case study idea evaluation

Last updated 20/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > Journals
• > Design Science
• > Volume 9
• > Idea evaluation as a design process: understanding...

Article contents

• Introduction
• Theoretical background
• Limitations and future research

Supplementary Materials

Idea evaluation as a design process: understanding how experts develop ideas and manage fixations.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2023

• Supplementary materials

Idea evaluation is used to identify and select ideas for development as future innovations. However, approaching idea evaluation as a decision gate can limit the role of the person evaluating ideas, create fixation bias, and underutilise the person’s creative potential. Although studies show that during evaluation experts are able to engage in design activities, it is still not clear how they design and develop ideas. The aim of this study was to understand how experts develop ideas during evaluation. Using the think-aloud technique, we identify different ways in which experts develop ideas. Specifically, we show how experts transform initial idea concepts using iterative steps of elaboration and transformation of different idea components. Then, relying on concept-knowledge theory (C-K theory), we identify six types of reasoning that the experts use during idea evaluation. This helps us to distinguish between three different roles that experts can move between during evaluation: gatekeeper, designer managing fixation, and designer managing defixation. These findings suggest that there is value in viewing idea evaluation as a design process because it allows us to identify and leverage the experts’ knowledge and creativity to a fuller extent.

1. Introduction

Idea evaluation plays an important role in the innovation process. Its purpose is to identify promising ideas for innovations and to filter out ideas that do not present value for the company (Hammedi, van Riel, & Sasovova Reference Hammedi, van Riel and Sasovova 2011 ; Eling, Langerak, & Griffin Reference Eling, Langerak and Griffin 2015 ; Sukhov Reference Sukhov 2018 ). Idea evaluation has been historically conceptualised as a decision gate, whereby experts estimate the likelihood of an idea being successful with the aim of reducing uncertainty and risk related to idea implementation (Cooper Reference Cooper 1990 ; Cooper & Sommer Reference Cooper and Sommer 2016 ). Consequently, this has led to an impression that idea evaluation can be optimised and outsourced, and that good ideas can be found when specific criteria are applied (e.g., Magnusson, Netz, & Wästlund Reference Magnusson, Netz and Wästlund 2014 ; Eling et al. Reference Eling, Langerak and Griffin 2015 ), which has influenced managers to look for other ways of optimising idea evaluation as a decision gate. However, this search for the “best” ideas during a period of high uncertainty has created suitable conditions for fixation bias, whereby individuals who are tasked with making decisions regarding idea quality are locked into a single frame of reasoning and the specific role of a gatekeeper. This type of fixation in relation to idea evaluation, whereby uncertainty leads to avoidance of creativity, has been found to result in the dismissal of new and original ideas (Licuanan, Dailey, & Mumford Reference Licuanan, Dailey and Mumford 2007 ; Mueller, Melwani, & Goncalo Reference Mueller, Melwani and Goncalo 2012 ), which are crucial for innovation.

Previous studies have suggested a different conceptualisation of idea evaluation whereby experts are not limited to idea evaluation, but rather are encouraged to envision a potential future and forecast what the ideas they are evaluating can become (Hatchuel & Weil Reference Hatchuel and Weil 2009 ; Florén & Frishammar Reference Florén and Frishammar 2012 ). Furthermore, research suggests that individuals can alter their behavior during idea evaluation and approach idea evaluation as a creative process (e.g., Harvey & Kou Reference Harvey and Kou 2013 ; Sukhov et al. , Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Olsson and Magnusson 2018 ). Moreover, encouragement of creativity during evaluation has been found to enhance the generation and selection of ideas (Gillier & Bayus Reference Gillier and Bayus 2022 ). This approach highlights the importance of creative idea development activities during evaluation such as elaboration and transformation of ideas because it reveals why ideas are considered to be good and how they can be even better (Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Netz, Magnusson and Olsson 2021 ). Furthermore, previous studies have suggested that ideas emerge from fragments of the problem and solution elements of an idea (Maher, Poon, & Boulanger Reference Maher, Poon and Boulanger 1996 ; Dorst & Cross Reference Dorst and Cross 2001 ), and that idea generation, development, and evaluation are better viewed as a holistic and iterative design process (Dorst & Cross Reference Dorst and Cross 2001 ; Sosa Reference Sosa 2019 ). Recent studies have also found that a combination of generative and evaluative activities during idea evaluation yields better task performance because it improves the ability to recognise creative and original ideas and the ability to better discriminate between feasible and unfeasible ideas (van Broekhoven et al., Reference van Broekhoven, Belfi, Borghans and Seegers 2021 ). Furthermore, some studies have pointed to the notion that experts can adopt different roles during idea evaluation. For instance, experts might fixate on the initial idea and use their knowledge to assess the potential of the initial idea concept, but they could also act as designers, recognising the idea’s hidden potential, reconceptualising it and finding a better path for the idea’s development (Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Netz, Magnusson and Olsson 2021 ; Hua, Harvey, & Rietzschel Reference Hua, Harvey and Rietzschel 2022 ). However, at present, we have little understanding of how experts actually engage with ideas during evaluation, the extent of fixations during evaluation, and whether they are able to act as designers in a consistent manner.

The aim of this study was to better understand how experts engage in creative idea development activities (i.e., design activities) during the idea evaluation process. More particularly, we focus on understanding the extent of experts’ fixation during idea evaluation and on their capacity to act as designers in an effort to manage fixations. By doing so, we aim to expand our conceptualisation of idea evaluation as a holistic and generative design process. Thus, we undertook an explorative study wherein we collected data from five industry professionals tasked with evaluating a range of ideas for new product and service innovations using the think-aloud method (Ericsson & Simon Reference Ericsson and Simon 1980 ; Van Someren, Barnard, & Sandberg Reference Van Someren, Barnard and Sandberg 1994 ). This enabled us to gain a better understanding of how different experts engage with ideas in terms of idea evaluation and idea development, and to expand our perspective regarding the design activities and the roles of experts during idea evaluation.

Our study makes three main contributions to the literature. First, we show that experts perceive ideas in different ways, in terms of both how they evaluate and how they develop ideas. This suggests that early ideas require engagement, conversation, and discussion to enable experts to realise their potential, understand their limitations, and integrate the experts’ knowledge in a complementary manner. Second, we find that ideas have a dual purpose, acting as both an object for evaluation and a trigger for the reconceptualisation and creation of new ideas. Specifically, experts can fixate on ideas by evaluating and further elaborating on the initial idea concept, or they can defixate from the initial idea concept and envision an alternative development path for the idea. This changes our understanding of the role of idea evaluators from one of gatekeepers to one of the potential designers who are more involved in the co-creation of ideas. Third, we identify specific design patterns that can be used by experts for developing ideas further. This helps us to advance our understanding of the roles of experts during idea evaluation and show how ideas can evolve in specific directions. Hence, we show how different strategies can be used to develop ideas further during evaluation. Overall, the findings of our study provide value to innovation managers and design scholars and practitioners by illuminating the intricate details of experts’ designerly behavior and their contributions to creative idea development during evaluation.

The rest of the paper is organised as follows. First, we present a theoretical background explaining the main concepts underlying our investigation. Next, we present a description of the method used and our results. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings in light of our theoretical framework and outline recommendations for managers and for future research.

2. Theoretical background

2.1. idea evaluation.

Idea evaluation is generally understood to be a process aimed at identifying ideas that have the highest potential for the organisation and filtering out ideas that do not present sufficient value (Hammedi et al. Reference Hammedi, van Riel and Sasovova 2011 ). The challenges associated with idea evaluation include the high degree of uncertainty that the evaluators experience, partly because of the incompleteness of early versions of underdeveloped ideas (Chang, Chen, & Wey Reference Chang, Chen and Wey 2007 ; Frishammar, Florén, & Wincent Reference Frishammar, Florén and Wincent 2010 ), and partly because of the ideas’ originality (Moreau, Markman, & Lehmann Reference Moreau, Markman and Lehmann 2001 ; Deichmann & Ende Reference Deichmann and Ende 2014 ). Thus, people tasked with idea evaluation may have difficulty understanding the ideas, which can result in underappreciation of their quality (Sukhov Reference Sukhov 2018 ), adopt a negative attitude toward ideas that do not fit into a specific framework (Licuanan et al. Reference Licuanan, Dailey and Mumford 2007 ), or avoid creative ideas because of the high level of uncertainty associated with their future development (Mueller et al. Reference Mueller, Melwani and Goncalo 2012 ).

Idea evaluation is often explained in terms of a rational and systematic approach that can involve specific criteria for determining idea quality (e.g., Balachandra & Friar Reference Balachandra and Friar 1997 ; Carbonell-Foulquié, Munuera-Alemán, & Rodrıguez-Escudero Reference Carbonell-Foulquié, Munuera-Alemán and Rodrıguez-Escudero 2004 ; Frederiksen & Knudsen Reference Frederiksen and Knudsen 2017 ). The use of these criteria is aimed at directing and anchoring the evaluators’ reasoning and helping them to make a more informed decision regarding idea quality (Kudrowitz & Wallace Reference Kudrowitz and Wallace 2013 ; Magnusson et al. Reference Magnusson, Netz and Wästlund 2014 ). However, a more holistic and intuitive decision-making approach to idea evaluation has also been portrayed as useful for experts in determining idea quality because of the need to quickly sort through large quantities of ideas while relying on the individuals’ domain knowledge and expertise (Dane & Pratt Reference Dane and Pratt 2007 ; Dayan & Di Benedetto Reference Dayan and Di Benedetto 2011 ; Magnusson et al. Reference Magnusson, Netz and Wästlund 2014 ). Moreover, research suggests that a combination of a rational analytic approach and an intuitive holistic approach helps to increase the overall efficiency and effectiveness of idea evaluation (Eling et al. Reference Eling, Langerak and Griffin 2015 ; Dziallas Reference Dziallas 2020 ; Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Netz, Magnusson and Olsson 2021 ).

Given recent developments in research, an increasing number of studies are pointing toward the notion that idea evaluation should be approached as a generative task to take greater advantage of the evaluating person’s knowledge and creative capacity (Sosa Reference Sosa 2019 ; Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Netz, Magnusson and Olsson 2021 ; van Broekhoven et al., Reference van Broekhoven, Belfi, Borghans and Seegers 2021 ). This is explained by the need to understand what the ideas can become, which requires a forward-looking perspective and active engagement with the ideas during evaluation. However, the extent of the experts’ engagement with ideas during evaluation and an understanding of what is happening to ideas during this process remain unclear (Sosa Reference Sosa 2019 ).

2.2. Ideas for innovation

In innovation research, ideas often refer to creative products or descriptions of solutions to problems whereby people engage in ideation activities to generate early ideas on how to solve a specific problem (Osborn Reference Osborn 1957 ; Dorst & Cross Reference Dorst and Cross 2001 ; Hua et al. Reference Hua, Harvey and Rietzschel 2022 ). Despite the reference to ideas as solutions to problems, the definition of what is a problem and what is a solution is rarely elaborated upon, making it difficult to understand what makes a good idea, or even when an idea is sufficiently developed to be considered complete (Sukhov Reference Sukhov 2018 ; Sosa Reference Sosa 2019 ). Hence, it is important to clarify that a problem is something that describes “the disharmony between reality and a person’s preferences for the reality” (Smith Reference Smith 1988 , p. 1491), and can be triggered by someone’s dissatisfaction with a situation in the hope of exchanging that situation for a better one (Sukhov, Magnusson, & Netz Reference Sukhov, Magnusson and Netz 2019 ). A solution refers to an understanding of a problem and a suggestion as to how that problem can be solved, and what is required to solve the problem (Suh Reference Suh 2001 ; Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Magnusson and Netz 2019 ). Furthermore, ideas are contextual—they are conceived and communicated in specific surroundings, and this context may also play an important role in relation to perceptions of an idea’s intentions and quality. Previous studies have found that clarifying and elaborating on these components during the process of idea description and communication helps to concretise an idea, which increases the comprehension of the idea by external evaluators and leads to a higher level of perception of the idea’s quality (Sukhov Reference Sukhov 2018 ).

Based on the classical understanding of idea evaluation as a decision gate, the role of people involved in evaluation is to determine whether the solution to a specific problem is appropriate, and whether the idea should be selected for further development and implementation (Cooper Reference Cooper 1990 , Reference Cooper 2014 ). However, in practice, early ideas submitted for evaluation are seldom clear and complete, and require active interpretation by filling in the gaps in idea description using subjective knowledge (Sukhov Reference Sukhov 2018 ). This makes the notion of objective idea evaluation difficult because interpretation of early ideas by different people can be highly subjective in light of their unique experiences, differences in knowledge, and personal values affecting their sensemaking process (Sukhov et al. , Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Olsson and Magnusson 2018 ; Ulrich & Nielsen Reference Ulrich and Nielsen 2020 ; Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Netz, Magnusson and Olsson 2021 ).

Research has also found that ideas have different characteristics. They can act as mental representations that are often unelaborated and transmittable, but can also act as physical representations that are interpretable and communicable through action (Hua et al. Reference Hua, Harvey and Rietzschel 2022 ). This means that ideas need to be both conceived and communicated, and ideas that are communicated by the idea creator can trigger further intellectualisation by person evaluating the idea, which can be continuous and emergent, and lead to the creation of new ideas or idea enhancements by the individual (Sosa Reference Sosa 2019 ; Ulrich & Nielsen Reference Ulrich and Nielsen 2020 ; Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Netz, Magnusson and Olsson 2021 ; Hua et al. Reference Hua, Harvey and Rietzschel 2022 ). This conceptualisation challenges the understanding of idea evaluation as a decision gate, and points to the importance of elaboration, interpretation, clarification, and the creation of new ideas during evaluation. Furthermore, it emphasises the need for idea development during the idea evaluation process and the need to understand the potential differences in how ideas are perceived by different experts. This leads to the following proposition:

Proposition 1: Early ideas require interpretation and elaboration, and are perceived differently by different experts during evaluation.

2.3. Idea development and design process

To understand how individuals come up with new and appropriate solutions to problems, it is important to model the creative process using a theory that can explain creative thinking during idea development. The design theory that is best suited to modeling this type of creative thinking is the concept-knowledge (C-K) theory presented by Hatchuel & Weil ( Reference Hatchuel and Weil 2003 ). Specifically, C-K design theory is a recognised lens for understanding the interactions between concepts and knowledge that enable the creation of new ideas (Choulier, Coatane’a, & Forest Reference Choulier, Coatane’a and Forest 2010 ; Hatchuel, Masson, & Weil Reference Hatchuel, Masson and Weil 2017 ). In C-K theory, new propositions are generated through the interaction of two spaces, the concept space and the knowledge space, which can extend and interact with each other using four operators, two allowing extension within the same space (C- > C and K- > K) and two others enabling movement from one space to the other (C- > K and K- > C). For a more detailed explanation of C-K theory, see Hatchuel & Weil ( Reference Hatchuel and Weil 2003 , Reference Hatchuel and Weil 2009 ).

The knowledge space characterises propositions that have a logical status (K) (i.e., the individual knows that something is true or false). The knowledge space then interacts with the concept space where propositions do not have a logical status (C) (i.e., something can be imagined but the individual cannot say whether it is true or false). Therefore, for any generated concept, or a problem-solving element of an idea, it is possible to identify the knowledge that was used for its generation. For instance, in the illustrative example of the Mg/CO 2 engines used for Mars missions presented in their study, Hatchuel and Weil identified that knowledge of Mars’ environment (such as frequent storms) led to the new concept of rapid refueling of CO 2 for unplanned moves (Hatchuel & Weil Reference Hatchuel and Weil 2009 ). The concept space is then organised in the form of a tree, with the concepts following the branch belonging to the same set of knowledge. To create a new partition (branch), the expert must call upon different knowledge to identify a new property that allows the generation of a different concept (Hatchuel & Weil Reference Hatchuel and Weil 2003 ). These qualities enable researchers to use C-K theory for analysing design processes, and make explicit the links between knowledge and concepts that are important for the development and creation of ideas (e.g., Ondrus & Pigneur Reference Ondrus and Pigneur 2009 ; Zedin et al. Reference Zedin, Vitalis, Guéna and Marchand 2017 ). Thus, the development and transformation of ideas during evaluation can be made explicit by tracking the knowledge mobilised and the concepts generated.

Proposition 2: Experts are able to use their knowledge and imagination for designing and developing ideas during evaluation.

2.4. Fixation and defixation

C-K theory also enables the identification of specific subprocesses that can occur during the design process. For instance, C-K theory can help to identify fixation, which is one of the major cognitive biases hindering creativity (Jansson & Smith Reference Jansson and Smith 1991 ; Agogué et al. Reference Agogué, Kazakçi, Hatchuel, Masson, Weil, Poirel and Cassotti 2013 ). Fixation means that individuals rely on the same knowledge base to generate concepts, resulting in fixation on a limited set of concepts and inability to access a different knowledge base for associating new and different sets of concepts (Purcell & Gero Reference Purcell and Gero 1996 ; Hatchuel et al. Reference Hatchuel, Masson and Weil 2017 ). Therefore, the idea generator’s fixation can lead to them generating only similar and unoriginal ideas, while the evaluator’s fixation can lead to bias in their evaluation by following a single frame of reasoning and not taking into account other ways in which ideas could have greater potential. Thus, when evaluating ideas, experts can experience fixation by focusing on the evaluation or elaboration of the initial idea concept, but they can also experience defixation by, for example, interpreting the meaning of the idea drawing on their past experience, or even reinterpreting the task (Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Netz, Magnusson and Olsson 2021 ). Indeed, there are mechanisms that can help to overcome these fixation effects. One study found that the use of examples corresponding to creative solutions that are beyond the individual’s initial fixation can be a means of overcoming fixation effects and achieving defixation (Agogué et al. Reference Agogué, Kazakçi, Hatchuel, Masson, Weil, Poirel and Cassotti 2013 ). However, other studies have found that the use of examples can have an adverse effect on creativity and can even reinforce fixation (e.g., Smith, Ward, & Schumacher Reference Smith, Ward and Schumacher 1993 ). Other tools that help to defixate and result in generating more original and appropriate ideas involve negating the category of solutions included in the fixation (Ezzat et al. Reference Ezzat, Agogué, Le Masson, Weil and Cassotti 2020 ) or using minimal directive feedback (Ezzat et al. Reference Ezzat, Camarda, Cassotti, Agogué, Houdé, Weil and Le Masson 2017 ), because they help to prompt the individual to look for different ways of problem-solving.

Furthermore, experts can exhibit different types of behavior during idea evaluation. Previous studies have found that experts can act in a more proactive and open way, trying to actively engage in idea development, or they can be more reserved and conservative during evaluation (Sukhov Reference Sukhov 2018 ). In a similar vein, by engaging in actions that aim to foster creativity, experts evaluating ideas can be understood as creative leaders (Mainemelis, Kark, & Epitropaki Reference Mainemelis, Kark and Epitropaki 2015 ) who actively envision how ideas can be developed and what needs to be done to achieve creative outcomes. Hence, when experts evaluate ideas, they can adopt different behaviors in terms of fixation, either reinforcing it or trying to avoid fixation effects. To understand how this happens, it is important to understand and analyze idea evaluation as a design process. The knowledge that experts possess can either constrain them to thinking in a specific way or act as a trigger for creating a new partition from the initial idea, and thus defixate the initial idea intention by changing its framing (Dorst & Cross Reference Dorst and Cross 2001 ). However, how this process unfolds and what types of fixations or defixations occur remain to be understood.

Proposition 3: Experts exhibit fixation and defixation when developing ideas during evaluation.

Against this theoretical background, in the next section, we explain our methodological procedure in an effort to further understand how experts engage in creative idea development during idea evaluation.

3.1. Data collection

To study how experts engage in idea development during evaluation, we used a combination of a questionnaire survey together with the think-aloud protocol to collect data (Ericsson & Simon Reference Ericsson and Simon 1980 ). The think-aloud protocol focuses on construction rather than recall of information (Nisbett & Wilson Reference Nisbett and Wilson 1977 ; Russo, Johnson, & Stephens Reference Russo, Johnson and Stephens 1989 ; Ericsson & Simon Reference Ericsson and Simon 1993 ) allowing researchers to document individuals’ thought processes as they occur, and is often used in design studies (Payne Reference Payne 1994 ; Atman & Bursic Reference Atman and Bursic 1998 ; Dorst & Cross Reference Dorst and Cross 2001 ; Coley, Houseman, & Roy Reference Coley, Houseman and Roy 2007 ).

The data consisted of individual idea evaluations by five experts from a global vehicle manufacturing company located in France (the ideas were documented and evaluated in English). These experts worked in the same company, had managerial positions, and possessed a high level of technical competence and an understanding of their company’s business. Our study followed the company’s own innovation process, wherein ideas were initially generated in a global online idea “jam,” with employees suggesting improvements to the company’s operational and business functions.

The experts were individually presented with 31 ideas that had been created by other employees, and tasked with evaluating these ideas. All ideas were presented in a uniform format containing a textual description of the idea, ranging between a few sentences to several paragraphs in length. The ideas were labelled with a number and a name that were used to keep track of the ideas in the internal idea management system. The experts were instructed to make a “rough screening” of incoming ideas and speak aloud their thoughts during this process using the think-aloud approach. Idea evaluation took between 60 and 90 minutes, wherein ideas were rated on a scale between 0 and 100 based on two criteria: how good the idea was in the short term (ST), and how good the idea was in the long term (LT). Applying these criteria allowed the experts not only to adopt a holistic perspective regarding the idea’s potential, but also to assess the idea’s value to the company using different temporal perspectives. If an idea received a high rating (above 50 on the 100-point scale) it was considered a promising idea from a short- and/or long-term perspective. If the idea received a low rating (below 50) it was considered to be of lower quality.

The ratings for all ideas were collected, but because of practical limitations, the think-aloud protocols were only collected for 64 of the 155 idea evaluations. During the idea evaluation session, the experts performed think-aloud protocols for about an hour and then continued their evaluations of the remaining ideas without the think-aloud protocol. The think-aloud protocol cases were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim.

3.2. Data analysis

The data were analyzed in three steps (see Figure 1 ). First, to understand how different experts evaluated ideas, we performed a statistical test using Cronbach’s alpha wherein we compared the experts’ ratings of all of the ideas. This allowed us to observe whether there was agreement or disagreement in terms of how the experts perceived idea quality from a short- and long-term perspective.

