Jordan, E; Gross, M E; Javernick-Will, A N and Garvin, M J (2011) Use and misuse of qualitative comparative analysis. Construction Management and Economics, 29(11), pp. 1159-1173. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Research in construction is often confronted with a trade-off of selecting either in-depth studies of small-N cases, which may affect generalization of findings, or statistical large-N studies, which may limit examination of causal links. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) provides a middle ground between these options, allowing researchers to analytically determine different combinations of conditions that produce an outcome in comparative studies. QCA has been applied extensively in other fields; however, the method has only recently started to gain traction in construction research. Guidance on the implementation of QCA is provided, including: a description of the method and its variants; stages required for its application; its benefits and critiques; applications in the construction field; and recommendations for scholars employing the method. QCA is a promising approach for probing causal links via investigations between variable-based, large-N analyses and qualitative, case-based, small-N studies. However, researchers must not use the method in haste or simply to obtain quantitative results from qualitative data. It requires significant time and rigour to determine and justify the conditions, outcomes and cases used in its application. QCA is well suited for research where interactions between conditions and outcomes are not well understood and can be used to build theory in the complex environment of construction.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | qualitative analysis; qualitative comparative analysis; research methods |
| Index terms: | qualitative comparative analysis, qualitative analysis, traction, critique, option, implementation, interaction, investigation, comparative study |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, research design and methodology, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, decision analysis, transportation engineering, behavioral psychology, research methods |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 CTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here