoples time and their employer's money. Another is straight forward and easy to avoid, Statistical Relevance. Making sure you have replicates and repeatability in the data you are using is key to drawing impactful relationships/conclusions from it. Non-statistically relevant data usually stems from expediency.

'Analysis - Crucial aspect for Credibility' :: One approach to enhancing the credibility of Case study/research is through the implementation of the triangulation strategy. This essentially signifies that the investigation will be carried out from various or multiple vantage points. This could involve, for instance, the utilisation of multiple moderators situated in distinct geographical locations, or it might involve the analysis of the same data by multiple individuals. In essence, any methodology that enables the investigator to scrutinise the data from diverse perspectives. Another way being respondent evaluation which entails evaluating the preliminary findings through participant testing to ascertain their continued validity.

Each case study is set in a unique context. Therefore, the methodology may be restricted to investigation of a single case. I view triangulation as the best first step in the case study analysis. Fusch referred to the importance of using different sources of data, namely by conducting interviews with multiple participants or multiple archive sources. As it's generally not possible to replicate a case study under the conditions in which it occurred, its reliability is fundamentally demonstrated by triangulation of data. This process originates from the application of several data collection instruments, evidence chaining, and rigor in all procedures performed throughout the research. Only then, you should look at external/internal validity.

Engaging with peers for feedback can be instrumental. For example, presenting your preliminary findings at a conference or a seminar can provide diverse perspectives from other researchers who might point out biases or suggest alternative interpretations you might not have considered.

Reflecting on the limitations of your study openly enhances its credibility. For instance, acknowledging that a case study conducted within a single organization limits the generalizability of your findings encourages a more nuanced interpretation of the results.

To ensure the validity of case study findings, focus on three key areas. 1st - Prolonged engagement: Spend ample time with participants and in the field to build trust and understand the context thoroughly. This reduces misinterpretation risks. 2nd- Negative case analysis: Actively look for cases or data that contradict your emerging findings to test the robustness of your conclusions. And, 3rd -Data saturation: Collect data until no new information emerges, indicating a comprehensive examination of your case. By emphasizing these three aspects, you can create a solid foundation for a valid and reliable case study.