Figure 1. Research process.

Second, to gain a better understanding of what happens to ideas and how they are developed during evaluation, we used a model of an idea for innovation (see Sukhov Reference Sukhov 2018 ; Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Magnusson and Netz 2019 ) to trace idea-development activities from the think-aloud protocols. This enabled us to gain a qualitative understanding of the activities that are relevant to idea development, and we identified and coded these activities based on the five components of an idea: i) Context , that is, where/when does the idea occur?; ii) Situation , that is, what is the idea about?; iii) Importance/dissatisfaction , that is, why and to whom is the idea important?; iv) Procedure , that is, how can the idea work?; and v) Resources , that is, what is needed for the idea to work? Inspired by Dorst & Cross ( Reference Dorst and Cross 2001 ), Sukhov et al. ( Reference Sukhov, Magnusson and Netz 2019 ), and Hua et al. ( Reference Hua, Harvey and Rietzschel 2022 ), we characterised these activities in one of two ways, either as an elaboration activity (elaborating on and completing the initial idea), or as a transformation activity (changing the idea into a new and different idea). This enabled us to code the content of the initial ideas and trace all of the additional idea fragments that were generated by the experts, resulting in a detailed examination of 456 idea development activities.

Third, to understand how the idea development process unfolds, we used C-K theory to identify all of the 456 idea development activities and classify them in terms of concepts and knowledge (Kroll, Le Masson, & Weil Reference Kroll, Le Masson and Weil 2013 ), relying on the definitions of the two spaces included in C-K theory. Thus, any activity with a logical status for the expert evaluator (true or false) belonged to the knowledge space and any activity without a logical status for the expert belonged to the concept space. We organised the knowledge space by grouping knowledge into sets based on related themes and the concept space by shaping it in the form of a tree. The evaluated idea corresponded to C0 in our C-K representation (the initial concept to start the design reasoning), and it could be either at the top of the tree with all of the concepts generated by the expert derived from it, or on a branch of the tree if the expert decided to go beyond the initial idea, and thus created another partition to generate concepts that were not derived from the original concept.

During the analysis, we noticed the presence of negative conjunctions, meaning that some of the concepts generated by the experts, or even the C0, were considered unfeasible and rejected as alternatives. Moreover, for each partition created in the C space, we identified the knowledge required for the generation of the concepts (including whether this knowledge was implicit, in which case we made it explicit in the C-K representation). This allowed us to identify two types of paths that could occur during the development of an idea: an Easy path and a Difficult path.

Easy paths can be characterised by mobilising knowledge that is directly related to the idea, or that is easy to access for the expert. Following an easy path can also be related to a fixating behavior, since the knowledge related to this type of a path is restrictive with respect to the idea (Hatchuel et al. Reference Hatchuel, Masson and Weil 2017 ), and does not allow the expert to explore other paths. Thus, in cases when the concepts were generated from knowledge of existing solutions in the same domain as the initial idea, or when the knowledge allowed the expert to think that the concepts were easily implementable, the expert exhibited a fixating behavior by following an easy path of reasoning.

Difficult paths occurred when the expert mobilised different knowledge with respect to the idea, which resembled an expansive process (Hatchuel et al. Reference Hatchuel, Masson and Weil 2017 ). Following a difficult path resembled a defixating behavior, where the expert used knowledge from different knowledge domains in relation to the initial idea, generated technical solutions that did not exist, or identified complexities in implementation of the concept. Thus, in cases when the generated concepts were not derived from knowledge of existing (or easily accessible) solutions or when the expert mobilised knowledge that did not belong to the same domain, the expert exhibited a defixating behavior by following a difficult path of reasoning. Depending on the knowledge that was mobilised to generate the concepts, we were able to differentiate each partition of the concept tree into either an easy path or a difficult path.

To limit bias during the coding of ideas based on C-K theory, all ideas were coded independently by two researchers. Initially, the independent coding resulted in a 70 percent agreement between both researchers, which was followed by a discussion focusing on cases containing disagreement. After a review and a discussion of the coding differences the coders reached a mutual agreement on all cases.

These procedures enabled us to trace the experts’ generative progression and creation of new partitions and concepts based on their knowledge. This enabled us to compare the idea development activities and design patterns and to outline the different approaches the experts used when engaging with ideas.

4.1. How are ideas evaluated?

To determine whether the experts agreed or disagreed on their ratings of an idea’s quality, we performed a Cronbach’s alpha test on all ideas evaluated by all experts. The results were .04 for the short-term (ST) and .43 for the long-term (LT) ratings. This indicated significant levels of disagreement among the experts, and thus differences in how they perceived idea quality. These results were in line with our first proposition that ideas are perceived differently by different experts, but pointed toward a need for closer qualitative examination of how ideas are interpreted and elaborated by experts during idea evaluation.

4.2. What is happening to ideas?

To understand what happens to ideas when experts evaluate them, we applied the idea model (see Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Magnusson and Netz 2019 ) in an effort to identify changes to the idea in terms of its various components ( context, situation, importance/dissatisfaction, procedure, resources ). This made it easier to trace idea development activities and distinguish between elaborations of the initial idea or transformations of its various elements. For the sake of brevity, we illustrate the results of our analysis using the example of Idea 2 (Customer Services—Remote diagnostic information). Additional examples are provided in a Supplementary Material .

“Idea 2: Customer services—remote diagnostic information

Provide the customer support and service by using the remote tools and virtual mechnics/technicans to: Diagnose the vehicle and inform customer of the health of the vehicle. The intention would be to investigate enhanced diagnostic solution in order to provide as early as possible information on vehicle status to Customer Services. The goal is for [the company] to know about any anomaly before the customers knows and thus become a pro-active service provider. ”

Table 1 shows the analysis of the initial idea (upper part of the table), the breakdown of the idea into its five elements, and a partial extract of idea development activities provided by Expert 3 (lower part of the table). It can be seen from Table 1 that idea development activities iterate between different components of the idea, forming an additional layer of information provided by the expert.

Table 1. Breakdown of Idea 2 and idea development activities provided by Expert 3

This visualisation shows that the expert quickly saw a problem in relation to the initial idea’s proposed solution, namely, that the initial solution of “ applying remote tools and performing diagnostics ” was insufficient, and saw that the real problem was actually “ knowing how to diagnose the vehicle. ” The expert elaborates that the new solution might lie in “ asking good questions to the customer ”, which shifts the initial idea into a new area by focusing on finding new ways of understanding the customer’s needs.

When comparing the number and type of idea development activities of all of the experts using this template, we also found that they undertook a different range of activities, and perceived ideas in different ways.

Figure 2 shows that three of the experts varied in terms of their number of idea development activities in the case of Idea 2. They also differed in terms of the extent to which they were able to transform the idea. The experts also rated the short- and long-term value of this idea differently. Further comparisons of all of the experts’ engagement with the ideas showed that they undertook between two and 17 activities per idea (with an average of eight activities per idea, see Figure 3 for an example of activities by Expert 1), and engaged in anywhere between zero and four idea transformations (with an average of one transformation per idea).

Figure 2. Number of idea development and transformation activities of Expert 1, Expert 3, and Expert 4 in relation to Idea 2 and the idea’s evaluation scores.

Figure 3. The range of idea development and transformation activities for different ideas provided by Expert 1.

These findings provided further support for our first proposition, confirming that ideas require elaboration, and that they are perceived and evaluated differently by different experts. Furthermore, in line with our second proposition, we could see that experts are prone to developing and transforming ideas, but that the extent of their development and transformation activities varied depending on the ideas with which they were engaging.

4.3. What does the development process look like?

To further understand the process of idea development during evaluation, we coded all of the ideas based on C-K methodology, as explained in the Method section above. For additional clarity, Figure 4 shows an example of our coding illustrating the development of Idea 2 by Expert 3. On the left-hand side, in the think-aloud extracts from Expert 3, we have annotated the various elements that allowed us to apply the coding based on C-K theory that appears on the right-hand side. In the extracts, knowledge is presented in bold type and concepts are presented in blue and underlined. The verbatim comments indicating the rejection of the evaluated idea are presented in red and the indications that help to explain the new partition that the expert creates when generating new concepts are presented in italics. In the C-K coded representation, concepts are represented as a tree on the left and knowledge is grouped by theme on the right.

Figure 4. Development of Idea 2 by Expert 3 based on C-K theory.

To trace the expert’s reasoning, first we identified the initial concept (C0) as the initial idea to be evaluated. For the evaluation, the expert started by appealing to their previous experience, and found that the idea was not new. The expert then relied on his knowledge to claim that the initial idea was focusing on the wrong area, that is, “The problem is that when you have the […] codes it’s not enough to diagnose.” Therefore, his knowledge and experience allowed the expert to generate a concept that differed from the initial idea, that is, “ asking good questions to the customer ”. As shown in the dotted oval in the C space in Figure 4 , this new concept involves the customer in the solution, whereas the initial concept did not. Thus, the expert has created a new partition whose C0 is not the same as the idea he is evaluating. Therefore, we formulated a new C0*, which is the origin of the concept tree.

After adding some knowledge about the technology, the expert rejects the initial idea (the initial C0), which is illustrated with a negative conjunction and presented in red. Despite this rejection of the initial idea, the expert continues to engage with the idea, connecting the idea to knowledge about other existing solutions and experiments related to the subject. This allows the expert to generate a new concept, that of “remote diagnosis.” This concept is placed in the concept tree above the previously generated concept because it is less specific. Finally, the expert concludes the evaluation by adding knowledge about complexity and confirms that the idea to be considered is much more advanced than the one proposed. The generated concepts are not based on knowledge of existing solutions, and the related knowledge indicates complexity in implementation, which corresponds to a difficult path in the expert evaluator’s concept tree.

By mapping all 64 cases and systematically comparing them for differences and similarities, we were able to identify six different types of reasoning in relation to the experts’ idea evaluation, as shown in Figure 5 .

Figure 5. Types of reasoning used in the experts’ idea evaluation.

The previous example of Idea 2 that was developed by Expert 3 corresponds to Type B reasoning “Discovering a new path”, which produces a negative conjunction of the initial concept and then proposes an alternative path to be explored in an effort to generate more value for the company. The various types of reasoning are explained as follows.

1. Type O “Being a gate-keeper” corresponds to behavior where only knowledge is mobilised and no additional concepts are generated during the evaluation.

2. Type N “Dismissing alternative paths” corresponds to behavior whereby the experts reject their own generated concepts (negative conjunction).

3. Type A “Elaborating on the initial concept” corresponds to behavior whereby only easy paths are explored by experts, and the concepts that are generated are directly related to the initial idea on an easy path, referring to existing or easily implementable solutions. In this type of reasoning, it is possible that some solutions are generated using a difficult path. However, these solutions always result in a negative conjunction.

4. Type B “Discovering a new path” has a unique structure in that the initial concept (C0) does not remain at the top of the concept tree and corresponds to a negative conjunction. This means that the expert reject the initial idea and prefer to generate alternative concepts by approaching the problem from a new angle, which requires different knowledge.

5. Type C “Searching for other alternatives” is the mirror opposite of type A. Here, the expert evaluators explore only difficult paths, with no referral to existing solutions but an acknowledgment of the complexity of implementation. If concepts on an easy path are generated, they are immediately rejected.

6. Type D “Exploring all possibilities” involves an approach whereby both easy and difficult paths are explored. The unique feature of this type of reasoning is broad exploration without any negative conjunction. The C0 can be either at the top of the tree or on a branch of the easy path, which can create departitions on the difficult path in response to the need for a broader exploration of different ideas.

By adopting these different types of reasoning, the experts could either close, explore, or even open new paths by which the idea could be improved. Furthermore, we observed that the experts did not limit themselves to one type of reasoning, but adopted different types of reasoning depending on the idea they were evaluating. The distribution of the types of reasoning used by the experts is shown in Table 2 .

Table 2. Distribution of different types of reasoning used by the expert evaluators

We were able to further distinguish between different types of behavior the experts exhibited based on the think-aloud protocols. Decision-making behavior, wherein the focus was on understanding and assessing the initial idea concept C0 (Types O and N) occurred in 25% of the cases, while Designer behavior, wherein more emphasis was placed on exploring different alternatives for idea development (Types A, B, C, and D), occurred in 75% of the cases. We observed that the experts were able to apply at least two different types of reasoning, but we saw no evidence of consistent expert behavior, suggesting that they engaged in whatever type of reasoning was appropriate for the idea they were evaluating. Given the high number of cases where the experts engaged in design activities during idea evaluation, this provides additional support for our second proposition.

In the final step of our analysis, we were able to distinguish between different roles that the experts played during their engagement with the ideas (see Table 3 ). When the experts acted as decision-makers or gatekeepers (applying reasoning types O or N), they closed all alternative paths of idea development, which meant that they did not leave an option for a designer to continue exploration of their idea after the evaluation. In doing so, they left no degree of freedom in relation to how the idea could be developed. However, when the experts acted as designers in and of themselves, they could fixate on the initial idea concept (C0) and pursue an easy path using Type A or D reasoning, which involved elaborating on the idea with less design effort, and little use of different knowledge domains to reframe the problem. In doing so, they left a degree of freedom on an easy path and searched for a means of rapid implementation. They could also defixate from the initial idea and open up a difficult path using type B, C, or D reasoning, which required a significant design effort to develop the idea in a creative way. In doing so, they tried to either begin with defixation by changing paths using type B reasoning (strongly constrained defixation), or promote defixation by continuing the exploration on difficult paths using type C or D reasoning (weakly constrained or unconstrained defixation, respectively), leaving a degree of freedom for difficult paths. These findings provide further support for our third proposition that experts can not only promote both fixation and defixation when developing ideas during evaluation but also contribute to a much more nuanced understanding of how this happens.

Table 3. The different types of reasoning used during idea evaluation

We also found that the experts tended to evaluate the ideas in a certain way based on how they engaged with the design and the degrees of freedom they left for the idea. For instance, they could have a strong opinion about the high short-term and low long-term value of an idea, which meant that they believed that the idea could be implemented quickly, but that it required development along the easy path, which corresponded to type A “Elaborating on the initial concept” reasoning. They could also conclude that the initial idea was bad from both the short- and long-term perspectives, and point to the necessity of defixation and pursuing a different path, which corresponded to type B “Discovering a new path” reasoning. They could also see the high long-term value of the idea and encourage its development along the difficult path, expressing the need for defixation, which corresponded to type C “Searching for other alternatives” reasoning. Finally, they could experience a high degree of freedom in terms of idea development, realising that the idea had value from both the short- and long-term perspectives, and that it could be developed in different ways but could also give rise to new ideas, which corresponded to type D “Exploring all possibilities” reasoning.

Based on this analysis, we observed that some experts acted as decision makers, but all of the experts were able to adopt either defixating or fixating behaviors depending on the ideas they evaluated. Thus, it was possible for all of the experts to defixate themselves from idea evaluation as a decision gate and move toward idea evaluation as a design process. Additionally, type D “Exploring all possibilities” reasoning revealed that it was also possible for experts to switch between defixating and fixating behavior in relation to the same idea.

5. Discussion

The aim of this study was to better understand how experts engage in creative idea development activities during the idea evaluation process. Our findings revealed that experts perceive ideas in different ways, are frequently engaging in idea development activities during evaluation, and can exhibit different types of reasoning and intentions in identifying ways in which ideas can be developed further. In particular, we identified three different roles that the experts moved between during evaluation: decision-maker, designer managing fixation, and designer managing defixation. This means that experts are able to move beyond their role as gatekeeper during idea evaluation and act as designers who can either focus on the development of the initial idea or see beyond the initial idea concept. This is consistent with studies showing that engagement in creative idea development activities can help the evaluator to understand the full potential of an idea (Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Sihvonen, Netz, Magnusson and Olsson 2021 ; van Broekhoven et al., Reference van Broekhoven, Belfi, Borghans and Seegers 2021 ).

We also observed that during the evaluation process, experts could embrace fixation to the initial idea and suggest incremental improvements, but they could also transform the idea by gradually changing some of its components and realising new opportunities for idea development. This is in line with the findings of Purcell & Gero ( Reference Purcell and Gero 1996 ), who suggested that fixation is linked to the specific knowledge possessed by experts. The way in which experts activate this knowledge allows them to either design improvements while remaining fixated on the initial idea concept, or to go further than the initial idea by generating new alternatives and opening up new paths through the mobilisation of new knowledge. Hence, the introduction of new knowledge during evaluation can help with defixation from the idea concept and enhancing its creativity.

Our findings also provide evidence supporting Sosa’s ( Reference Sosa 2019 ) accretion view of ideation, whereby ideas emerge from interactions with different ideas or idea fragments. Specifically, because of the significant differences in idea evaluation ratings among the experts, we were able to confirm Sosa’s ( Reference Sosa 2019 ) notion that early ideas can mean different things to different experts, despite them having similar expertise. When comparing the different types of reasoning used during evaluation, it became clear that early ideas might hold different meanings for a single designer. Hence, we further suggest that understanding idea evaluation as a design process can help in focusing on the fluency and flexibility of this process, rather than fixating on the need to find the best ideas.

Thus, viewing idea evaluation as a design process shifts our understanding of the role of experts from one of decision-makers to one of designers managing fixation and defixation. Additionally, given the proactive behavior exhibited during evaluation, the experts can also be viewed as creative leaders (Mainemelis et al. Reference Mainemelis, Kark and Epitropaki 2015 ) who engage with ideas and envision how they can be developed to achieve a creative outcome. This means that the types of reasoning used by experts during evaluation and their intentions can be understood in a new light. Fixation type A “Elaborating on the initial concept” reasoning shows the willingness of the experts to launch a particular project quickly without wasting additional time on exploring other paths. Strongly Constrained Defixating type B “Discovering a new path” reasoning corresponds to an orientation toward future exploration of the paths chosen by the expert (which do not have to be the fixation paths and can be specific defixation paths). Weakly Constrained Defixating type C “Searching for other alternatives” reasoning corresponds to a willingness to continue exploration, which encourages defixation without setting a particular path to follow. Finally, Unconstrained Defixating type D “Exploring all possibilities” reasoning leaves the future exploration of the idea free in terms of both the fixation and defixation paths. This could indicate that experts acting as leaders would search for a portfolio of projects with different time horizons rather than focusing on a particular project in relation to the current idea.

This study has revealed several key insights into the experts’ behavior and their roles during idea evaluation. To reduce fixation bias during idea evaluation and engage experts in creative idea development, it is important to view idea evaluation as a design process. This can help to increase the level of engagement with ideas and better utilise the experts’ knowledge, expertise, and creativity if those objectives are considered important in the organisational context. Additionally, by making their reasoning explicit during evaluation, new paths for exploration might emerge. Furthermore, by identifying the different types of reasoning used during idea evaluation and outlining different types of behaviors, the experts can be shown the various ways in which they can engage with ideas, and managers can foster an environment in which experts can explore different perspectives. Engaging with ideas using fixating or defixating behavior can help people evaluating ideas to increase creativity during idea development and selection, which is also in line with existing research (e.g., Agogué et al. Reference Agogué, Kazakçi, Hatchuel, Masson, Weil, Poirel and Cassotti 2013 ; Gillier & Bayus Reference Gillier and Bayus 2022 ). Finally, given the substantial differences in how experts perceive ideas, it is important to make idea evaluation more explicit in order to better capture the experts’ knowledge and share their unique insights with others. The introduction of new knowledge and different perspectives can help to create new ideas that are valuable to the organisation.

This study provided a basis for combining different theoretical perspectives and analytical steps to better understand how ideas emerge through the gradual development of different idea fragments. By combining the framework of an idea for innovation (Sukhov et al. Reference Sukhov, Magnusson and Netz 2019 ) with C-K theory (Hatchuel & Weil Reference Hatchuel and Weil 2003 , Reference Hatchuel and Weil 2009 ), we were able to trace the emergence of new ideas and understand how experts navigate during idea evaluation. Although this was a rather consuming analytical work, we believe that our study was able to shed light on a complex empirical phenomenon and explain how idea fragments are combined into layers of different narratives, and how experts are able to elaborate and transform ideas. A potential research implication is to further expand this framework to make tracing of idea development through its fragments more straightforward.

6. Limitations and future research

In this study, we identified six types of design evaluation reasoning using a small sample of participants and a limited number of ideas. We also chose a particular theoretical framework that guided our analysis. Although this study has some limitations in terms of the generalizability and robustness of the results, we argue that undertaking this study has provided us with a unique opportunity to understand idea evaluation as a design process in a real-life setting while performing an in-depth analysis of the process as it unfolds. Thus, future research could investigate the recurrence of these types of reasoning using a larger sample and different study settings to obtain a deeper understanding of the process of idea development during evaluation. Additionally, while our data related to individual experts evaluating ideas, organisations using different approaches and forms of leadership might have several people interacting during a joint idea-evaluation process. Therefore, future research could explore the dynamics of multiple evaluators and whether the results obtained in such a scenario complement our findings. Finally, our findings could lead to further research on how to undertake idea evaluation as a design process, and an investigation of the role of different instructions on participants’ behavior during evaluation.

Acknowledgment

We thank Geoff Whyte, MBA, from Edanz ( https://www.edanz.com/ac ), for editing a draft of this manuscript. We would also like to thank the SIG workshop on Design Theory for helping us to further improve this paper. We would also like to thank Thomas Gillier for his help in advancing this manuscript forward. Finally, we would like to thank Antoine Bordas and Nafissa Jibet for their help with the coding of the data.

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit http://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.7 .

Boudier et al. supplementary material

This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref .

• Google Scholar

View all Google Scholar citations for this article.

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

• Justine Boudier (a1) , Alexandre Sukhov (a2) , Johan Netz (a2) , Pascal Le Masson (a1) and Benoit Weil (a1)
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.7

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

Reply to: Submit a response

- No HTML tags allowed - Web page URLs will display as text only - Lines and paragraphs break automatically - Attachments, images or tables are not permitted

Your details

Your email address will be used in order to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and in case the author(s) of the article or the moderator need to contact you directly.

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests.

Please list any fees and grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in or any close relationship with, at any time over the preceding 36 months, any organisation whose interests may be affected by the publication of the response. Please also list any non-financial associations or interests (personal, professional, political, institutional, religious or other) that a reasonable reader would want to know about in relation to the submitted work. This pertains to all the authors of the piece, their spouses or partners.

Design and Implementation of a Collaborative Idea Evaluation System

• Conference paper
• First Online: 16 June 2022
• Cite this conference paper

• Andreas Hermann 9  

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13327))

Included in the following conference series:

• International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction

1710 Accesses

1 Citations

Digital transformation is a complex endeavor with unforeseen pitfalls. However, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) seem to struggle with digital transformation. To address this problem, governments have started initiatives, i.e., publicly-funded support units, with the purpose to support digital transformation through facilitating idea management in SMEs. Studies suggest that the application of (IT-based) idea evaluation systems could impact the digital transformation success of SMEs. However, contributions addressing the interplay of support units and SMEs in the context of idea evaluation are scarce. Therefore, this article addresses the following problems (1) SMEs require external support in the context of digital transformation, and (2) idea evaluation is often improperly executed. Bringing together these areas leads to the objective to design and implement a collaborative idea evaluation system. The system development follows the methodological pathway for design science research. Observations from seven small-scale projects with SMEs complemented with selected literature inform the system design. Two focus group discussions serve as an evaluation of the system. The results are a set of design features and an interaction concept. Finally, a prototypical web application puts the conceptual design into action to tackle the identified practical problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Idea Management in SMEs – Design Principles for Collaboration in Idea Management Systems

Design Principles for Digital Transformation in Traditional SMEs - An Antipodean Comparison

Stakeholder Engagement: Applying Dechnology in a Technology-Oriented Organization

Aschehoug, S.H., Ringen, G.: Open innovation and idea generation in SMEs. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, vol. 1, pp. 169–178, August 2013

Google Scholar  

Baez, M., Convertino, G.: Innovation cockpit: a dashboard for facilitators in idea management. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW, pp. 47–48 (2012)

Barann, B., Hermann, A., Cordes, A.K., Chasin, F., Becker, J.: Supporting digital transformation in small and medium-sized enterprises: a procedure model involving publicly funded support units. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS, Wailea, Hawaii, pp. 4977–4986 (2019)

Barthel, P.: What is meant by digital transformation success? investigating the notion in IS literature. In: 16th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik (2021)

Barthel, P., Fuchs, C., Birner, B., Hess, T.: Embedding digital innovations in organizations: a typology for digital innovation units. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, Potsdam, Germany, pp. 780–795, March 2020

Berghaus, S., Back, A.: Stages in digital business transformation: results of an empirical maturity study. In: Proceedings of the 10th Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, MCIS 2016, Paphos, Cyprus (2016)

Binz, H., Reichle, M.: Evaluation method to determine the success potential and the degree of innovation of technical product ideas and products. In: 15th International Conference on Engineering Design, Melbourne, Australia (2005)

Boeddrich, H.J.: Ideas in the workplace: a new approach towards organizing the fuzzy front end of the innovation process. Creativity Innov. Manage. 13 (4), 274–285 (2004)

Article   Google Scholar  

Boell, S.K., Cecez-Kecmanovic, D.: A hermeneutic approach for conducting literature reviews and literature searches. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 34 (1), 257–286 (2014)

Bothos, E., Apostolou, D., Mentzas, G.: Idea selection and information aggregation markets. In: 2008 IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, pp. 1–5. IEEE, Estoril, June 2008

Brem, A., Voigt, K.I.: Innovation management in emerging technology ventures - the concept of an integrated idea management. Int. J. Technol. Policy Manage. 7 (3), 304–321 (2007)

Brunswicker, S., Ehrenmann, F.: Managing open innovation in SMEs: a good practice example of a German software firm. Int. J. Ind. Eng. Manage. 4 (1), 33–41 (2013)

Chen, C.L., Lin, Y.C., Chen, W.H., Chao, C.F., Pandia, H.: Role of government to enhance digital transformation in small service business. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13 (3), 1–26 (2021)

Chen, J., Zhu, Z., Zhang, Y.: A study of factors influencing disruptive innovation in Chinese SMEs. Asian J. Technol. Innov. 25 (1), 140–157 (2017)

Chrisman, J.J., McMullan, W.E.: Outsider assistance as a knowledge resource for new venture survival. J. Small Bus. Manage. 42 (3), 229–244 (2004)

Crupi, A., et al.: The digital transformation of SMEs - a new knowledge broker called the digital innovation hub. J. Knowl. Manage. 24 (6), 1263–1288 (2020)

Dean, D.L., Hender, J.M., Rodgers, T.L., Santanen, E.L.: Identifying quality, novel, and creative ideas: constructs and scales for idea evaluation. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 7 (10), 646–699 (2006)

Dunstheimer, M.: Idea Management in technology development evaluation criteria for value proposition, technology and strategy. Ph.D. thesis, Halmstad University (2019)

Ebel, P., Bretschneider, U., Leimeister, J.M.: Leveraging virtual business model innovation: a framework for designing business model development tools. Inf. Syst. J. 26 (5), 519–550 (2016)

European commission: digital transformation scoreboard 2018 - EU businesses go digital: opportunities, outcomes and uptake. Tech. rep., Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (2019)

Ferioli, M., Dekoninck, E., Culley, S., Roussel, B., Renaud, J.: Understanding the rapid evaluation of innovative ideas in the early stages of design. Int. J. Prod. Dev. 12 (1), 67–83 (2010)

Flynn, M., Dooley, L., O’Sullivan, D., Cormican, K.: Idea management for organisational innovation. Int. J. Innov. Manage. 07 (04), 417–442 (2003)

Gebauer, M., Tangour, C., Zeitschel, D.: Digital business model innovation in SMEs - case studies with DIH support from brandenburg (Germany). In: Bach Tobji, M.A., et al. (eds.) ICDEc 2020. LNBIP, vol. 395, pp. 155–165. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64642-4_13

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Gerlach, S., Brem, A.: Idea management revisited: a review of the literature and guide for implementation. Int. J. Innov. Stud. 1 (2), 144–161 (2017)

Goerzig, D., Bauernhansl, T.: Enterprise architectures for the digital transformation in small and medium-sized enterprises. In: Proceedings of the 11th CIRP - Conference on Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing Engineering, Gulf of Naples, Italy, pp. 540–545 (2018)

Gollhardt, T.: Towards business model tools for SMES - knowledge boundaries in business model innovation projects. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, WI 2022, Nürnberg, Germany [virtual conference] (2022)

Gollhardt, T., Hermann, A., Cordes, A.K., Barann, B., Kruse, P.: Design of a software tool supporting orientation in the context of digital transformation. In: Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2022, Maui, HI [virtual conference], pp. 4859–4868 (2022)

Gregor, S., Chandra Kruse, L., Seidel, S.: Research perspectives: the anatomy of a design principle. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 21 (6), 1622–1652 (2020)

Guimarães, L.G.d.A., Blanchet, P., Cimon, Y.: Collaboration Among Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises as Part of Internationalization: A Systematic Review, December 2021

Hermann, A., Gollhardt, T., Cordes, A.K., Kruse, P.: PlanDigital: a software tool supporting the digital transformation. In: Chandra Kruse, L., Seidel, S., Hausvik, G.I. (eds.) Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology, DESRIST 2021, Kristiansand, Norway [hybrid conference], pp. 356–361 (2021)

Herrmann, T., Binz, H., Roth, D.: Necessary extension of conventional idea processes by means of a method for the identification of radical product ideas. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, vol. 8 (2017)

Hess, T., Benlian, A., Matt, C., Wiesböck, F.: Options for formulating a digital transformation strategy. MIS Q. Exec. 15 (2), 123–139 (2016)

Hevner, A., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28 (1), 75 (2004)

Hevner, A.R.: A three cycle view of design science research. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 19 (2), 87–92 (2007)

Hönigsberg, S., Dias, M., Dinter, B.: Design principles for digital transformation in traditional SMEs - an antipodean comparison. In: Chandra Kruse, L., Seidel, S., Hausvik, G.I. (eds.) DESRIST 2021. LNCS, vol. 12807, pp. 375–386. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82405-1_36

Khastehdel, M., Mansour, S.: Developing a dynamic model for idea selection during fuzzy front end of innovation. In: 7th International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management (ICITM), pp. 78–82. IEEE, Oxford (2018)

Kohli, R., Melville, N.P.: Digital innovation: a review and synthesis. Inf. Syst. J. 29 (1), 200–223 (2019)

Lu, C., Yu, B.: The effect of formal and informal external collaboration on innovation performance of SMEs: evidence from China. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12 (22), 1–21 (2020)

Matt, C., Hess, T., Benlian, A.: Digital transformation strategies. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 57 (5), 339–343 (2015)

Messerle, M., Binz, H., Roth, D.: Elaboration and assessment of a set of criteria for the evaluation of product ideas. In: International Conference on Engineering Design, Seoul, Korea (2013)

Mikelsone, E., Liela, E.: Literature review of idea management: focuses and gaps. J. Bus. Manage. 9 , 107–121 (2015)

Mikelsone, E., Spilbergs, A., Segers, J.P.: Benefits of web-based idea management system application. Euro. J. Manage. Issues 29 (3), 151–161 (2021)

Milder, R.: The effect of anonymity in idea evaluation. Ph.D. thesis, Rotterdam School of Management (2019)

Mole, K., North, D., Baldock, R.: Which SMEs seek external support? business characteristics, management behaviour and external influences in a contingency approach. Eviron. Plann. C. Gov. Policy 35 (3), 476–499 (2017)

Möller, F., Guggenberger, T.M., Otto, B.: Towards a method for design principle development in information systems. In: Hofmann, S., Müller, O., Rossi, M. (eds.) DESRIST 2020. LNCS, vol. 12388, pp. 208–220. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64823-7_20

Müller, E., Hopf, H.: Competence center for the digital transformation in small and medium-sized enterprises. In: FAIM 2017–27th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing, Modena, Italy, vol. 11, pp. 1495–1500 (2017)

Murah, M.Z., Abdullah, Z., Hassan, R., Bakar, M.A., Mohamed, I., Amin, H.M.: Kacang cerdik: a conceptual design of an idea management system. Int. Educ. Stud. 6 (6), 178–184 (2013)

Orji, C.I.: Digital business transformation: towards an integrated capability framework for digitization and business value generation. J. Glob. Bus. Technol. 15 (1), 47–57 (2019)

Reis, J., Amorim, M., Melão, N., Matos, P.: Digital transformation: a literature review and guidelines for future research. In: Rocha, Á., Adeli, H., Reis, L.P., Costanzo, S. (eds.) WorldCIST’18 2018. AISC, vol. 745, pp. 411–421. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77703-0_41

Sandström, C., Björk, J.: Idea management systems for a changing innovation landscape. Int. J. Prod. Dev. 11 (3–4), 310–324 (2010)

Sassanelli, C., Terzi, S., Panetto, H., Doumeingts, G.: Digital innovation hubs supporting smes digital transformation. In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation, ICE/ITMC 2021 - Proceedings, pp. 1–8 (2021)

Stevanović, M., Marjanović, D., Štorga, M.: Decision support system for idea selection. In: International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, pp. 1951–1960 (2012)

Stevanovic, M., Marjanovic, D., Storga, M.: A model of idea evaluation and selection for product innovation. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, Milano, Italy (2015)

Stich, V., Zeller, V., Hicking, J., Kraut, A.: Measures for a successful digital transformation of SMEs. In: Procedia CIRP, vol. 93, pp. 286–291. Elsevier B.V. (2020)

Szopinski, D., Schoormann, T., John, T., Knackstedt, R., Kundisch, D.: How software can support innovating business models: a taxonomy of functions of business model development tools. In: AMCIS 2017 - America’s Conference on Information Systems: A Tradition of Innovation 2017-Augus (Recker 2012) (2017)

Thom, N.: Idea management in Switzerland and Germany: past, present and future. Die Unternehmung 69 (3), 238–254 (2015)

Tremblay, M.C., Hevner, A.R., Berndt, D.J.: Focus groups for artifact refinement and evaluation in design research. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 26 , 27 (2010)

Van Goolen, R., Evers, H., Lammens, C.: International innovation labs: an innovation meeting ground between SMEs and business schools. Proc. Econ. Finan. 12 , 184–190 (2014)

Vandenbosch, B., Saatcioglu, A., Fay, S.: Idea management: a systemic view. J. Manage. Stud. 43 (2), 259–288 (2006)

Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R.: FEDS: a framework for evaluation in design science research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 25 (1), 77–89 (2016)

Wagner, S., Bican, P.M., Brem, A.: Critical success factors in the front end of innovation: results from an empirical study. Int. J. Innov. Manage. 25 (04), 2150046 (2021)

Wessel, L., Baiyere, A., Ologeanu-Taddei, R., Cha, J., Blegind Jensen, T.: Unpacking the difference between digital transformation and it-enabled organizational transformation. J. Assoc. for Inf. Syst. 22 (1), 102–129 (2021)

Wiesböck, F., Hess, T.: Digital innovations: embedding in organizations. Electron. Mark. 30 (1), 75–86 (2020)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

European Research Center for Information Systems (ERCIS), University of Münster, Münster, Germany

Andreas Hermann

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Hermann .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Fiona Fui-Hoon Nah

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Hermann, A. (2022). Design and Implementation of a Collaborative Idea Evaluation System. In: Fui-Hoon Nah, F., Siau, K. (eds) HCI in Business, Government and Organizations. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13327. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05544-7_3

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05544-7_3

Published : 16 June 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-05543-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-05544-7

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Idea evaluation – What is it and how should one do it?

For managers and executives, evaluating new ideas can be daunting and complex. Prioritizing ideas and implementing them can pose a challenge, given the uncertainty and lack of data that comes with new ideas. Idea evaluation is important to both innovation management and idea management, but choosing the right evaluation method can be difficult. Transparency, having a systematic set of criteria, and treating incremental and disruptive ideas separately can make the evaluation process work better. Evaluation should be treated as a tool for making decisions, not a decision-making system, and should be done using a team effort or an individual decision depending on the idea’s complexity. Having a simple but effective process for collecting ideas, and evaluating and prioritizing them, is important in the entire innovation process.

More Innovation Resources:

Elon Musk and SpaceX Want Your ideas

Elon Musk’s Hyperloop idea is set to revolutionize transportation, with plans to build a test track and an Open Competition to collect design ideas for the capsule.

Steps to Design Thinking in Practice: A Process Walkthrough

Design thinking is a human-centered approach to innovation with stages such as empathy, definition, ideation, prototyping, and testing.

Siemens Case Study: Crowdsourcing Solutions to Turn Gridlock into Green Lights

Siemens launched a crowdsourcing competition to find solutions for some of the toughest problems in the traffic industry. Planview IdeaPlace platform was used to engage the public and gather ideas.

• Case Study Evaluation Approach
• Learning Center

A case study evaluation approach can be an incredibly powerful tool for monitoring and evaluating complex programs and policies. By identifying common themes and patterns, this approach allows us to better understand the successes and challenges faced by the program. In this article, we’ll explore the benefits of using a case study evaluation approach in the monitoring and evaluation of projects, programs, and public policies.

Table of Contents

Introduction to Case Study Evaluation Approach

The advantages of a case study evaluation approach, types of case studies, potential challenges with a case study evaluation approach, guiding principles for successful implementation of a case study evaluation approach.

• Benefits of Incorporating the Case Study Evaluation Approach in the Monitoring and Evaluation of Projects and Programs

A case study evaluation approach is a great way to gain an in-depth understanding of a particular issue or situation. This type of approach allows the researcher to observe, analyze, and assess the effects of a particular situation on individuals or groups.

An individual, a location, or a project may serve as the focal point of a case study’s attention. Quantitative and qualitative data are frequently used in conjunction with one another.

It also allows the researcher to gain insights into how people react to external influences. By using a case study evaluation approach, researchers can gain insights into how certain factors such as policy change or a new technology have impacted individuals and communities. The data gathered through this approach can be used to formulate effective strategies for responding to changes and challenges. Ultimately, this monitoring and evaluation approach helps organizations make better decision about the implementation of their plans.

This approach can be used to assess the effectiveness of a policy, program, or initiative by considering specific elements such as implementation processes, outcomes, and impact. A case study evaluation approach can provide an in-depth understanding of the effectiveness of a program by closely examining the processes involved in its implementation. This includes understanding the context, stakeholders, and resources to gain insight into how well a program is functioning or has been executed. By evaluating these elements, it can help to identify areas for improvement and suggest potential solutions. The findings from this approach can then be used to inform decisions about policies, programs, and initiatives for improved outcomes.

It is also useful for determining if other policies, programs, or initiatives could be applied to similar situations in order to achieve similar results or improved outcomes. All in all, the case study monitoring evaluation approach is an effective method for determining the effectiveness of specific policies, programs, or initiatives. By researching and analyzing the successes of previous cases, this approach can be used to identify similar approaches that could be applied to similar situations in order to achieve similar results or improved outcomes.

A case study evaluation approach offers the advantage of providing in-depth insight into a particular program or policy. This can be accomplished by analyzing data and observations collected from a range of stakeholders such as program participants, service providers, and community members. The monitoring and evaluation approach is used to assess the impact of programs and inform the decision-making process to ensure successful implementation. The case study monitoring and evaluation approach can help identify any underlying issues that need to be addressed in order to improve program effectiveness. It also provides a reality check on how successful programs are actually working, allowing organizations to make adjustments as needed. Overall, a case study monitoring and evaluation approach helps to ensure that policies and programs are achieving their objectives while providing valuable insight into how they are performing overall.

By taking a qualitative approach to data collection and analysis, case study evaluations are able to capture nuances in the context of a particular program or policy that can be overlooked when relying solely on quantitative methods. Using this approach, insights can be gleaned from looking at the individual experiences and perspectives of actors involved, providing a more detailed understanding of the impact of the program or policy than is possible with other evaluation methodologies. As such, case study monitoring evaluation is an invaluable tool in assessing the effectiveness of a particular initiative, enabling more informed decision-making as well as more effective implementation of programs and policies.

Furthermore, this approach is an effective way to uncover experiential information that can help to inform the ongoing improvement of policy and programming over time All in all, the case study monitoring evaluation approach offers an effective way to uncover experiential information necessary to inform the ongoing improvement of policy and programming. By analyzing the data gathered from this systematic approach, stakeholders can gain deeper insight into how best to make meaningful and long-term changes in their respective organizations.

Case studies come in a variety of forms, each of which can be put to a unique set of evaluation tasks. Evaluators have come to a consensus on describing six distinct sorts of case studies, which are as follows: illustrative, exploratory, critical instance, program implementation, program effects, and cumulative.

Illustrative Case Study

An illustrative case study is a type of case study that is used to provide a detailed and descriptive account of a particular event, situation, or phenomenon. It is often used in research to provide a clear understanding of a complex issue, and to illustrate the practical application of theories or concepts.

An illustrative case study typically uses qualitative data, such as interviews, surveys, or observations, to provide a detailed account of the unit being studied. The case study may also include quantitative data, such as statistics or numerical measurements, to provide additional context or to support the qualitative data.

The goal of an illustrative case study is to provide a rich and detailed description of the unit being studied, and to use this information to illustrate broader themes or concepts. For example, an illustrative case study of a successful community development project may be used to illustrate the importance of community engagement and collaboration in achieving development goals.

One of the strengths of an illustrative case study is its ability to provide a detailed and nuanced understanding of a particular issue or phenomenon. By focusing on a single case, the researcher is able to provide a detailed and in-depth analysis that may not be possible through other research methods.

However, one limitation of an illustrative case study is that the findings may not be generalizable to other contexts or populations. Because the case study focuses on a single unit, it may not be representative of other similar units or situations.

A well-executed case study can shed light on wider research topics or concepts through its thorough and descriptive analysis of a specific event or phenomenon.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is a type of case study that is used to investigate a new or previously unexplored phenomenon or issue. It is often used in research when the topic is relatively unknown or when there is little existing literature on the topic.

Exploratory case studies are typically qualitative in nature and use a variety of methods to collect data, such as interviews, observations, and document analysis. The focus of the study is to gather as much information as possible about the phenomenon being studied and to identify new and emerging themes or patterns.

The goal of an exploratory case study is to provide a foundation for further research and to generate hypotheses about the phenomenon being studied. By exploring the topic in-depth, the researcher can identify new areas of research and generate new questions to guide future research.

One of the strengths of an exploratory case study is its ability to provide a rich and detailed understanding of a new or emerging phenomenon. By using a variety of data collection methods, the researcher can gather a broad range of data and perspectives to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon being studied.

However, one limitation of an exploratory case study is that the findings may not be generalizable to other contexts or populations. Because the study is focused on a new or previously unexplored phenomenon, the findings may not be applicable to other situations or populations.

Exploratory case studies are an effective research strategy for learning about novel occurrences, developing research hypotheses, and gaining a deep familiarity with a topic of study.

Critical Instance Case Study

A critical instance case study is a type of case study that focuses on a specific event or situation that is critical to understanding a broader issue or phenomenon. The goal of a critical instance case study is to analyze the event in depth and to draw conclusions about the broader issue or phenomenon based on the analysis.

A critical instance case study typically uses qualitative data, such as interviews, observations, or document analysis, to provide a detailed and nuanced understanding of the event being studied. The data are analyzed using various methods, such as content analysis or thematic analysis, to identify patterns and themes that emerge from the data.

The critical instance case study is often used in research when a particular event or situation is critical to understanding a broader issue or phenomenon. For example, a critical instance case study of a successful disaster response effort may be used to identify key factors that contributed to the success of the response, and to draw conclusions about effective disaster response strategies more broadly.

One of the strengths of a critical instance case study is its ability to provide a detailed and in-depth analysis of a particular event or situation. By focusing on a critical instance, the researcher is able to provide a rich and nuanced understanding of the event, and to draw conclusions about broader issues or phenomena based on the analysis.

However, one limitation of a critical instance case study is that the findings may not be generalizable to other contexts or populations. Because the case study focuses on a specific event or situation, the findings may not be applicable to other similar events or situations.

A critical instance case study is a valuable research method that can provide a detailed and nuanced understanding of a particular event or situation and can be used to draw conclusions about broader issues or phenomena based on the analysis.

Program Implementation Program Implementation

A program implementation case study is a type of case study that focuses on the implementation of a particular program or intervention. The goal of the case study is to provide a detailed and comprehensive account of the program implementation process, and to identify factors that contributed to the success or failure of the program.

Program implementation case studies typically use qualitative data, such as interviews, observations, and document analysis, to provide a detailed and nuanced understanding of the program implementation process. The data are analyzed using various methods, such as content analysis or thematic analysis, to identify patterns and themes that emerge from the data.

The program implementation case study is often used in research to evaluate the effectiveness of a particular program or intervention, and to identify strategies for improving program implementation in the future. For example, a program implementation case study of a school-based health program may be used to identify key factors that contributed to the success or failure of the program, and to make recommendations for improving program implementation in similar settings.

One of the strengths of a program implementation case study is its ability to provide a detailed and comprehensive account of the program implementation process. By using qualitative data, the researcher is able to capture the complexity and nuance of the implementation process, and to identify factors that may not be captured by quantitative data alone.

However, one limitation of a program implementation case study is that the findings may not be generalizable to other contexts or populations. Because the case study focuses on a specific program or intervention, the findings may not be applicable to other programs or interventions in different settings.

An effective research tool, a case study of program implementation may illuminate the intricacies of the implementation process and point the way towards future enhancements.

Program Effects Case Study

A program effects case study is a research method that evaluates the effectiveness of a particular program or intervention by examining its outcomes or effects. The purpose of this type of case study is to provide a detailed and comprehensive account of the program’s impact on its intended participants or target population.

A program effects case study typically employs both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods, such as surveys, interviews, and observations, to evaluate the program’s impact on the target population. The data is then analyzed using statistical and thematic analysis to identify patterns and themes that emerge from the data.

The program effects case study is often used to evaluate the success of a program and identify areas for improvement. For example, a program effects case study of a community-based HIV prevention program may evaluate the program’s effectiveness in reducing HIV transmission rates among high-risk populations and identify factors that contributed to the program’s success.

One of the strengths of a program effects case study is its ability to provide a detailed and nuanced understanding of a program’s impact on its intended participants or target population. By using both quantitative and qualitative data, the researcher can capture both the objective and subjective outcomes of the program and identify factors that may have contributed to the outcomes.

However, a limitation of the program effects case study is that it may not be generalizable to other populations or contexts. Since the case study focuses on a particular program and population, the findings may not be applicable to other programs or populations in different settings.

A program effects case study is a good way to do research because it can give a detailed look at how a program affects the people it is meant for. This kind of case study can be used to figure out what needs to be changed and how to make programs that work better.

Cumulative Case Study

A cumulative case study is a type of case study that involves the collection and analysis of multiple cases to draw broader conclusions. Unlike a single-case study, which focuses on one specific case, a cumulative case study combines multiple cases to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon.

The purpose of a cumulative case study is to build up a body of evidence through the examination of multiple cases. The cases are typically selected to represent a range of variations or perspectives on the phenomenon of interest. Data is collected from each case using a range of methods, such as interviews, surveys, and observations.

The data is then analyzed across cases to identify common themes, patterns, and trends. The analysis may involve both qualitative and quantitative methods, such as thematic analysis and statistical analysis.

The cumulative case study is often used in research to develop and test theories about a phenomenon. For example, a cumulative case study of successful community-based health programs may be used to identify common factors that contribute to program success, and to develop a theory about effective community-based health program design.

One of the strengths of the cumulative case study is its ability to draw on a range of cases to build a more comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon. By examining multiple cases, the researcher can identify patterns and trends that may not be evident in a single case study. This allows for a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon and helps to develop more robust theories.

However, one limitation of the cumulative case study is that it can be time-consuming and resource-intensive to collect and analyze data from multiple cases. Additionally, the selection of cases may introduce bias if the cases are not representative of the population of interest.

In summary, a cumulative case study is a valuable research method that can provide a more comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon by examining multiple cases. This type of case study is particularly useful for developing and testing theories and identifying common themes and patterns across cases.

When conducting a case study evaluation approach, one of the main challenges is the need to establish a contextually relevant research design that accounts for the unique factors of the case being studied. This requires close monitoring of the case, its environment, and relevant stakeholders. In addition, the researcher must build a framework for the collection and analysis of data that is able to draw meaningful conclusions and provide valid insights into the dynamics of the case. Ultimately, an effective case study monitoring evaluation approach will allow researchers to form an accurate understanding of their research subject.

Additionally, depending on the size and scope of the case, there may be concerns regarding the availability of resources and personnel that could be allocated to data collection and analysis. To address these issues, a case study monitoring evaluation approach can be adopted, which would involve a mix of different methods such as interviews, surveys, focus groups and document reviews. Such an approach could provide valuable insights into the effectiveness and implementation of the case in question. Additionally, this type of evaluation can be tailored to the specific needs of the case study to ensure that all relevant data is collected and respected.

When dealing with a highly sensitive or confidential subject matter within a case study, researchers must take extra measures to prevent bias during data collection as well as protect participant anonymity while also collecting valid data in order to ensure reliable results

Moreover, when conducting a case study evaluation it is important to consider the potential implications of the data gathered. By taking extra measures to prevent bias and protect participant anonymity, researchers can ensure reliable results while also collecting valid data. Maintaining confidentiality and deploying ethical research practices are essential when conducting a case study to ensure an unbiased and accurate monitoring evaluation.

When planning and implementing a case study evaluation approach, it is important to ensure the guiding principles of research quality, data collection, and analysis are met. To ensure these principles are upheld, it is essential to develop a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation plan. This plan should clearly outline the steps to be taken during the data collection and analysis process. Furthermore, the plan should provide detailed descriptions of the project objectives, target population, key indicators, and timeline. It is also important to include metrics or benchmarks to monitor progress and identify any potential areas for improvement. By implementing such an approach, it will be possible to ensure that the case study evaluation approach yields valid and reliable results.

To ensure successful implementation, it is essential to establish a reliable data collection process that includes detailed information such as the scope of the study, the participants involved, and the methods used to collect data. Additionally, it is important to have a clear understanding of what will be examined through the evaluation process and how the results will be used. All in all, it is essential to establish a sound monitoring evaluation approach for a successful case study implementation. This includes creating a reliable data collection process that encompasses the scope of the study, the participants involved, and the methods used to collect data. It is also imperative to have an understanding of what will be examined and how the results will be utilized. Ultimately, effective planning is key to ensure that the evaluation process yields meaningful insights.

Benefits of Incorporating the Case Study Evaluation Approach in the Monitoring and Evaluation of Projects and Programmes

Using a case study approach in monitoring and evaluation allows for a more detailed and in-depth exploration of the project’s success, helping to identify key areas of improvement and successes that may have been overlooked through traditional evaluation. Through this case study method, specific data can be collected and analyzed to identify trends and different perspectives that can support the evaluation process. This data can allow stakeholders to gain a better understanding of the project’s successes and failures, helping them make informed decisions on how to strengthen current activities or shape future initiatives. From a monitoring and evaluation standpoint, this approach can provide an increased level of accuracy in terms of accurately assessing the effectiveness of the project.

This can provide valuable insights into what works—and what doesn’t—when it comes to implementing projects and programs, aiding decision-makers in making future plans that better meet their objectives However, monitoring and evaluation is just one approach to assessing the success of a case study. It does provide a useful insight into what initiatives may be successful, but it is important to note that there are other effective research methods, such as surveys and interviews, that can also help to further evaluate the success of a project or program.

In conclusion, a case study evaluation approach can be incredibly useful in monitoring and evaluating complex programs and policies. By exploring key themes, patterns and relationships, organizations can gain a detailed understanding of the successes, challenges and limitations of their program or policy. This understanding can then be used to inform decision-making and improve outcomes for those involved. With its ability to provide an in-depth understanding of a program or policy, the case study evaluation approach has become an invaluable tool for monitoring and evaluation professionals.

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

How strong is my Resume?

Only 2% of resumes land interviews.

Land a better, higher-paying career

Jobs for You

Junior program analyst/admin assistant – usaid lac/fo.

• United States

Tax Coordinator – USAID Uganda

Monitoring and evaluation advisor.

• Cuso International

Monitoring, Evaluation &Learning (MEL) Specialist

• Brussels, Belgium
• European Endowment for Democracy (EED)

Economics and Business Management Expert

Governance and sustainability expert, agriculture expert with irrigation background, nutritionist with food security background, director of impact and evaluation.

• Glendale Heights, IL 60137, USA
• Bridge Communities

USAID Benin Advisor / Program Officer

Usaid/drc elections advisor.

• Democratic Republic of the Congo

Business Development Associate

Agriculture and resilience advisor, usaid/drc program officer, team leader, services you might be interested in, useful guides ....

How to Create a Strong Resume

Monitoring And Evaluation Specialist Resume

Resume Length for the International Development Sector

Types of Evaluation

Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, and Learning (MEAL)

LAND A JOB REFERRAL IN 2 WEEKS (NO ONLINE APPS!)

Sign Up & To Get My Free Referral Toolkit Now:

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, capture and evaluation of innovative ideas in early stages of product development.

The TQM Journal

ISSN : 1754-2731

Article publication date: 26 June 2019

Issue publication date: 18 November 2019

The purpose of this paper is to propose a structured procedure for the capture and evaluation of innovative ideas in the early stages of product development. The procedure is designed to take account of internal and external factors affecting the value of innovative ideas.

Design/methodology/approach

The proposed procedure is based on divergent and convergent approaches to innovation. Ideas are generated and captured using targeted questions and subsequently evaluated using modifications of the Kano model and failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA). Idea evaluation considers four criteria – delight, originality, market share potential and simplicity – which are used to compute an “idea priority number”.

A case study looking at innovations in swimming goggles verified the validity of the proposed procedure. The procedure also supports fact-based decision making and applies a structured perspective to the innovation process that makes it easier to manage.

Research limitations/implications

The case study made use of a pilot survey in which 32 customers participated. Although the case study was only intended as a demonstration of the method’s use, such a sample size could lead to unreliable results in certain cases.

Originality/value

Applications of standard or expanded FMEA do not add value to a product because the main purpose of the approach is to prevent failure. The proposed inversion of FMEA logic combined with customer view via the Kano model offers a method for the structured analysis of product innovations. No similar approach to the evaluation of innovations has so far appeared in the literature.

• New product development

Madzík, P. (2019), "Capture and evaluation of innovative ideas in early stages of product development", The TQM Journal , Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 908-927. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-02-2019-0050

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2019, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

Designing and Conducting Case Studies

This guide examines case studies, a form of qualitative descriptive research that is used to look at individuals, a small group of participants, or a group as a whole. Researchers collect data about participants using participant and direct observations, interviews, protocols, tests, examinations of records, and collections of writing samples. Starting with a definition of the case study, the guide moves to a brief history of this research method. Using several well documented case studies, the guide then looks at applications and methods including data collection and analysis. A discussion of ways to handle validity, reliability, and generalizability follows, with special attention to case studies as they are applied to composition studies. Finally, this guide examines the strengths and weaknesses of case studies.

Definition and Overview

Case study refers to the collection and presentation of detailed information about a particular participant or small group, frequently including the accounts of subjects themselves. A form of qualitative descriptive research, the case study looks intensely at an individual or small participant pool, drawing conclusions only about that participant or group and only in that specific context. Researchers do not focus on the discovery of a universal, generalizable truth, nor do they typically look for cause-effect relationships; instead, emphasis is placed on exploration and description.

Case studies typically examine the interplay of all variables in order to provide as complete an understanding of an event or situation as possible. This type of comprehensive understanding is arrived at through a process known as thick description, which involves an in-depth description of the entity being evaluated, the circumstances under which it is used, the characteristics of the people involved in it, and the nature of the community in which it is located. Thick description also involves interpreting the meaning of demographic and descriptive data such as cultural norms and mores, community values, ingrained attitudes, and motives.

Unlike quantitative methods of research, like the survey, which focus on the questions of who, what, where, how much, and how many, and archival analysis, which often situates the participant in some form of historical context, case studies are the preferred strategy when how or why questions are asked. Likewise, they are the preferred method when the researcher has little control over the events, and when there is a contemporary focus within a real life context. In addition, unlike more specifically directed experiments, case studies require a problem that seeks a holistic understanding of the event or situation in question using inductive logic--reasoning from specific to more general terms.

In scholarly circles, case studies are frequently discussed within the context of qualitative research and naturalistic inquiry. Case studies are often referred to interchangeably with ethnography, field study, and participant observation. The underlying philosophical assumptions in the case are similar to these types of qualitative research because each takes place in a natural setting (such as a classroom, neighborhood, or private home), and strives for a more holistic interpretation of the event or situation under study.

Unlike more statistically-based studies which search for quantifiable data, the goal of a case study is to offer new variables and questions for further research. F.H. Giddings, a sociologist in the early part of the century, compares statistical methods to the case study on the basis that the former are concerned with the distribution of a particular trait, or a small number of traits, in a population, whereas the case study is concerned with the whole variety of traits to be found in a particular instance" (Hammersley 95).

Case studies are not a new form of research; naturalistic inquiry was the primary research tool until the development of the scientific method. The fields of sociology and anthropology are credited with the primary shaping of the concept as we know it today. However, case study research has drawn from a number of other areas as well: the clinical methods of doctors; the casework technique being developed by social workers; the methods of historians and anthropologists, plus the qualitative descriptions provided by quantitative researchers like LePlay; and, in the case of Robert Park, the techniques of newspaper reporters and novelists.

Park was an ex-newspaper reporter and editor who became very influential in developing sociological case studies at the University of Chicago in the 1920s. As a newspaper professional he coined the term "scientific" or "depth" reporting: the description of local events in a way that pointed to major social trends. Park viewed the sociologist as "merely a more accurate, responsible, and scientific reporter." Park stressed the variety and value of human experience. He believed that sociology sought to arrive at natural, but fluid, laws and generalizations in regard to human nature and society. These laws weren't static laws of the kind sought by many positivists and natural law theorists, but rather, they were laws of becoming--with a constant possibility of change. Park encouraged students to get out of the library, to quit looking at papers and books, and to view the constant experiment of human experience. He writes, "Go and sit in the lounges of the luxury hotels and on the doorsteps of the flophouses; sit on the Gold Coast settees and on the slum shakedowns; sit in the Orchestra Hall and in the Star and Garter Burlesque. In short, gentlemen [sic], go get the seats of your pants dirty in real research."

But over the years, case studies have drawn their share of criticism. In fact, the method had its detractors from the start. In the 1920s, the debate between pro-qualitative and pro-quantitative became quite heated. Case studies, when compared to statistics, were considered by many to be unscientific. From the 1930's on, the rise of positivism had a growing influence on quantitative methods in sociology. People wanted static, generalizable laws in science. The sociological positivists were looking for stable laws of social phenomena. They criticized case study research because it failed to provide evidence of inter subjective agreement. Also, they condemned it because of the few number of cases studied and that the under-standardized character of their descriptions made generalization impossible. By the 1950s, quantitative methods, in the form of survey research, had become the dominant sociological approach and case study had become a minority practice.

Educational Applications

The 1950's marked the dawning of a new era in case study research, namely that of the utilization of the case study as a teaching method. "Instituted at Harvard Business School in the 1950s as a primary method of teaching, cases have since been used in classrooms and lecture halls alike, either as part of a course of study or as the main focus of the course to which other teaching material is added" (Armisted 1984). The basic purpose of instituting the case method as a teaching strategy was "to transfer much of the responsibility for learning from the teacher on to the student, whose role, as a result, shifts away from passive absorption toward active construction" (Boehrer 1990). Through careful examination and discussion of various cases, "students learn to identify actual problems, to recognize key players and their agendas, and to become aware of those aspects of the situation that contribute to the problem" (Merseth 1991). In addition, students are encouraged to "generate their own analysis of the problems under consideration, to develop their own solutions, and to practically apply their own knowledge of theory to these problems" (Boyce 1993). Along the way, students also develop "the power to analyze and to master a tangled circumstance by identifying and delineating important factors; the ability to utilize ideas, to test them against facts, and to throw them into fresh combinations" (Merseth 1991).

In addition to the practical application and testing of scholarly knowledge, case discussions can also help students prepare for real-world problems, situations and crises by providing an approximation of various professional environments (i.e. classroom, board room, courtroom, or hospital). Thus, through the examination of specific cases, students are given the opportunity to work out their own professional issues through the trials, tribulations, experiences, and research findings of others. An obvious advantage to this mode of instruction is that it allows students the exposure to settings and contexts that they might not otherwise experience. For example, a student interested in studying the effects of poverty on minority secondary student's grade point averages and S.A.T. scores could access and analyze information from schools as geographically diverse as Los Angeles, New York City, Miami, and New Mexico without ever having to leave the classroom.

The case study method also incorporates the idea that students can learn from one another "by engaging with each other and with each other's ideas, by asserting something and then having it questioned, challenged and thrown back at them so that they can reflect on what they hear, and then refine what they say" (Boehrer 1990). In summary, students can direct their own learning by formulating questions and taking responsibility for the study.

Types and Design Concerns

Researchers use multiple methods and approaches to conduct case studies.

Types of Case Studies

Under the more generalized category of case study exist several subdivisions, each of which is custom selected for use depending upon the goals and/or objectives of the investigator. These types of case study include the following:

Illustrative Case Studies These are primarily descriptive studies. They typically utilize one or two instances of an event to show what a situation is like. Illustrative case studies serve primarily to make the unfamiliar familiar and to give readers a common language about the topic in question.

Exploratory (or pilot) Case Studies These are condensed case studies performed before implementing a large scale investigation. Their basic function is to help identify questions and select types of measurement prior to the main investigation. The primary pitfall of this type of study is that initial findings may seem convincing enough to be released prematurely as conclusions.

Cumulative Case Studies These serve to aggregate information from several sites collected at different times. The idea behind these studies is the collection of past studies will allow for greater generalization without additional cost or time being expended on new, possibly repetitive studies.

Critical Instance Case Studies These examine one or more sites for either the purpose of examining a situation of unique interest with little to no interest in generalizability, or to call into question or challenge a highly generalized or universal assertion. This method is useful for answering cause and effect questions.

Identifying a Theoretical Perspective

Much of the case study's design is inherently determined for researchers, depending on the field from which they are working. In composition studies, researchers are typically working from a qualitative, descriptive standpoint. In contrast, physicists will approach their research from a more quantitative perspective. Still, in designing the study, researchers need to make explicit the questions to be explored and the theoretical perspective from which they will approach the case. The three most commonly adopted theories are listed below:

Individual Theories These focus primarily on the individual development, cognitive behavior, personality, learning and disability, and interpersonal interactions of a particular subject.

Organizational Theories These focus on bureaucracies, institutions, organizational structure and functions, or excellence in organizational performance.

Social Theories These focus on urban development, group behavior, cultural institutions, or marketplace functions.

Two examples of case studies are used consistently throughout this chapter. The first, a study produced by Berkenkotter, Huckin, and Ackerman (1988), looks at a first year graduate student's initiation into an academic writing program. The study uses participant-observer and linguistic data collecting techniques to assess the student's knowledge of appropriate discourse conventions. Using the pseudonym Nate to refer to the subject, the study sought to illuminate the particular experience rather than to generalize about the experience of fledgling academic writers collectively.

For example, in Berkenkotter, Huckin, and Ackerman's (1988) study we are told that the researchers are interested in disciplinary communities. In the first paragraph, they ask what constitutes membership in a disciplinary community and how achieving membership might affect a writer's understanding and production of texts. In the third paragraph they state that researchers must negotiate their claims "within the context of his sub specialty's accepted knowledge and methodology." In the next paragraph they ask, "How is literacy acquired? What is the process through which novices gain community membership? And what factors either aid or hinder students learning the requisite linguistic behaviors?" This introductory section ends with a paragraph in which the study's authors claim that during the course of the study, the subject, Nate, successfully makes the transition from "skilled novice" to become an initiated member of the academic discourse community and that his texts exhibit linguistic changes which indicate this transition. In the next section the authors make explicit the sociolinguistic theoretical and methodological assumptions on which the study is based (1988). Thus the reader has a good understanding of the authors' theoretical background and purpose in conducting the study even before it is explicitly stated on the fourth page of the study. "Our purpose was to examine the effects of the educational context on one graduate student's production of texts as he wrote in different courses and for different faculty members over the academic year 1984-85." The goal of the study then, was to explore the idea that writers must be initiated into a writing community, and that this initiation will change the way one writes.

The second example is Janet Emig's (1971) study of the composing process of a group of twelfth graders. In this study, Emig seeks to answer the question of what happens to the self as a result educational stimuli in terms of academic writing. The case study used methods such as protocol analysis, tape-recorded interviews, and discourse analysis.

In the case of Janet Emig's (1971) study of the composing process of eight twelfth graders, four specific hypotheses were made:

• Twelfth grade writers engage in two modes of composing: reflexive and extensive.
• These differences can be ascertained and characterized through having the writers compose aloud their composition process.
• A set of implied stylistic principles governs the writing process.
• For twelfth grade writers, extensive writing occurs chiefly as a school-sponsored activity, or reflexive, as a self-sponsored activity.

In this study, the chief distinction is between the two dominant modes of composing among older, secondary school students. The distinctions are:

• The reflexive mode, which focuses on the writer's thoughts and feelings.
• The extensive mode, which focuses on conveying a message.

Emig also outlines the specific questions which guided the research in the opening pages of her Review of Literature , preceding the report.

Designing a Case Study

After considering the different sub categories of case study and identifying a theoretical perspective, researchers can begin to design their study. Research design is the string of logic that ultimately links the data to be collected and the conclusions to be drawn to the initial questions of the study. Typically, research designs deal with at least four problems:

• What questions to study
• What data are relevant
• What data to collect
• How to analyze that data

In other words, a research design is basically a blueprint for getting from the beginning to the end of a study. The beginning is an initial set of questions to be answered, and the end is some set of conclusions about those questions.

Because case studies are conducted on topics as diverse as Anglo-Saxon Literature (Thrane 1986) and AIDS prevention (Van Vugt 1994), it is virtually impossible to outline any strict or universal method or design for conducting the case study. However, Robert K. Yin (1993) does offer five basic components of a research design:

• A study's questions.
• A study's propositions (if any).
• A study's units of analysis.
• The logic that links the data to the propositions.
• The criteria for interpreting the findings.

In addition to these five basic components, Yin also stresses the importance of clearly articulating one's theoretical perspective, determining the goals of the study, selecting one's subject(s), selecting the appropriate method(s) of collecting data, and providing some considerations to the composition of the final report.

Conducting Case Studies

To obtain as complete a picture of the participant as possible, case study researchers can employ a variety of approaches and methods. These approaches, methods, and related issues are discussed in depth in this section.

Method: Single or Multi-modal?

To obtain as complete a picture of the participant as possible, case study researchers can employ a variety of methods. Some common methods include interviews , protocol analyses, field studies, and participant-observations. Emig (1971) chose to use several methods of data collection. Her sources included conversations with the students, protocol analysis, discrete observations of actual composition, writing samples from each student, and school records (Lauer and Asher 1988).

Berkenkotter, Huckin, and Ackerman (1988) collected data by observing classrooms, conducting faculty and student interviews, collecting self reports from the subject, and by looking at the subject's written work.

A study that was criticized for using a single method model was done by Flower and Hayes (1984). In this study that explores the ways in which writers use different forms of knowing to create space, the authors used only protocol analysis to gather data. The study came under heavy fire because of their decision to use only one method.

Participant Selection

Case studies can use one participant, or a small group of participants. However, it is important that the participant pool remain relatively small. The participants can represent a diverse cross section of society, but this isn't necessary.

For example, the Berkenkotter, Huckin, and Ackerman (1988) study looked at just one participant, Nate. By contrast, in Janet Emig's (1971) study of the composition process of twelfth graders, eight participants were selected representing a diverse cross section of the community, with volunteers from an all-white upper-middle-class suburban school, an all-black inner-city school, a racially mixed lower-middle-class school, an economically and racially mixed school, and a university school.

Often, a brief "case history" is done on the participants of the study in order to provide researchers with a clearer understanding of their participants, as well as some insight as to how their own personal histories might affect the outcome of the study. For instance, in Emig's study, the investigator had access to the school records of five of the participants, and to standardized test scores for the remaining three. Also made available to the researcher was the information that three of the eight students were selected as NCTE Achievement Award winners. These personal histories can be useful in later stages of the study when data are being analyzed and conclusions drawn.

Data Collection

There are six types of data collected in case studies:

• Archival records.
• Interviews.
• Direct observation.
• Participant observation.

In the field of composition research, these six sources might be:

• A writer's drafts.
• School records of student writers.
• Transcripts of interviews with a writer.
• Transcripts of conversations between writers (and protocols).
• Videotapes and notes from direct field observations.
• Hard copies of a writer's work on computer.

Depending on whether researchers have chosen to use a single or multi-modal approach for the case study, they may choose to collect data from one or any combination of these sources.

Protocols, that is, transcriptions of participants talking aloud about what they are doing as they do it, have been particularly common in composition case studies. For example, in Emig's (1971) study, the students were asked, in four different sessions, to give oral autobiographies of their writing experiences and to compose aloud three themes in the presence of a tape recorder and the investigator.

In some studies, only one method of data collection is conducted. For example, the Flower and Hayes (1981) report on the cognitive process theory of writing depends on protocol analysis alone. However, using multiple sources of evidence to increase the reliability and validity of the data can be advantageous.

Case studies are likely to be much more convincing and accurate if they are based on several different sources of information, following a corroborating mode. This conclusion is echoed among many composition researchers. For example, in her study of predrafting processes of high and low-apprehensive writers, Cynthia Selfe (1985) argues that because "methods of indirect observation provide only an incomplete reflection of the complex set of processes involved in composing, a combination of several such methods should be used to gather data in any one study." Thus, in this study, Selfe collected her data from protocols, observations of students role playing their writing processes, audio taped interviews with the students, and videotaped observations of the students in the process of composing.

It can be said then, that cross checking data from multiple sources can help provide a multidimensional profile of composing activities in a particular setting. Sharan Merriam (1985) suggests "checking, verifying, testing, probing, and confirming collected data as you go, arguing that this process will follow in a funnel-like design resulting in less data gathering in later phases of the study along with a congruent increase in analysis checking, verifying, and confirming."

It is important to note that in case studies, as in any qualitative descriptive research, while researchers begin their studies with one or several questions driving the inquiry (which influence the key factors the researcher will be looking for during data collection), a researcher may find new key factors emerging during data collection. These might be unexpected patterns or linguistic features which become evident only during the course of the research. While not bearing directly on the researcher's guiding questions, these variables may become the basis for new questions asked at the end of the report, thus linking to the possibility of further research.

Data Analysis

As the information is collected, researchers strive to make sense of their data. Generally, researchers interpret their data in one of two ways: holistically or through coding. Holistic analysis does not attempt to break the evidence into parts, but rather to draw conclusions based on the text as a whole. Flower and Hayes (1981), for example, make inferences from entire sections of their students' protocols, rather than searching through the transcripts to look for isolatable characteristics.

However, composition researchers commonly interpret their data by coding, that is by systematically searching data to identify and/or categorize specific observable actions or characteristics. These observable actions then become the key variables in the study. Sharan Merriam (1988) suggests seven analytic frameworks for the organization and presentation of data:

• The role of participants.
• The network analysis of formal and informal exchanges among groups.
• Historical.
• Thematical.
• Ritual and symbolism.
• Critical incidents that challenge or reinforce fundamental beliefs, practices, and values.

There are two purposes of these frameworks: to look for patterns among the data and to look for patterns that give meaning to the case study.

As stated above, while most researchers begin their case studies expecting to look for particular observable characteristics, it is not unusual for key variables to emerge during data collection. Typical variables coded in case studies of writers include pauses writers make in the production of a text, the use of specific linguistic units (such as nouns or verbs), and writing processes (planning, drafting, revising, and editing). In the Berkenkotter, Huckin, and Ackerman (1988) study, for example, researchers coded the participant's texts for use of connectives, discourse demonstratives, average sentence length, off-register words, use of the first person pronoun, and the ratio of definite articles to indefinite articles.

Since coding is inherently subjective, more than one coder is usually employed. In the Berkenkotter, Huckin, and Ackerman (1988) study, for example, three rhetoricians were employed to code the participant's texts for off-register phrases. The researchers established the agreement among the coders before concluding that the participant used fewer off-register words as the graduate program progressed.

Composing the Case Study Report

In the many forms it can take, "a case study is generically a story; it presents the concrete narrative detail of actual, or at least realistic events, it has a plot, exposition, characters, and sometimes even dialogue" (Boehrer 1990). Generally, case study reports are extensively descriptive, with "the most problematic issue often referred to as being the determination of the right combination of description and analysis" (1990). Typically, authors address each step of the research process, and attempt to give the reader as much context as possible for the decisions made in the research design and for the conclusions drawn.

This contextualization usually includes a detailed explanation of the researchers' theoretical positions, of how those theories drove the inquiry or led to the guiding research questions, of the participants' backgrounds, of the processes of data collection, of the training and limitations of the coders, along with a strong attempt to make connections between the data and the conclusions evident.

Although the Berkenkotter, Huckin, and Ackerman (1988) study does not, case study reports often include the reactions of the participants to the study or to the researchers' conclusions. Because case studies tend to be exploratory, most end with implications for further study. Here researchers may identify significant variables that emerged during the research and suggest studies related to these, or the authors may suggest further general questions that their case study generated.

For example, Emig's (1971) study concludes with a section dedicated solely to the topic of implications for further research, in which she suggests several means by which this particular study could have been improved, as well as questions and ideas raised by this study which other researchers might like to address, such as: is there a correlation between a certain personality and a certain composing process profile (e.g. is there a positive correlation between ego strength and persistence in revising)?

Also included in Emig's study is a section dedicated to implications for teaching, which outlines the pedagogical ramifications of the study's findings for teachers currently involved in high school writing programs.

Sharan Merriam (1985) also offers several suggestions for alternative presentations of data:

• Prepare specialized condensations for appropriate groups.
• Replace narrative sections with a series of answers to open-ended questions.
• Present "skimmer's" summaries at beginning of each section.
• Incorporate headlines that encapsulate information from text.
• Prepare analytic summaries with supporting data appendixes.
• Present data in colorful and/or unique graphic representations.

Issues of Validity and Reliability

Once key variables have been identified, they can be analyzed. Reliability becomes a key concern at this stage, and many case study researchers go to great lengths to ensure that their interpretations of the data will be both reliable and valid. Because issues of validity and reliability are an important part of any study in the social sciences, it is important to identify some ways of dealing with results.

Multi-modal case study researchers often balance the results of their coding with data from interviews or writer's reflections upon their own work. Consequently, the researchers' conclusions become highly contextualized. For example, in a case study which looked at the time spent in different stages of the writing process, Berkenkotter concluded that her participant, Donald Murray, spent more time planning his essays than in other writing stages. The report of this case study is followed by Murray's reply, wherein he agrees with some of Berkenkotter's conclusions and disagrees with others.

As is the case with other research methodologies, issues of external validity, construct validity, and reliability need to be carefully considered.

Commentary on Case Studies

Researchers often debate the relative merits of particular methods, among them case study. In this section, we comment on two key issues. To read the commentaries, choose any of the items below:

Strengths and Weaknesses of Case Studies

Most case study advocates point out that case studies produce much more detailed information than what is available through a statistical analysis. Advocates will also hold that while statistical methods might be able to deal with situations where behavior is homogeneous and routine, case studies are needed to deal with creativity, innovation, and context. Detractors argue that case studies are difficult to generalize because of inherent subjectivity and because they are based on qualitative subjective data, generalizable only to a particular context.

Flexibility

The case study approach is a comparatively flexible method of scientific research. Because its project designs seem to emphasize exploration rather than prescription or prediction, researchers are comparatively freer to discover and address issues as they arise in their experiments. In addition, the looser format of case studies allows researchers to begin with broad questions and narrow their focus as their experiment progresses rather than attempt to predict every possible outcome before the experiment is conducted.

Emphasis on Context

By seeking to understand as much as possible about a single subject or small group of subjects, case studies specialize in "deep data," or "thick description"--information based on particular contexts that can give research results a more human face. This emphasis can help bridge the gap between abstract research and concrete practice by allowing researchers to compare their firsthand observations with the quantitative results obtained through other methods of research.

Inherent Subjectivity

"The case study has long been stereotyped as the weak sibling among social science methods," and is often criticized as being too subjective and even pseudo-scientific. Likewise, "investigators who do case studies are often regarded as having deviated from their academic disciplines, and their investigations as having insufficient precision (that is, quantification), objectivity and rigor" (Yin 1989). Opponents cite opportunities for subjectivity in the implementation, presentation, and evaluation of case study research. The approach relies on personal interpretation of data and inferences. Results may not be generalizable, are difficult to test for validity, and rarely offer a problem-solving prescription. Simply put, relying on one or a few subjects as a basis for cognitive extrapolations runs the risk of inferring too much from what might be circumstance.

High Investment

Case studies can involve learning more about the subjects being tested than most researchers would care to know--their educational background, emotional background, perceptions of themselves and their surroundings, their likes, dislikes, and so on. Because of its emphasis on "deep data," the case study is out of reach for many large-scale research projects which look at a subject pool in the tens of thousands. A budget request of $10,000 to examine 200 subjects sounds more efficient than a similar request to examine four subjects.

Ethical Considerations

Researchers conducting case studies should consider certain ethical issues. For example, many educational case studies are often financed by people who have, either directly or indirectly, power over both those being studied and those conducting the investigation (1985). This conflict of interests can hinder the credibility of the study.

The personal integrity, sensitivity, and possible prejudices and/or biases of the investigators need to be taken into consideration as well. Personal biases can creep into how the research is conducted, alternative research methods used, and the preparation of surveys and questionnaires.

A common complaint in case study research is that investigators change direction during the course of the study unaware that their original research design was inadequate for the revised investigation. Thus, the researchers leave unknown gaps and biases in the study. To avoid this, researchers should report preliminary findings so that the likelihood of bias will be reduced.

Concerns about Reliability, Validity, and Generalizability

Merriam (1985) offers several suggestions for how case study researchers might actively combat the popular attacks on the validity, reliability, and generalizability of case studies:

• Prolong the Processes of Data Gathering on Site: This will help to insure the accuracy of the findings by providing the researcher with more concrete information upon which to formulate interpretations.
• Employ the Process of "Triangulation": Use a variety of data sources as opposed to relying solely upon one avenue of observation. One example of such a data check would be what McClintock, Brannon, and Maynard (1985) refer to as a "case cluster method," that is, when a single unit within a larger case is randomly sampled, and that data treated quantitatively." For instance, in Emig's (1971) study, the case cluster method was employed, singling out the productivity of a single student named Lynn. This cluster profile included an advanced case history of the subject, specific examination and analysis of individual compositions and protocols, and extensive interview sessions. The seven remaining students were then compared with the case of Lynn, to ascertain if there are any shared, or unique dimensions to the composing process engaged in by these eight students.
• Conduct Member Checks: Initiate and maintain an active corroboration on the interpretation of data between the researcher and those who provided the data. In other words, talk to your subjects.
• Collect Referential Materials: Complement the file of materials from the actual site with additional document support. For example, Emig (1971) supports her initial propositions with historical accounts by writers such as T.S. Eliot, James Joyce, and D.H. Lawrence. Emig also cites examples of theoretical research done with regards to the creative process, as well as examples of empirical research dealing with the writing of adolescents. Specific attention is then given to the four stages description of the composing process delineated by Helmoltz, Wallas, and Cowley, as it serves as the focal point in this study.
• Engage in Peer Consultation: Prior to composing the final draft of the report, researchers should consult with colleagues in order to establish validity through pooled judgment.

Although little can be done to combat challenges concerning the generalizability of case studies, "most writers suggest that qualitative research should be judged as credible and confirmable as opposed to valid and reliable" (Merriam 1985). Likewise, it has been argued that "rather than transplanting statistical, quantitative notions of generalizability and thus finding qualitative research inadequate, it makes more sense to develop an understanding of generalization that is congruent with the basic characteristics of qualitative inquiry" (1985). After all, criticizing the case study method for being ungeneralizable is comparable to criticizing a washing machine for not being able to tell the correct time. In other words, it is unjust to criticize a method for not being able to do something which it was never originally designed to do in the first place.

Annotated Bibliography

Armisted, C. (1984). How Useful are Case Studies. Training and Development Journal, 38 (2), 75-77.

This article looks at eight types of case studies, offers pros and cons of using case studies in the classroom, and gives suggestions for successfully writing and using case studies.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1997). Beyond Methods: Components of Second Language Teacher Education . New York: McGraw-Hill.

A compilation of various research essays which address issues of language teacher education. Essays included are: "Non-native reading research and theory" by Lee, "The case for Psycholinguistics" by VanPatten, and "Assessment and Second Language Teaching" by Gradman and Reed.

Bartlett, L. (1989). A Question of Good Judgment; Interpretation Theory and Qualitative Enquiry Address. 70th Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco.

Bartlett selected "quasi-historical" methodology, which focuses on the "truth" found in case records, as one that will provide "good judgments" in educational inquiry. He argues that although the method is not comprehensive, it can try to connect theory with practice.

Baydere, S. et. al. (1993). Multimedia conferencing as a tool for collaborative writing: a case study in Computer Supported Collaborative Writing. New York: Springer-Verlag.

The case study by Baydere et. al. is just one of the many essays in this book found in the series "Computer Supported Cooperative Work." Denley, Witefield and May explore similar issues in their essay, "A case study in task analysis for the design of a collaborative document production system."

Berkenkotter, C., Huckin, T., N., & Ackerman J. (1988). Conventions, Conversations, and the Writer: Case Study of a Student in a Rhetoric Ph.D. Program. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 9-44.

The authors focused on how the writing of their subject, Nate or Ackerman, changed as he became more acquainted or familiar with his field's discourse community.

Berninger, V., W., and Gans, B., M. (1986). Language Profiles in Nonspeaking Individuals of Normal Intelligence with Severe Cerebral Palsy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2, 45-50.

Argues that generalizations about language abilities in patients with severe cerebral palsy (CP) should be avoided. Standardized tests of different levels of processing oral language, of processing written language, and of producing written language were administered to 3 male participants (aged 9, 16, and 40 yrs).

Bockman, J., R., and Couture, B. (1984). The Case Method in Technical Communication: Theory and Models. Texas: Association of Teachers of Technical Writing.

Examines the study and teaching of technical writing, communication of technical information, and the case method in terms of those applications.

Boehrer, J. (1990). Teaching With Cases: Learning to Question. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 42 41-57.

This article discusses the origins of the case method, looks at the question of what is a case, gives ideas about learning in case teaching, the purposes it can serve in the classroom, the ground rules for the case discussion, including the role of the question, and new directions for case teaching.

Bowman, W. R. (1993). Evaluating JTPA Programs for Economically Disadvantaged Adults: A Case Study of Utah and General Findings . Washington: National Commission for Employment Policy.

"To encourage state-level evaluations of JTPA, the Commission and the State of Utah co-sponsored this report on the effectiveness of JTPA Title II programs for adults in Utah. The technique used is non-experimental and the comparison group was selected from registrants with Utah's Employment Security. In a step-by-step approach, the report documents how non-experimental techniques can be applied and several specific technical issues can be addressed."

Boyce, A. (1993) The Case Study Approach for Pedagogists. Annual Meeting of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. (Address). Washington DC.

This paper addresses how case studies 1) bridge the gap between teaching theory and application, 2) enable students to analyze problems and develop solutions for situations that will be encountered in the real world of teaching, and 3) helps students to evaluate the feasibility of alternatives and to understand the ramifications of a particular course of action.

Carson, J. (1993) The Case Study: Ideal Home of WAC Quantitative and Qualitative Data. Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication. (Address). San Diego.

"Increasingly, one of the most pressing questions for WAC advocates is how to keep [WAC] programs going in the face of numerous difficulties. Case histories offer the best chance for fashioning rhetorical arguments to keep WAC programs going because they offer the opportunity to provide a coherent narrative that contextualizes all documents and data, including what is generally considered scientific data. A case study of the WAC program, . . . at Robert Morris College in Pittsburgh demonstrates the advantages of this research method. Such studies are ideal homes for both naturalistic and positivistic data as well as both quantitative and qualitative information."

---. (1991). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication. 32. 365-87.

No abstract available.

Cromer, R. (1994) A Case Study of Dissociations Between Language and Cognition. Constraints on Language Acquisition: Studies of Atypical Children . Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 141-153.

Crossley, M. (1983) Case Study in Comparative and International Education: An Approach to Bridging the Theory-Practice Gap. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the Australian Comparative and International Education Society. Hamilton, NZ.

Case study research, as presented here, helps bridge the theory-practice gap in comparative and international research studies of education because it focuses on the practical, day-to-day context rather than on the national arena. The paper asserts that the case study method can be valuable at all levels of research, formation, and verification of theories in education.

Daillak, R., H., and Alkin, M., C. (1982). Qualitative Studies in Context: Reflections on the CSE Studies of Evaluation Use . California: EDRS

The report shows how the Center of the Study of Evaluation (CSE) applied qualitative techniques to a study of evaluation information use in local, Los Angeles schools. It critiques the effectiveness and the limitations of using case study, evaluation, field study, and user interview survey methodologies.

Davey, L. (1991). The Application of Case Study Evaluations. ERIC/TM Digest.

This article examines six types of case studies, the type of evaluation questions that can be answered, the functions served, some design features, and some pitfalls of the method.

Deutch, C. E. (1996). A course in research ethics for graduate students. College Teaching, 44, 2, 56-60.

This article describes a one-credit discussion course in research ethics for graduate students in biology. Case studies are focused on within the four parts of the course: 1) major issues, 2 )practical issues in scholarly work, 3) ownership of research results, and 4) training and personal decisions.

DeVoss, G. (1981). Ethics in Fieldwork Research. RIE 27p. (ERIC)

This article examines four of the ethical problems that can happen when conducting case study research: acquiring permission to do research, knowing when to stop digging, the pitfalls of doing collaborative research, and preserving the integrity of the participants.

Driscoll, A. (1985). Case Study of a Research Intervention: the University of Utah’s Collaborative Approach . San Francisco: Far West Library for Educational Research Development.

Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education, Denver, CO, March 1985. Offers information of in-service training, specifically case studies application.

Ellram, L. M. (1996). The Use of the Case Study Method in Logistics Research. Journal of Business Logistics, 17, 2, 93.

This article discusses the increased use of case study in business research, and the lack of understanding of when and how to use case study methodology in business.

Emig, J. (1971) The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders . Urbana: NTCE.

This case study uses observation, tape recordings, writing samples, and school records to show that writing in reflexive and extensive situations caused different lengths of discourse and different clusterings of the components of the writing process.

Feagin, J. R. (1991). A Case For the Case Study . Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.

This book discusses the nature, characteristics, and basic methodological issues of the case study as a research method.

Feldman, H., Holland, A., & Keefe, K. (1989) Language Abilities after Left Hemisphere Brain Injury: A Case Study of Twins. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 9, 32-47.

"Describes the language abilities of 2 twin pairs in which 1 twin (the experimental) suffered brain injury to the left cerebral hemisphere around the time of birth and1 twin (the control) did not. One pair of twins was initially assessed at age 23 mo. and the other at about 30 mo.; they were subsequently evaluated in their homes 3 times at about 6-mo intervals."

Fidel, R. (1984). The Case Study Method: A Case Study. Library and Information Science Research, 6.

The article describes the use of case study methodology to systematically develop a model of online searching behavior in which study design is flexible, subject manner determines data gathering and analyses, and procedures adapt to the study's progressive change.

Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1984). Images, Plans and Prose: The Representation of Meaning in Writing. Written Communication, 1, 120-160.

Explores the ways in which writers actually use different forms of knowing to create prose.

Frey, L. R. (1992). Interpreting Communication Research: A Case Study Approach Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

The book discusses research methodologies in the Communication field. It focuses on how case studies bridge the gap between communication research, theory, and practice.

Gilbert, V. K. (1981). The Case Study as a Research Methodology: Difficulties and Advantages of Integrating the Positivistic, Phenomenological and Grounded Theory Approaches . The Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for the Study of Educational Administration. (Address) Halifax, NS, Can.

This study on an innovative secondary school in England shows how a "low-profile" participant-observer case study was crucial to the initial observation, the testing of hypotheses, the interpretive approach, and the grounded theory.

Gilgun, J. F. (1994). A Case for Case Studies in Social Work Research. Social Work, 39, 4, 371-381.

This article defines case study research, presents guidelines for evaluation of case studies, and shows the relevance of case studies to social work research. It also looks at issues such as evaluation and interpretations of case studies.

Glennan, S. L., Sharp-Bittner, M. A. & Tullos, D. C. (1991). Augmentative and Alternative Communication Training with a Nonspeaking Adult: Lessons from MH. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 240-7.

"A response-guided case study documented changes in a nonspeaking 36-yr-old man's ability to communicate using 3 trained augmentative communication modes. . . . Data were collected in videotaped interaction sessions between the nonspeaking adult and a series of adult speaking."

Graves, D. (1981). An Examination of the Writing Processes of Seven Year Old Children. Research in the Teaching of English, 15, 113-134.

Hamel, J. (1993). Case Study Methods . Newbury Park: Sage. .

"In a most economical fashion, Hamel provides a practical guide for producing theoretically sharp and empirically sound sociological case studies. A central idea put forth by Hamel is that case studies must "locate the global in the local" thus making the careful selection of the research site the most critical decision in the analytic process."

Karthigesu, R. (1986, July). Television as a Tool for Nation-Building in the Third World: A Post-Colonial Pattern, Using Malaysia as a Case-Study. International Television Studies Conference. (Address). London, 10-12.

"The extent to which Television Malaysia, as a national mass media organization, has been able to play a role in nation building in the post-colonial period is . . . studied in two parts: how the choice of a model of nation building determines the character of the organization; and how the character of the organization influences the output of the organization."

Kenny, R. (1984). Making the Case for the Case Study. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16, (1), 37-51.

The article looks at how and why the case study is justified as a viable and valuable approach to educational research and program evaluation.

Knirk, F. (1991). Case Materials: Research and Practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 4 (1 ), 73-81.

The article addresses the effectiveness of case studies, subject areas where case studies are commonly used, recent examples of their use, and case study design considerations.

Klos, D. (1976). Students as Case Writers. Teaching of Psychology, 3.2, 63-66.

This article reviews a course in which students gather data for an original case study of another person. The task requires the students to design the study, collect the data, write the narrative, and interpret the findings.

Leftwich, A. (1981). The Politics of Case Study: Problems of Innovation in University Education. Higher Education Review, 13.2, 38-64.

The article discusses the use of case studies as a teaching method. Emphasis is on the instructional materials, interdisciplinarity, and the complex relationships within the university that help or hinder the method.

Mabrito, M. (1991, Oct.). Electronic Mail as a Vehicle for Peer Response: Conversations of High and Low Apprehensive Writers. Written Communication, 509-32.

McCarthy, S., J. (1955). The Influence of Classroom Discourse on Student Texts: The Case of Ella . East Lansing: Institute for Research on Teaching.

A look at how students of color become marginalized within traditional classroom discourse. The essay follows the struggles of one black student: Ella.

Matsuhashi, A., ed. (1987). Writing in Real Time: Modeling Production Processes Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Investigates how writers plan to produce discourse for different purposes to report, to generalize, and to persuade, as well as how writers plan for sentence level units of language. To learn about planning, an observational measure of pause time was used" (ERIC).

Merriam, S. B. (1985). The Case Study in Educational Research: A Review of Selected Literature. Journal of Educational Thought, 19.3, 204-17.

The article examines the characteristics of, philosophical assumptions underlying the case study, the mechanics of conducting a case study, and the concerns about the reliability, validity, and generalizability of the method.

---. (1988). Case Study Research in Education: A Qualitative Approach San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Merry, S. E., & Milner, N. eds. (1993). The Possibility of Popular Justice: A Case Study of Community Mediation in the United States . Ann Arbor: U of Michigan.

". . . this volume presents a case study of one experiment in popular justice, the San Francisco Community Boards. This program has made an explicit claim to create an alternative justice, or new justice, in the midst of a society ordered by state law. The contributors to this volume explore the history and experience of the program and compare it to other versions of popular justice in the United States, Europe, and the Third World."

Merseth, K. K. (1991). The Case for Cases in Teacher Education. RIE. 42p. (ERIC).

This monograph argues that the case method of instruction offers unique potential for revitalizing the field of teacher education.

Michaels, S. (1987). Text and Context: A New Approach to the Study of Classroom Writing. Discourse Processes, 10, 321-346.

"This paper argues for and illustrates an approach to the study of writing that integrates ethnographic analysis of classroom interaction with linguistic analysis of written texts and teacher/student conversational exchanges. The approach is illustrated through a case study of writing in a single sixth grade classroom during a single writing assignment."

Milburn, G. (1995). Deciphering a Code or Unraveling a Riddle: A Case Study in the Application of a Humanistic Metaphor to the Reporting of Social Studies Teaching. Theory and Research in Education, 13.

This citation serves as an example of how case studies document learning procedures in a senior-level economics course.

Milley, J. E. (1979). An Investigation of Case Study as an Approach to Program Evaluation. 19th Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research. (Address). San Diego.

The case study method merged a narrative report focusing on the evaluator as participant-observer with document review, interview, content analysis, attitude questionnaire survey, and sociogram analysis. Milley argues that case study program evaluation has great potential for widespread use.

Minnis, J. R. (1985, Sept.). Ethnography, Case Study, Grounded Theory, and Distance Education Research. Distance Education, 6.2.

This article describes and defines the strengths and weaknesses of ethnography, case study, and grounded theory.

Nunan, D. (1992). Collaborative language learning and teaching . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Included in this series of essays is Peter Sturman’s "Team Teaching: a case study from Japan" and David Nunan’s own "Toward a collaborative approach to curriculum development: a case study."

Nystrand, M., ed. (1982). What Writers Know: The Language, Process, and Structure of Written Discourse . New York: Academic Press.

Owenby, P. H. (1992). Making Case Studies Come Alive. Training, 29, (1), 43-46. (ERIC)

This article provides tips for writing more effective case studies.

---. (1981). Pausing and Planning: The Tempo of Writer Discourse Production. Research in the Teaching of English, 15 (2),113-34.

Perl, S. (1979). The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 317-336.

"Summarizes a study of five unskilled college writers, focusing especially on one of the five, and discusses the findings in light of current pedagogical practice and research design."

Pilcher J. and A. Coffey. eds. (1996). Gender and Qualitative Research . Brookfield: Aldershot, Hants, England.

This book provides a series of essays which look at gender identity research, qualitative research and applications of case study to questions of gendered pedagogy.

Pirie, B. S. (1993). The Case of Morty: A Four Year Study. Gifted Education International, 9 (2), 105-109.

This case study describes a boy from kindergarten through third grade with above average intelligence but difficulty in learning to read, write, and spell.

Popkewitz, T. (1993). Changing Patterns of Power: Social Regulation and Teacher Education Reform. Albany: SUNY Press.

Popkewitz edits this series of essays that address case studies on educational change and the training of teachers. The essays vary in terms of discipline and scope. Also, several authors include case studies of educational practices in countries other than the United States.

---. (1984). The Predrafting Processes of Four High- and Four Low Apprehensive Writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 18, (1), 45-64.

Rasmussen, P. (1985, March) A Case Study on the Evaluation of Research at the Technical University of Denmark. International Journal of Institutional Management in Higher Education, 9 (1).

This is an example of a case study methodology used to evaluate the chemistry and chemical engineering departments at the University of Denmark.

Roth, K. J. (1986). Curriculum Materials, Teacher Talk, and Student Learning: Case Studies in Fifth-Grade Science Teaching . East Lansing: Institute for Research on Teaching.

Roth offers case studies on elementary teachers, elementary school teaching, science studies and teaching, and verbal learning.

Selfe, C. L. (1985). An Apprehensive Writer Composes. When a Writer Can't Write: Studies in Writer's Block and Other Composing-Process Problems . (pp. 83-95). Ed. Mike Rose. NMY: Guilford.

Smith-Lewis, M., R. and Ford, A. (1987). A User's Perspective on Augmentative Communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 12-7.

"During a series of in-depth interviews, a 25-yr-old woman with cerebral palsy who utilized augmentative communication reflected on the effectiveness of the devices designed for her during her school career."

St. Pierre, R., G. (1980, April). Follow Through: A Case Study in Metaevaluation Research . 64th Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (Address).

The three approaches to metaevaluation are evaluation of primary evaluations, integrative meta-analysis with combined primary evaluation results, and re-analysis of the raw data from a primary evaluation.

Stahler, T., M. (1996, Feb.) Early Field Experiences: A Model That Worked. ERIC.

"This case study of a field and theory class examines a model designed to provide meaningful field experiences for preservice teachers while remaining consistent with the instructor's beliefs about the role of teacher education in preparing teachers for the classroom."

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

This book examines case study research in education and case study methodology.

Stiegelbauer, S. (1984) Community, Context, and Co-curriculum: Situational Factors Influencing School Improvements in a Study of High Schools. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Discussion of several case studies: one looking at high school environments, another examining educational innovations.

Stolovitch, H. (1990). Case Study Method. Performance And Instruction, 29, (9), 35-37.

This article describes the case study method as a form of simulation and presents guidelines for their use in professional training situations.

Thaller, E. (1994). Bibliography for the Case Method: Using Case Studies in Teacher Education. RIE. 37 p.

This bibliography presents approximately 450 citations on the use of case studies in teacher education from 1921-1993.

Thrane, T. (1986). On Delimiting the Senses of Near-Synonyms in Historical Semantics: A Case Study of Adjectives of 'Moral Sufficiency' in the Old English Andreas. Linguistics Across Historical and Geographical Boundaries: In Honor of Jacek Fisiak on the Occasion of his Fiftieth Birthday . Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

United Nations. (1975). Food and Agriculture Organization. Report on the FAO/UNFPA Seminar on Methodology, Research and Country: Case Studies on Population, Employment and Productivity . Rome: United Nations.

This example case study shows how the methodology can be used in a demographic and psychographic evaluation. At the same time, it discusses the formation and instigation of the case study methodology itself.

Van Vugt, J. P., ed. (1994). Aids Prevention and Services: Community Based Research . Westport: Bergin and Garvey.

"This volume has been five years in the making. In the process, some of the policy applications called for have met with limited success, such as free needle exchange programs in a limited number of American cities, providing condoms to prison inmates, and advertisements that depict same-sex couples. Rather than dating our chapters that deal with such subjects, such policy applications are verifications of the type of research demonstrated here. Furthermore, they indicate the critical need to continue community based research in the various communities threatened by acquired immuno-deficiency syndrome (AIDS) . . . "

Welch, W., ed. (1981, May). Case Study Methodology in Educational Evaluation. Proceedings of the Minnesota Evaluation Conference. Minnesota. (Address).

The four papers in these proceedings provide a comprehensive picture of the rationale, methodology, strengths, and limitations of case studies.

Williams, G. (1987). The Case Method: An Approach to Teaching and Learning in Educational Administration. RIE, 31p.

This paper examines the viability of the case method as a teaching and learning strategy in instructional systems geared toward the training of personnel of the administration of various aspects of educational systems.

Yin, R. K. (1993). Advancing Rigorous Methodologies: A Review of 'Towards Rigor in Reviews of Multivocal Literatures.' Review of Educational Research, 61, (3).

"R. T. Ogawa and B. Malen's article does not meet its own recommended standards for rigorous testing and presentation of its own conclusions. Use of the exploratory case study to analyze multivocal literatures is not supported, and the claim of grounded theory to analyze multivocal literatures may be stronger."

---. (1989). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage Publications Inc.

This book discusses in great detail, the entire design process of the case study, including entire chapters on collecting evidence, analyzing evidence, composing the case study report, and designing single and multiple case studies.

Related Links

Consider the following list of related Web sites for more information on the topic of case study research. Note: although many of the links cover the general category of qualitative research, all have sections that address issues of case studies.

• Sage Publications on Qualitative Methodology: Search here for a comprehensive list of new books being published about "Qualitative Methodology" http://www.sagepub.co.uk/
• The International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education: An on-line journal "to enhance the theory and practice of qualitative research in education." On-line submissions are welcome. http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/tf/09518398.html
• Qualitative Research Resources on the Internet: From syllabi to home pages to bibliographies. All links relate somehow to qualitative research. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/qualres.html

Becker, Bronwyn, Patrick Dawson, Karen Devine, Carla Hannum, Steve Hill, Jon Leydens, Debbie Matuskevich, Carol Traver, & Mike Palmquist. (2005). Case Studies. Writing@CSU . Colorado State University. https://writing.colostate.edu/guides/guide.cfm?guideid=60

Discover the Top 10 Idea Evaluation Tools For Better Decision Making

Developing a new product can be an exciting and challenging process, but it requires careful planning and execution of ideas that can bring the best results. One of the most critical steps in product development is idea evaluation. It also helps businesses focus on the most promising ideas and develop them into successful products.

However, idea evaluation is not just about using tools and methods. It also requires businesses to be creative, innovative, and open-minded. Businesses need to be willing to explore new ideas, take risks, and learn from failures. They also need to be able to adapt to changing market conditions and customer preferences.

What is Idea Evaluation?

Idea evaluation is the process of assessing a product idea to determine if it's worth pursuing. Businesses use this step to save time, money, and resources by identifying and eliminating weak or unprofitable ideas early on.

Idea evaluation improves decision-making in business. It helps businesses reduce risks and costs by assessing untested concepts. It also uncovers opportunities for innovation and creativity. In a broader picture idea evaluation aligns business strategies with market potential, leading to a competitive advantage.

Importance of Idea Evaluation for Innovation Process

Enhancing decision-making processes.

Idea evaluation improves decision-making by using objective criteria and eliminating bias. It ensures data-driven and reliable decisions.

Prioritizing Ideas

Evaluating and selecting the best ideas helps businesses focus on promising ones, optimizing resources and avoiding waste.

Reducing Risks and Costs

Effective evaluation reduces risks and costs by assessing the feasibility and practicality of new concepts.

Avoiding Costly Mistakes

The thorough evaluation assesses risks, aiding informed decisions on moving forward or not.

Encouraging Innovation and Creativity

Idea evaluation identifies improvement opportunities, boosting efficiency, cost savings, and growth. Scenario planning fosters creative solutions and prepares for challenges.

How to Select the Right Idea Evaluation Tool

To evaluate ideas effectively, businesses establish criteria. Common evaluation criteria include:

• Feasibility : Can the concept be implemented practically and achieve set goals?
• Market Potential : Is there a demand for the idea within the market?
• Alignment with Goals: Does the concept align with the business's strategy and objectives?
• Competitive Advantage: Does the concept offer uniqueness and a competitive edge?

List of Top 10 Idea Evaluation Tools

We have carefully selected and researched the best idea evaluation tools available to help you make informed decisions. Our top 10 picks are sure to provide you with the necessary features and benefits to evaluate your ideas effectively. Stay tuned for our comprehensive list!

FeedBear: A Modern, Minimal, and Capable Idea Evaluation Tool

FeedBear is an affordable and modern idea evaluation tool that helps teams manage their innovation process easily. Our platform offers a fast and easy-to-use way that helps your team stay organized, collaborate effectively, and keep your customers engaged.

The core idea behind FeedBear is to build a modern idea management and roadmap tool while also being the simplest in the market. So many alternatives are bloated with so many features and settings that they'll take days to learn and get set up.

We wanted to build a platform that reduces the learning curve for users and team members to near zero. We think we've accomplished that as onboarding and setup takes literally a few minutes.

Also, another important goal with FeedBear that we've succeeded in is reducing the amount of work needed from product teams to maintain and use the tool, saving time whenever possible.

FeedBear lets you create unlimited idea boards for feedback, ideas, and feature requests (but also bug reports and virtually anything you want).

• It centralizes feedback from both team and customers.
• It allows comments and voting on ideas and can be kept internal or public.
• Similar ideas are automatically surfaced and suggested to users as they attempt to post a new one, minimizing duplication.
• Aligns product development with customer needs, increasing satisfaction and reducing churn.
• Facilitates collaboration between product, support, and customer success teams to enhance the product and meet customer requirements.
• Ideas can be merged and reorganized, edited, moved, and deleted so your team members are in complete control.

Visual Product Roadmap

FeedBear allows creating and managing a visual product roadmap . It has:

• Customizable columns and statuses help you communicate exactly where each idea is in the pipeline.
• Tracking of planned, in-progress, and completed tasks ensures team alignment toward common goals and a simple way to communicate your progress with customers.

Engage Your Customers

• Share your idea evaluation tool with customers and demonstrate that you value their feedback.
• Cultivate a sense of community and loyalty among your customers to decrease churn and enhance retention.
• Use comments and discussions to identify the real problems and needs of your customers.

Announce New Ideas

• Keep customers updated on new ideas with a built-in changelog .
• Close the feedback loop and generate excitement for new ideas.
• Ensure new ideas are not overlooked and receive genuine usage from customers, thus aiding in customer retention and overall satisfaction with your product.

Integrate with Your Favorite Tools

Effortlessly integrate with popular tools such as Trello, Jira, Intercom, Slack, and Zapier.

Include FeedBear in your existing workflow and guarantee that everything is functioning together seamlessly.

Simple and Customizable Design

The straightforward and customizable design makes it effortless to get started with little to no learning curve.

Publish your idea evaluation tool from your own domain, on your website, or within your application.

Straightforward pricing plans that cover your entire team - FeedBear's team pricing is generally the per-user pricing of most alternatives, which means that if you have more than one user on your team, FeedBear will always be more affordable.

The Startup plan begins at just $49 per month for up to 3 team members.

The Business plan starts at $99 per month for larger teams with an unlimited number of team members.

A wide range of features and benefits, all integrations, at an incredibly low price point.

To summarize FeedBear:

• Users can contribute ideas and suggestions, while others can vote for their preferred ones.
• FeedBear improves prioritization, enhancing decision-making.
• It keeps customers informed about ongoing updates.
• FeedBear provides automatic status updates as progress is made or customer requests are addressed.
• FeedBear's user-friendly UI stands out for its simplicity and ease of use.
• Users can provide feedback without an email, streamlining the process.
• FeedBear is intuitive and user-friendly, making feedback collection and management efficient.
• Users can quickly implement new features based on received feedback.

FeedBear simplifies team workflow, offering a user-friendly and efficient tool. Its minimal and innovative design ensures easy setup and usability. Experience the capabilities of FeedBear firsthand by trying it today.

IdeaScale is an idea evaluation tool that connects organizations with individuals who have innovative ideas. With IdeaScale, you can gather, refine, prioritize, and choose ideas that arise organically in your environment, and integrate them into your organizational outcomes, such as projects and data.

Core Features

• Cloud-based platform for idea management and innovation.
• Creation of communities for idea submission, commenting, and voting.
• Responsive design for optimal functionality across devices and browsers.
• Support for custom fields for ideas, profiles, or campaigns to collect relevant data.
• Stage-gate process for development, prioritization, and selection of ideas.
• Seamless integration with various tools and systems, including Slack, Salesforce, and SharePoint.
• Good analytics and reporting features for valuable insights into the performance and impact of ideas.

IdeaScale offers 4 pricing plans with prices ranging from $12,999 to $64,999 per year. A free plan is available for up to 25 users, with limited functionality. Custom subscriptions are also available upon request. Contact their sales team for current pricing.

Note: These prices are not listed on IdeaScale's website and may not be current prices so please reach out to their sales team for the most recent pricing.

Viima is a versatile innovation platform that collects and improves ideas from employees and customers to tackle problems like weak feedback loops, limited transparency, and a lack of innovation culture. It can be customized to fit any process or need, including stage-gate, lean startup, hackathons, and beyond.

• Idea contribution and development: Users can submit their ideas through web, mobile, email, or Microsoft Teams. They can also comment, vote and work together on ideas with others.
• Idea ranking: Viima ranks ideas using a unique algorithm based on criteria like popularity, feasibility, and impact. Users can also customize their own ranking criteria and filters.
• Campaign management: Users can create and manage various campaigns for specific goals or challenges. They can set deadlines, rewards, and feedback mechanisms for each campaign.
• Gamification tools: Viima uses gamification elements such as points, badges, and leaderboards to motivate and engage users in the innovation process.
• Reporting and analytics tools: Viima provides various reports and dashboards to help users monitor and measure the performance of their ideas and campaigns. They can also export data to other tools for further analysis.

Viima has various pricing plans based on users and features, including a free plan for up to 10 users and 1 board.

The Basic plan, for small teams, offers more control and costs $39/mo for up to 50 users and 3 boards.

The Unlimited plan, for larger organizations, offers all features, unlimited users, and boards, and costs $1799/mo.

Innovation Cloud

Innovation Cloud is software that manages innovation processes, right from idea gathering to product launch, with ease and speed. It allows you to collect ideas from multiple sources, assess them using customizable criteria, execute them using project management tools, and measure their impact.

• Includes everyone in the innovation process.
• Efficiently manages idea progress with a streamlined workflow.
• Offers different plans for various company sizes and needs.
• Integrates with Microsoft 365 and a few other tools.
• Manages innovation process from idea to final product based on specific needs.
• Democratizes data and uses cloud-native application platforms for engaging experiences.
• Unlocks new technical skills and expanded business capabilities by understanding customer needs and building innovations rapidly.
• Provides insightful reports for better decision-making.
• Customizes workflows, forms, fields, and categories to suit specific innovation processes.
• Offers collaboration and communication tools such as comments, ratings, notifications, and feedback.

Innovation Cloud offers free online idea management software for collecting, developing, and executing team ideas. It allows 15 users, 100 ideas, and 1GB of storage.

The PRO 20 plan costs 25€/$30 per month and includes 20 users, unlimited ideas and folders, and 2GB of storage.

The PRO 50 plan costs 60€/$70 per month and includes 50 users, unlimited ideas and folders, and 5GB of storage.

Idea Note is a web-based tool designed to assist organizations in collecting, prioritizing, developing, and executing ideas. Its main purpose is to provide users with a platform where they can launch idea campaigns, invite participants, evaluate and rank ideas, and monitor their progress.

• Collaboration : Work together with your team members and stakeholders in real-time.
• Discussion Threads : Discuss ideas with your team members and stakeholders and add comments, feedback, and suggestions to the discussion thread.
• Engagement Monitoring: Track the engagement of your team members and stakeholders and see who is engaging with your ideas and how they are engaging.
• Evaluation Workflow: Evaluate ideas based on your criteria and score ideas based on those criteria.
• Feedback Management: Manage feedback from your team members and stakeholders in one place and respond to it.
• Gamification : Gamify the ideation process by setting up challenges, rewards, and badges to motivate your team members and stakeholders.
• Idea Ranking : Rank ideas based on their potential impact and prioritize ideas to focus on the most impactful ones.
• Ideation/Crowdsourcing: Crowdsource ideas from your team members and stakeholders by setting up challenges and inviting people to submit their ideas.
• Idea Campaigns : Create and launch different types of idea campaigns for specific challenges or opportunities with customizable settings.
• Idea Boards : Organize and visualize your ideas on interactive boards with filtering, sorting, and grouping options.
• Idea Evaluation: Evaluate ideas using various methods, such as voting, rating, or commenting, and assign reviewers or experts to provide feedback.
• Idea Execution: Turn ideas into actionable projects with clear goals and milestones and track progress and impact using metrics and reports.
• Idea Templates: Use ready-made templates for different types of ideas or create your own templates to suit your needs.
• Idea Collaboration: Invite and engage your team members or stakeholders to join your idea campaigns, share ideas, comment, and collaborate on projects.
• Idea Analytics : Measure and analyze the performance and impact of your ideas and projects, and see how they align with your goals.

Free plan: Perfect for small teams with up to 10 members. Unlimited guests and access to all features for collecting, engaging, managing, and automating ideas.

Business plan: Starts at $49/mo for 15 members, can scale up to 2,500 members. Advanced features like custom branding, integrations, analytics, and support.

Enterprise plan: Customized solution for enterprises. Includes everything in the Business plan, as well as dedicated account management, custom development, security, and compliance.

Brightidea is a software designed for innovation teams to manage their ideas. It facilitates the sourcing of better concepts, data-driven decision-making, and execution of innovation projects. It allows users to create portals, mobile apps, email campaigns, paper forms, or voice skills to collect ideas from anyone, anywhere.

• Brightidea allows organizations to collect and organize ideas in a centralized platform.
• The software provides various tools, such as idea boards, filters, and tags, to display ideas in a visual way and sort them by various criteria.
• Organizations can launch targeted idea campaigns for specific challenges or opportunities that they want to address with innovation.
• Brightidea enables organizations to create and manage innovation projects with clear goals, timelines, budgets, and deliverables.
• The software provides tools, such as surveys, forums, commenting, and ranking features, to engage the audience and gather insights.
• It helps organizations source ideas from both internal and external sources.
• Brightidea can integrate with various tools and platforms, such as Slack, Microsoft Teams, Salesforce, Jira, Zapier, etc., to streamline the innovation workflow and data.
• It provides organizations with capable analytics tools to measure the impact of their innovation initiatives on various metrics, such as ROI, engagement, participation, quality, diversity, etc.

Brightidea.com does not publicly reveal its pricing information. To receive a personalized quote that caters to your specific needs, you must contact them directly. Nevertheless, according to user feedback, the cost of a flat-rate plan starts at $59 per month.

Aha! Ideas is a cloud-based tool for evaluating ideas. It gathers feedback from multiple sources and turns them into feasible plans. You can prioritize features, create roadmaps, and establish vision and goals based on customer needs and market insights. Aha! Ideas also enable tracking progress across teams and making informed decisions.

• Ideas portals: online spaces for collecting ideas from various sources and enabling users to submit, vote, and comment on them.
• In-app feedback widget: for capturing ideas while customers use your product.
• Custom scorecards: assigning scores to ideas based on your criteria like value, effort, or risk.
• Custom fields: adding additional information to ideas such as tags, categories, or statuses.
• Custom workflows: defining stages that ideas go through from submission to implementation.
• Empathy sessions: inviting users to share their feedback live via video or audio calls.
• Reports and charts : visualizing and analyzing data from ideas such as votes, comments, scores, or statuses.
• Product roadmaps: linking ideas to your product strategy and showing how they align with goals and initiatives.
• Integrations : connecting ideas with other tools like Jira, Trello, GitHub, or Slack

Aha! Ideas provide idea management software with feedback, engagement, and analysis features. The Essentials plan is $39 per user per month with unlimited portals. The Advanced plan is $59 per user per month with advanced analytics, fields, and integrations.

Aha! Roadmaps is a product management suite with Ideas Essentials included. The Starter plan is $59 per user per month, while the Premium plan is $99 per user per month. The Enterprise plan is $124 per user per month, and the Enterprise+ plan is $149 per user per month. You can add Ideas Advanced for an additional fee.

MindMeister

MindMeister is an online tool that allows users to create and share mind maps for idea evaluation. With its user-friendly interface and visual approach, it enables individuals and teams to capture and organize their thoughts efficiently. MindMeister offers multiple layout options, themes, and icons to customize your maps according to your preferences.

• Mindmap templates for brainstorming ideas.
• Mindmap editor for creating and editing mind maps.
• Attachments for adding notes, links, images, or videos to ideas.
• Project management with MeisterTask integration for turning mind maps into project plans and assigning tasks and deadlines to team members.
• Publishing and embedding mind maps online or on websites or blogs for feedback or showcasing work.
• Images, videos, emojis, and stickers for making mind maps engaging and memorable.
• Import and export from other formats such as MindManager, Freemind, or XMind for using or editing existing files in MindMeister.
• History mode for tracking changes made to mind maps over time and restoring previous versions.

Basic plan: Free - 3 mind maps, real-time collaboration, import, and email support.

Personal plan: €4.99/month (or $2.49/lifetime) - unlimited mind maps, advanced export, file attachments, custom themes, stats, and reports.

Pro plan: €8.25/month - team management, branded presentations, custom styles, group sharing links, priority support.

Business plan: €12.49/month - everything in Pro plan + admin control panel, user groups, custom domain mapping.

Sideways 6 is a software platform that enables companies to foster innovation and change among their employees. It provides a platform for employees to share their ideas to improve the business through existing collaboration tools like Microsoft Teams or Yammer. The tool helps managers to collect, analyze and act on those ideas to create a feedback culture.

• Idea challenges to launch targeted campaigns for specific business problems or opportunities.
• Gamification to motivate employees to participate and reward them for their contributions.
• Sentiment analysis to measure employee mood and satisfaction based on their comments.
• Chatbot to guide employees through idea submission and provide instant feedback.
• Native integration with popular communication platforms like Microsoft Teams, Yammer, Workplace from Facebook, and Slack.
• Centralized dashboard to track, evaluate and prioritize ideas across different campaigns.
• Automated workflows to streamline idea management processes and provide feedback to employees.
• Analytics and reporting to measure the impact of ideas on business outcomes and employee engagement.

Sideways 6 does not offer a free version of its product. The paid version starts at US$2,000.00 per month, though this information is not publicly available on their website and was sourced from a third-party review site. In addition to their standard pricing, Sideways 6 offers customized pricing plans tailored to meet the specific idea management requirements of their clients. To receive a personalized quote, interested parties can submit a form directly through the Sideways 6 website.

Crowdicity is a cloud-hosted application designed to help companies collect, organize, and respond to feedback and proposals from their personnel, clients, and other stakeholders. The system employs social tools like voting, commenting, and gamification to promote teamwork, regardless of location or time zone.

• Challenge management : Easily create and launch challenges, target user participation, refine ideas, and automate progression.
• Idea management: Capture, categorize, and prioritize ideas using various criteria and collaborate with others using social tools.
• Analytics tools: Measure and monitor challenge and idea performance using various metrics, and generate reports and insights.
• Mobile engagement: Access Crowdicity from any device, and receive notifications and updates via email or push messages.
• Access control: Control who can access your platform, invite users individually or use SSO/LDAP integration, and assign different roles and permissions.
• Email integration: Integrate Crowdicity with your email provider, and customize email templates and branding.
• Custom landing pages and user interface: Create custom landing pages for challenges and ideas, and customize the look and feel of the platform using themes, colors, logos, and images.

Crowdicity has three pricing plans. Starter costs $99/month or $999/year for small teams or projects with up to 100 users, 1 challenge, basic analytics, and support.

Professional costs $499/month or $4999/year for medium-sized companies with up to 1000 users, 5 challenges, advanced analytics, and support.

Enterprise is for large organizations or networks with custom features, integrations, analytics, and support, price available on request.

After reviewing several idea evaluation tools, FeedBear definitely turns out to be one of the best options out there. With its affordable price, user-friendly interface, and impressive features, it's a great choice for businesses of all sizes.

One of the standout features of FeedBear is its centralized idea board , which allows you to easily keep track of all your ideas in one place. Additionally, the customizable public roadmap and changelog make it easy to communicate updates to your customers and keep them in the loop.

Another great thing about FeedBear is its modern design, which makes it easy on the eyes and enjoyable to use. Plus, the ability to close the loop with your customers is a game-changer, as it allows you to get feedback and make improvements based on their suggestions.

While there may be other tools out there with more advanced features, FeedBear is a solid choice for those looking for a simple, affordable, and effective idea evaluation tool. Give it a try and see how it can help you collaborate with your customers and build the right features for your business.

Improve how you handle feedback from customers and your team. Picture an easier way to gather, measure, and rank their feedback, ideas and feature requests. Try FeedBear for yourself to see the difference. Sign up now for a 14-day free trial and see how feedback helps you build better products!

Collect customer feedback the easy way.

Read more posts like this.

We use essential cookies to make Venngage work. By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

Manage Cookies

Cookies and similar technologies collect certain information about how you’re using our website. Some of them are essential, and without them you wouldn’t be able to use Venngage. But others are optional, and you get to choose whether we use them or not.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are always on, as they’re essential for making Venngage work, and making it safe. Without these cookies, services you’ve asked for can’t be provided.

Show cookie providers

• Google Login

Functionality Cookies

These cookies help us provide enhanced functionality and personalisation, and remember your settings. They may be set by us or by third party providers.

Performance Cookies

These cookies help us analyze how many people are using Venngage, where they come from and how they're using it. If you opt out of these cookies, we can’t get feedback to make Venngage better for you and all our users.

• Google Analytics

Targeting Cookies

These cookies are set by our advertising partners to track your activity and show you relevant Venngage ads on other sites as you browse the internet.

• Google Tag Manager
• Infographics
• Daily Infographics
• Popular Templates
• Accessibility
• Graphic Design
• Graphs and Charts
• Data Visualization
• Human Resources
• Beginner Guides

Blog Graphic Design 15+ Professional Case Study Examples [Design Tips + Templates]

15+ Professional Case Study Examples [Design Tips + Templates]

Written by: Alice Corner Jan 12, 2023

Have you ever bought something — within the last 10 years or so — without reading its reviews or without a recommendation or prior experience of using it?

If the answer is no — or at least, rarely — you get my point.

Positive reviews matter for selling to regular customers, and for B2B or SaaS businesses, detailed case studies are important too.

Wondering how to craft a compelling case study ? No worries—I’ve got you covered with 15 marketing case study templates , helpful tips, and examples to ensure your case study converts effectively.

Click to jump ahead:

• What is a Case Study?

Business Case Study Examples

Simple case study examples.

• Marketing Case Study Examples

Sales Case Study Examples

• Case Study FAQs

What is a case study?

A case study is an in-depth, detailed analysis of a specific real-world situation. For example, a case study can be about an individual, group, event, organization, or phenomenon. The purpose of a case study is to understand its complexities and gain insights into a particular instance or situation.

In the context of a business, however, case studies take customer success stories and explore how they use your product to help them achieve their business goals.

As well as being valuable marketing tools , case studies are a good way to evaluate your product as it allows you to objectively examine how others are using it.

It’s also a good way to interview your customers about why they work with you.

Related: What is a Case Study? [+6 Types of Case Studies]

Marketing Case Study Template

A marketing case study showcases how your product or services helped potential clients achieve their business goals. You can also create case studies of internal, successful marketing projects. A marketing case study typically includes:

• Company background and history
• The challenge
• How you helped
• Specific actions taken
• Visuals or Data
• Client testimonials

Here’s an example of a marketing case study template:

Whether you’re a B2B or B2C company, business case studies can be a powerful resource to help with your sales, marketing, and even internal departmental awareness.

Business and business management case studies should encompass strategic insights alongside anecdotal and qualitative findings, like in the business case study examples below.

Conduct a B2B case study by researching the company holistically

When it comes to writing a case study, make sure you approach the company holistically and analyze everything from their social media to their sales.

Think about every avenue your product or service has been of use to your case study company, and ask them about the impact this has had on their wider company goals.

In business case study examples like the one above, we can see that the company has been thought about holistically simply by the use of icons.

By combining social media icons with icons that show in-person communication we know that this is a well-researched and thorough case study.

This case study report example could also be used within an annual or end-of-year report.

Highlight the key takeaway from your marketing case study

To create a compelling case study, identify the key takeaways from your research. Use catchy language to sum up this information in a sentence, and present this sentence at the top of your page.

This is “at a glance” information and it allows people to gain a top-level understanding of the content immediately. 

You can use a large, bold, contrasting font to help this information stand out from the page and provide interest.

Learn  how to choose fonts  effectively with our Venngage guide and once you’ve done that.

Upload your fonts and  brand colors  to Venngage using the  My Brand Kit  tool and see them automatically applied to your designs.

The heading is the ideal place to put the most impactful information, as this is the first thing that people will read.

In this example, the stat of “Increase[d] lead quality by 90%” is used as the header. It makes customers want to read more to find out how exactly lead quality was increased by such a massive amount.

If you’re conducting an in-person interview, you could highlight a direct quote or insight provided by your interview subject.

Pick out a catchy sentence or phrase, or the key piece of information your interview subject provided and use that as a way to draw a potential customer in.

Use charts to visualize data in your business case studies

Charts are an excellent way to visualize data and to bring statistics and information to life. Charts make information easier to understand and to illustrate trends or patterns.

Making charts is even easier with Venngage.

In this consulting case study example, we can see that a chart has been used to demonstrate the difference in lead value within the Lead Elves case study.

Adding a chart here helps break up the information and add visual value to the case study. 

Using charts in your case study can also be useful if you’re creating a project management case study.

You could use a Gantt chart or a project timeline to show how you have managed the project successfully.

Use direct quotes to build trust in your marketing case study

To add an extra layer of authenticity you can include a direct quote from your customer within your case study.

According to research from Nielsen , 92% of people will trust a recommendation from a peer and 70% trust recommendations even if they’re from somebody they don’t know.

So if you have a customer or client who can’t stop singing your praises, make sure you get a direct quote from them and include it in your case study.

You can either lift part of the conversation or interview, or you can specifically request a quote. Make sure to ask for permission before using the quote.

This design uses a bright contrasting speech bubble to show that it includes a direct quote, and helps the quote stand out from the rest of the text.

This will help draw the customer’s attention directly to the quote, in turn influencing them to use your product or service.

Less is often more, and this is especially true when it comes to creating designs. Whilst you want to create a professional-looking, well-written and design case study – there’s no need to overcomplicate things.

These simple case study examples show that smart clean designs and informative content can be an effective way to showcase your successes.

Use colors and fonts to create a professional-looking case study

Business case studies shouldn’t be boring. In fact, they should be beautifully and professionally designed.

This means the normal rules of design apply. Use fonts, colors, and icons to create an interesting and visually appealing case study.

In this case study example, we can see how multiple fonts have been used to help differentiate between the headers and content, as well as complementary colors and eye-catching icons.

Marketing case study examples

Marketing case studies are incredibly useful for showing your marketing successes. Every successful marketing campaign relies on influencing a consumer’s behavior, and a great case study can be a great way to spotlight your biggest wins.

In the marketing case study examples below, a variety of designs and techniques to create impactful and effective case studies.

Show off impressive results with a bold marketing case study

Case studies are meant to show off your successes, so make sure you feature your positive results prominently. Using bold and bright colors as well as contrasting shapes, large bold fonts, and simple icons is a great way to highlight your wins.

In well-written case study examples like the one below, the big wins are highlighted on the second page with a bright orange color and are highlighted in circles.

Making the important data stand out is especially important when attracting a prospective customer with marketing case studies.

Use a simple but clear layout in your case study

Using a simple layout in your case study can be incredibly effective, like in the example of a case study below.

Keeping a clean white background, and using slim lines to help separate the sections is an easy way to format your case study.

Making the information clear helps draw attention to the important results, and it helps improve the  accessibility of the design .

Business case study examples like this would sit nicely within a larger report, with a consistent layout throughout.

Use visuals and icons to create an engaging and branded business case study

Nobody wants to read pages and pages of text — and that’s why Venngage wants to help you communicate your ideas visually.

Using icons, graphics, photos, or patterns helps create a much more engaging design. 

With this Blue Cap case study icons, colors, and impactful pattern designs have been used to create an engaging design that catches your eye.

Use a monochromatic color palette to create a professional and clean case study

Let your research shine by using a monochromatic and minimalistic color palette.

By sticking to one color, and leaving lots of blank space you can ensure your design doesn’t distract a potential customer from your case study content.

In this case study on Polygon Media, the design is simple and professional, and the layout allows the prospective customer to follow the flow of information.

The gradient effect on the left-hand column helps break up the white background and adds an interesting visual effect.

Did you know you can generate an accessible color palette with Venngage? Try our free accessible color palette generator today and create a case study that delivers and looks pleasant to the eye:

Add long term goals in your case study

When creating a case study it’s a great idea to look at both the short term and the long term goals of the company to gain the best understanding possible of the insights they provide.

Short-term goals will be what the company or person hopes to achieve in the next few months, and long-term goals are what the company hopes to achieve in the next few years.

Check out this modern pattern design example of a case study below:

In this case study example, the short and long-term goals are clearly distinguished by light blue boxes and placed side by side so that they are easy to compare.

Use a strong introductory paragraph to outline the overall strategy and goals before outlining the specific short-term and long-term goals to help with clarity.

This strategy can also be handy when creating a consulting case study.

Use data to make concrete points about your sales and successes

When conducting any sort of research stats, facts, and figures are like gold dust (aka, really valuable).

Being able to quantify your findings is important to help understand the information fully. Saying sales increased 10% is much more effective than saying sales increased.

While sales dashboards generally tend it make it all about the numbers and charts, in sales case study examples, like this one, the key data and findings can be presented with icons. This contributes to the potential customer’s better understanding of the report.

They can clearly comprehend the information and it shows that the case study has been well researched.

Use emotive, persuasive, or action based language in your marketing case study

Create a compelling case study by using emotive, persuasive and action-based language when customizing your case study template.

In this well-written case study example, we can see that phrases such as “Results that Speak Volumes” and “Drive Sales” have been used.

Using persuasive language like you would in a blog post. It helps inspire potential customers to take action now.

Keep your potential customers in mind when creating a customer case study for marketing

82% of marketers use case studies in their marketing  because it’s such an effective tool to help quickly gain customers’ trust and to showcase the potential of your product.

Why are case studies such an important tool in content marketing?

By writing a case study you’re telling potential customers that they can trust you because you’re showing them that other people do.

Not only that, but if you have a SaaS product, business case studies are a great way to show how other people are effectively using your product in their company.

In this case study, Network is demonstrating how their product has been used by Vortex Co. with great success; instantly showing other potential customers that their tool works and is worth using.

Related: 10+ Case Study Infographic Templates That Convert

Case studies are particularly effective as a sales technique.

A sales case study is like an extended customer testimonial, not only sharing opinions of your product – but showcasing the results you helped your customer achieve.

Make impactful statistics pop in your sales case study

Writing a case study doesn’t mean using text as the only medium for sharing results.

You should use icons to highlight areas of your research that are particularly interesting or relevant, like in this example of a case study:

Icons are a great way to help summarize information quickly and can act as visual cues to help draw the customer’s attention to certain areas of the page.

In some of the business case study examples above, icons are used to represent the impressive areas of growth and are presented in a way that grabs your attention.

Use high contrast shapes and colors to draw attention to key information in your sales case study

Help the key information stand out within your case study by using high contrast shapes and colors.

Use a complementary or contrasting color, or use a shape such as a rectangle or a circle for maximum impact.

This design has used dark blue rectangles to help separate the information and make it easier to read.

Coupled with icons and strong statistics, this information stands out on the page and is easily digestible and retainable for a potential customer.

Case Study Examples Summary

Once you have created your case study, it’s best practice to update your examples on a regular basis to include up-to-date statistics, data, and information.

You should update your business case study examples often if you are sharing them on your website .

It’s also important that your case study sits within your brand guidelines – find out how Venngage’s My Brand Kit tool can help you create consistently branded case study templates.

Case studies are important marketing tools – but they shouldn’t be the only tool in your toolbox. Content marketing is also a valuable way to earn consumer trust.

Case Study FAQ

Why should you write a case study.

Case studies are an effective marketing technique to engage potential customers and help build trust.

By producing case studies featuring your current clients or customers, you are showcasing how your tool or product can be used. You’re also showing that other people endorse your product.

In addition to being a good way to gather positive testimonials from existing customers , business case studies are good educational resources and can be shared amongst your company or team, and used as a reference for future projects.

How should you write a case study?

To create a great case study, you should think strategically. The first step, before starting your case study research, is to think about what you aim to learn or what you aim to prove.

You might be aiming to learn how a company makes sales or develops a new product. If this is the case, base your questions around this.

You can learn more about writing a case study  from our extensive guide.

Related: How to Present a Case Study like a Pro (With Examples)

Some good questions you could ask would be:

• Why do you use our tool or service?
• How often do you use our tool or service?
• What does the process of using our product look like to you?
• If our product didn’t exist, what would you be doing instead?
• What is the number one benefit you’ve found from using our tool?

You might also enjoy:

• 12 Essential Consulting Templates For Marketing, Planning and Branding
• Best Marketing Strategies for Consultants and Freelancers in 2019 [Study + Infographic]

Discover popular designs

Infographic maker

Brochure maker

White paper online

Newsletter creator

Flyer maker

Timeline maker

Letterhead maker

Mind map maker

Ebook maker

Idea evaluation methods

Methods for voting, scoring and rating of ideas

Choose appropriate evaluation criteria

As a facilitator, you should establish clear evaluation criteria upfront that align with the goals and objectives of the evaluation process.

These criteria should be communicated to participants to ensure that their evaluations are consistent and based on relevant factors. For example, criteria could include business value and feasibility.

With IdeaClouds you can apply the following evaluation criteria in your online workshops.

Evaluate importance, e.g. to prioritize ideas or tasks: unimportant, slightly important, moderately important, important or very important.

Effort and benefit

Evaluate effort and benefit, e.g. for actions, new products or features: high, fairly high, medium, fairly low, low.

Business value and feasibility

Evaluate business value and feasibility, e.g. for new products or features: high, fairly high, medium, fairly low, low.

Score from 0 to 10.

Voting (Yes or No)

Vote with Yes or No e.g. which proposals should be pursued and which not.

Ask for agreement level, e.g. to evaluate the acceptance of proposals or options: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree.

Pros and cons

Name advantages and drawbacks, e.g. for solution approaches.

Complexity (SCRUM poker)

Estimate complexity with SCRUM Poker, e.g. for user stories in development projects: 1 (very simple), 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 20, 40 or 100 (very complex)

Creativity and feasibility

Evaluate creativity and feasibility, e.g. for new product ideas: high, fairly high, medium, fairly low, low.

SWOT analysis

List strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and risks, e.g. for new business ideas.

Effort in person days

Estimate effort in person days, e.g. for implementing deliverables in projects: from less than 1 to 14 working days per person.

Evaluate accuracy, e.g. to assess ideas or tasks: not accurate, slightly accurate, moderately accurate, accurate or very accurate.

Do you want to evaluate ideas with your team?

• DOI: 10.46520/bddkdergisi.986618
• Corpus ID: 238714944

Idea Evaluation in Innovation Management for the New Normal in Banking: A Case Study in Vakıfbank

• S. Demirel , Süha Erdem Yabaş , +2 authors Metin Recep Zafer
• Published in BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal… 24 August 2021

42 References

Implementation of innovation management systems in large companies of different typologies, fintech banking industry: a systemic approach, context-a novel approach for collaborative virtual product realization and its disclosure using the business model canvas, capturing and measuring technology based service innovation-a case analysis within theory and practice, informational networks and innovation in mature industrial clusters, schumpeter’s view on innovation and entrepreneurship, virtual teams in new product development, local governance in industrial clusters: proposal of a management model and a self-assessment tool, a review of technologies for open innovation: characteristics and future trends, steal my idea organizational adoption of user innovations from a user innovation community: a case study of dell ideastorm, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Research/Study Research/Study

Inside Project 2025's attack on reproductive rights: Mifepristone and alternative abortion pills

Special Programs Abortion Rights & Reproductive Health

Written by Sophie Lawton , Jacina Hollins-Borges & Jack Wheatley

Published 06/24/24 1:30 PM EDT

At least 31 partner organizations of the Project 2025 initiative have published written content, supported legal efforts, or had organizational leadership make comments against the use of safe and effective abortion pills, specifically mifepristone, according to a Media Matters review. 

Project 2025 is organized by conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, and has laid out a radical plan for governance during the next Republican administration. The initiative's wide-ranging policy proposals, including extreme anti-abortion policies, are laid out in its “ Mandate for Leadership .” 

The policy book includes a chapter on the Department of Health and Human Services written by Roger Severino, husband of anti-abortion figure Carrie Severino. The chapter lays out policies against the use and distribution of abortion pills, advising the next Republican administration to heavily restrict access to mifepristone and so-called “mail-order abortions” through various means. 

Later in the policy book, America First Legal’s Gene Hamilton recommends that the Department of Justice should take steps to enforce the Comstock Act as a way to limit the distribution of abortion pills. In these passages, Project 2025 lays out a plan for the next Republican administration to criminalize the shipment of abortion pills and cut off huge swaths of Americans from accessing this lifeline of reproductive healthcare. 

Anti-choice organizations have been waging a legal battle against mifepristone for years, culminating in the ongoing Supreme Court case, U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , in which anti-choice groups challenge the FDA’s approval of mifepristone in 2000 and attempt to reinstate stricter rules around prescribing the drug that were in place prior to 2016. 

Project 2025 partner the Alliance for Defending Freedom (ADF) is behind the anti-choice “Alliance” along with Project 2025 partner, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG). A number of other Project 2025 partner organizations have signed letters, filed amicus briefs, or otherwise supported these efforts. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the case in March, and reportedly appeared skeptical of the plaintiffs’ right to sue, which would suggest the justices could rule in a way that allows mifepristone to remain broadly available. 

Organizations affiliated with Project 2025 use misinformation and scare tactics to push for restrictions, if not outright bans, of abortion pills despite evidence that they are safe and effective , even after regulations on prescribing the medication were eased in 2021. Some of the organizations argue that expanded access to abortion pills will result in the use of the drug by abusive partners or sex traffickers. Mother Jones recently  debunked the claim that telehealth abortion facilitates intimate partner violence. There has also been pushback against the idea that access to abortion pills negatively impacts victims of trafficking.

At least seven of the organizations partnered with Project 2025 have also promoted and helped advance legislation to force doctors to offer bogus “abortion reversal” treatment. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists states , “Medication abortion ‘reversal’ is not supported by science. 

For the full report on Project 2025's attack on reproductive rights, click here .

Select a Partner Organization

The heritage foundation, 1792 exchange, alliance defending freedom , american association of pro-life obstetricians and gynecologists, aclj action, the american conservative, american family association, america first legal, american principles project, americans united for life, amac action, california family council, center for family and human rights, center for renewing america, concerned women for america, discovery institute, eagle forum, ethics and public policy center, family policy alliance, family research council, first liberty institute, the frederick douglass foundation, the heartland institute, dr. james dobson family institute, media research center, the national center for public policy research and project 21 black leadership network, students for life of america, susan b. anthony pro-life america, texas public policy foundation, turning point usa, young america’s foundation.

• In an article about the Supreme Court case on the FDA’s mifepristone regulations, senior legal fellow Thomas Jipping claims abortion pills are “dangerous drugs.” Jipping opened the piece saying that “abortion poisons everything it touches,” and goes on to argue that the FDA violated the Comstock Act, a 19th-century law considered “dead” by some in Congress who support its repeal. [The Heritage Foundation, 1/17/24 ; The Hill, 4/2/24 ]
• In a post on X, The Heritage Foundation wrote, “Think the abortion pill is safe? Think again.”  [Twitter/X, 12/13/23 ]
• The Heritage Foundation hosted a panel on abortion pills moderated by Perry that included Rep. Bob Good (R-VA), ADF senior counsel Erik Baptist, and CEO of AAPLOG Christina Francis. Francis claimed that mifepristone users visit the emergency room more often than those who get surgical abortions, even claiming up to 35% of chemical abortions result in an ER visit. These claims are the same as those from a retracted 2021 study. Francis repeated this claim later in the panel stating abortion drugs have “high complication rates.” [YouTube, 11/13/23 ,  11/13/23 ; Salon, 3/20/24 ]
• In a piece celebrating the U.S. District Court ruling against both the initial approval of the drug and the FDA’s relaxation of mifepristone regulations, Perry called Texas Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s opinion a “recognition of the dangers of mifepristone to both mother and child.” [The Heritage Foundation, 8/13/23 ]
• In a 2023 post on X, Heritage stated “FACT: The abortion pill poses serious health risks to women. The FDA should never have authorized it.” [Twitter/X, 3/20/23 ]
• In another article by Perry on the Heritage site, she claimed states can use “police power to restrict or prohibit abortion—including particular methods of abortion, such as by pill.” [The Heritage Foundation, 2/22/23 ]
• Perry wrote in a 2023 article that states should be working to ban abortion drugs, despite the FDA calling them “safe and effective.” She also claimed the Supreme Court overturning Roe means “states can close off chemical abortions altogether.” [The Heritage Foundation, 1/11/23 ]
• In an article on the Heritage site about the Biden administration allowing pharmacies to distribute mifepristone, visiting fellow Melanie Israel wrote that “abortion pills aren’t safe.” [The Heritage Foundation, 1/6/23 ]
• In 2022, The Heritage Foundation published a coalition letter to members of Congress in an effort to “legislate abortion policy at the federal level.” The letter called on the federal government to “limit the interstate flow of dangerous abortion drugs” and falsely claimed abortion pills put “women’s health and safety at risk.” The letter was also signed by other Project 2025 partner organizations including Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, Americans United for Life, the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and Concerned Women for America. [The Heritage Foundation, 12/4/22 ]
• Right-wing nonprofit 1792 Exchange wrote in its corporate bias rating report on CVS Health that the company is “high risk” because it continued to dispense mifepristone at some pharmacies in spite of a related wrongful termination lawsuit from a former employee. 1792 Exchange also criticized CVS Health because it supposedly “pushes for the use of abortion-inducing drugs across the country.” [1792 Exchange, accessed 4/16/24 ]
• Along with other anti-abortion medical groups and doctors, Alliance Defending Freedom is a plaintiff in the lawsuit against the FDA to limit access to mifepristone. [The Guardian, 5/17/23 ]
• ADF has defended plaintiffs in at least 22 cases in 10 states and the District of Columbia which challenged the Obama-era requirement for employers to provide insurance that covers mifepristone and other reproductive care. [ADF, accessed  4/18/24 ]
• ADF intervened to defend a nurse practitioner named Chelsea Mynyk who offered abortion pill reversal in Colorado in spite of a state law barring the protocol, arguing that “by banning Chelsea from providing this care, Colorado is violating her religious freedom.” [ADF, 4/12/24 ]
• In a piece that criticized retail pharmacies dispensing mifepristone, ADF senior counsel Erin Morrow Hawley wrote that looser restrictions on the medication “all but ensure the abortion drug will be unsafe for many women, ubiquitous, and routinely mailed into states where it is unlawful.” She added that CVS and Walgreens have removed “important safeguards on abortion drugs.” [ADF, 3/26/24 ]
• ADF CEO Kristen Waggoner said that the data on mifepristone “suggests that it endangers women.” [Politico, 3/25/24 ,  11/18/22 ]
• In an article titled “The FDA’s Unforgivable Deceptions on Chemical-Abortion Drugs,” Hawley wrote that “no one should be okay with the FDA leaving pregnant women to take these high-risk drugs all alone.” She then urged the Supreme Court to “put the health and well-being of pregnant women first by reinstating necessary safeguards for abortion drugs.” [ADF, 3/15/24 ]
• In a piece titled “What the FDA Hasn’t Told You About Mifepristone,” ADF senior counsel Erik Baptist claimed that “the FDA has ignored” that abortion pills “can cause significant and serious complications.” [ADF, 3/14/23 ]
• The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists is a plaintiff in the Alliance Defending Freedom’s lawsuit against the FDA to suspend the use of mifepristone. [Washington State Standard, 2/6/24 ]
• AAPLOG runs a program called “Abortion Pill Reversal” that invites “pro-life medical professionals” to “provide urgent care to women who regret starting medication abortions.” The idea of reversing an abortion pill’s effect with progesterone is not supported by science. A 2012 study on the protocol had just six participants and no control group, and was not supervised or reviewed. A later 2020 study was ended early “due to safety concerns among the participants.” In its statement on abortion pill reversal, the organization included statistics on serious complications from abortion medication and referred to reversal as “another reproductive choice for women facing the abortion decision.” It repeatedly emphasizes that abortions are reversed with a “natural hormone.” [AAPLOG, accessed  4/17/24 ,  2019 ; ACOG, accessed 4/19/24 ]
• In response to efforts to ban abortion “reversal” treatments in Colorado, AAPLOG released a statement which said: “Efforts by abortion proponents to outlaw progesterone therapy after mifepristone consumption are not based on science or good medical ethics.” [AAPLOG, 9/27/23 ; Reuters, 10/23/23 ]
• AAPLOG often attacks mifepristone as a way for “abusers and traffickers” to easily coerce patients into abortion. In a response to the Fifth Circuit of Appeals ruling to reinstate restrictions on mifepristone, AAPLOG wrote that the previous “deregulations have placed women and girls at greater risk of life-threatening complications, as well as coerced abortion by abusers and traffickers.” [APPLOG, 8/16/23 ]
• In a “Myth vs. Fact” piece on “maternal medical care,” AAPLOG wrote that “the dangerous push in recent years to dispense abortion pills through the mail or without a doctor’s visit presents a grave threat to women’s health.” [AAPLOG, 8/29/22 ]
• Now-CEO Christina Francis warned in 2021 of “mounting evidence of significant adverse events and maternal deaths” from mifepristone in a piece originally published by Deseret News. [AAPLOG, 5/18/21 ; Salt Lake Tribune, 11/18/23 ]
• Throughout the 2000s and early 2010s, AAPLOG argued through letters, press releases, and articles that mifepristone is dangerous. [AAPLOG, 1/25/10 ]
• ACLJ’s Jay and Jordan Sekulow called mifepristone “deadly abortion pills” while describing the organization’s position in U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. [ACLJ, 6/22/23 ]
• In a piece explaining why the organization filed an amicus brief in that case, ACLJ senior counsel Walter M. Weber wrote that “mailing abortion pills is an act of racketeering that violates the federal RICO statute.” The ACLJ’s brief asked the court “to uphold an injunction against federal approval of abortion pills and against federal loosening of restrictions on abortion pills.” [ACLJ, 5/12/23 ; U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , Brief of Amicus Curiae, 5/09/23 ]
• The American Conservative celebrated U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , saying that banning access to mifepristone would be “a major blow to abortion activists’ cause” and would create precedent to change “an untouchable federal agency.” Contributing editor Carmel Richardson wrote that the anti-abortion movement “has been all but apologizing for” overturning Roe v. Wade “at the ballot box ever since,” but the possibility of a mifepristone ban is a “positive step forward.” [The American Conservative, 5/19/23 ]
• After the Supreme Court said that mifepristone should stay broadly available as the case is litigated, Richardson called on Congress to ban abortion, “including a ban on drugs prescribed for the purpose of inducing the death of a pre-born child.” [The American Conservative, 4/28/23 ]
• Richardson has also claimed that mifepristone is dangerous for patients, writing that “the lives of unborn babies, and those of several of their mothers” are at stake in the mifepristone case. [The American Conservative, 4/14/23 ]
• American Family Association’s news outlet, American Family News, published an article on the Louisiana law categorizing mifepristone as a controlled dangerous substance that called the drug “Fetus-killing abortion pills” and failed to include that the law will likely inhibit access to the drug and ensure harsher penalties for people who obtain it without a prescription. The piece misleadingly implies the new law would mainly be used to punish people for “misusing” the drugs by coercing a pregnant person to take them or slipping it unknowingly to a pregnant person. [American Family News, 5/28/24 ; CNN, 5/24/24 ]
• Jordan Chamblee, a writer for American Family Association’s publication The Stand, claimed that the Biden administration paving the way for retail pharmacies to dispense abortion pills is “prioritizing the interests of the abortion industry over women’s health and safety.” He claimed that “chemical abortions are dangerous,” as they “can result in serious complications such as sepsis, hemorrhaging, and even death.” Chamblee also promoted The Abortion Pill Rescue Network (APRN), which offers abortion pill reversal. [American Family Association, 4/10/23 ]
• After the FDA allowed mifepristone to be dispensed by mail, AFA Executive Vice President Ed Vitagliano said that this promoted “an agenda of wanton destruction eliminating tens of thousands of people who would become innovators and creators.” [American Family Association, 12/20/21 ]
• An AFA article criticized abortion clinics for not advertising the existence of abortion reversal, and claimed that they “fail to inform their patients about what to expect after they take the pill and leave the clinic.” [American Family Association, 7/15/19 ]
• Project 2025 contributor and vice president of America First Legal Gene Hamilton, who wrote the section of Mandate for Leadership on the Department of Justice, pushed in that section to enforce the Comstock Act, which could be used to restrict abortion medication nationwide. [Rolling Stone, 12/22/23 ; Teen Vogue, 2/7/24 ]
• The American Principles Project backed the bill of Reps. Diana Harshbarger (R-TN) and Kevin Hern (R-OK) to tighten restrictions on mifepristone, with the APP's President Terry Schilling arguing that easier access to abortion pills means dispensing “dangerous pills online” and “empowering abusers by making it even easier for them to get their hands on abortion drugs.” [Website of Rep. Diana Harshbarger, 1/18/23 ]
• On Twitter, APP shared an article promoting abortion pill reversal: “#Abortion Pill Reversal: When ‘Pro-Choicers’ Don’t Support a Woman’s Choice.” [Twitter/X, 9/14/17 ]
• During the Obama administration, APP celebrated the fight against what it calls “the abortion pill mandate,” the Department of Health and Human Services requirement for employers to provide insurance that covers abortion pills. [Twitter/X, 3/6/13 ,  7/10/12 ]
• Americans United for Life federal policy director Jesse Southerland told Politico that fighting against “chemical abortion” is a “priority” for the organization. [Politico, 3/27/24 ]
• AUL drafted a model law for anti-abortion lawmakers to restrict or ban telehealth prescriptions for abortion pills. [Politico, 3/27/24 ; Stateline, 1/30/23 ]
• In February, AUL filed two amicus briefs in support of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine in its case against the FDA. [Americans United for Life, 2/29/24 ]
• AUL listed the court battle to re-restrict mifepristone as one of its “top ten developments in the Life arena of 2023.” [Americans United for Life, 12/20/23 ]
• Chief legal officer and general counsel of AUL Steven H. Aden said that loosening regulations on mifepristone “has been a healthcare disaster for women and has normalized the wholesale destruction of human life.” [Americans United for Life, 12/13/23 ]
• AUL filed multiple amicus briefs to the Fifth Circuit asking the court to uphold the U.S. District Court’s suspension of mifepristone’s approval. Aden, the counsel of record on the brief, explained that abortion pills are “dangerous drugs,” and suspending them “is in the interest of patient welfare.” AUL has made similar arguments in several pieces on its amicus briefs regarding this case. [Americans United for Life, 5/16/23 ,  4/18/23 ,  4/12/23 ]
• Carolyn McDonnell, litigation counsel at AUL, accused the FDA of “promoting its radical abortion agenda at the expense of patient health and safety” by relaxing mifepristone restrictions. [Americans United for Life, 2/13/23 ]
• AUL submitted testimony in support of Wyoming’s attempt to ban abortion pills partially because it was “consistent with the American legal tradition on abortion.” In its related explainer on mifepristone, AUL emphasized possible complications resulting from consumption of the drug. [Americans United for Life, 2/9/23 ; The Associated Press, 6/22/23 ]
• AUL wrote that receiving mifepristone through the mail is the “new back-alley,” as patients are receiving pills “from a stranger on the internet.” The piece emphasized that “women have died taking chemical abortion pills.” [Americans United for Life, 12/17/21 ]
• In 2021, AUL celebrated South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem’s executive order to ban abortion pills from being prescribed via telemedicine, calling it a measure “to protect South Dakota women from the threat of chemical abortion drugs.” [Americans United for Life, 9/7/21 ]
• In the same piece, the organization attributed relaxed restrictions on mifepristone to “corporate greed.” Similarly, in 2016, AUL said that “abortion industry profits” were the motivator behind the updated guidelines. [Americans United for Life, 9/7/21 ; 11/1/16 ]
• After the FDA loosened restrictions on mifepristone in 2021, AUL accused the agency of “playing politics with women’s health.” In another piece on the issue, it said the FDA was “abandoning women to suffer through the physical and psychological impact of chemical abortion without medical supervision or support.” [Americans United for Life, 4/13/21 ,  1/12/21 ]
• In 2017, AUL’s vice president of legal affairs, Denise Burke, testified in favor of a Colorado law that would require abortion providers to tell patients about abortion reversal, which it calls “informed consent.” According to Burke, because they are not told about so-called abortion reversal, “many women are physically and psychologically harmed by the abortion process.” [Americans United for Life, 2/9/17 ]
• AUL called on state lawmakers to repeal what it called a “discriminatory rule” and an “unconstitutional abuse of power” from the Washington State Board of Pharmacists that required pharmacists to keep abortion pills stocked. The organization joined an amicus brief in support of pharmacists against “drugs misleadingly called ‘emergency contraceptives,’ specifically Plan B and ella.” [Americans United for Life, 6/28/16 ]
• AUL has been involved in multiple cases related to state laws seeking to restrict mifepristone, with AUL's president referring to looser restrictions as “patient abandonment.” In a press release celebrating an Arkansas law restricting mifepristone, AUL wrote that “the abortion industry consistently puts profits over people.” [Americans United for Life, 3/23/15 ,  10/4/13 ]
• The organization filed amicus briefs in support of embattled North Dakota and Oklahoma bills that restricted access to mifepristone. [Americans United for Life, 10/4/13 ,  8/21/13 ,  10/9/12 ]
• In a 2023 article on the Association for Mature American Citizens website, author Ben Solis repeated false claims made by Fox News host Rachel Campos-Duffy that “40 percent of abortions are chemical abortions that are likely to end with complications.”  More than 60% of all abortions are performed with the abortion pill and around 2% of all abortions have complications. [AMAC, 4/8/23 ; Guttmacher Institute, 3/19/24 ; Pew Research Center, 3/25/24 ] 
• AMAC hosted an interview with Jeanne Mancini, president of March for Life, to talk about how chemical abortions are supposedly “dangerous.” In the interview, AMAC CEO Rebecca Weber claimed the expansion of abortion pill access is really pro-abortion activists “taking advantage of frightened young women.” Mancini argued that access to mifepristone is “dangerous in a lot of different ways” claiming the drug is “actually much harder on women's health than surgical abortion.” [YouTube, 11/9/22 ]
• In a story on its site, the California Family Council (CFC) wrote about the recent Supreme Court case regarding mifepristone, saying that “true reproductive freedom includes access to comprehensive information about fertility, pregnancy, and the support available for women experiencing a crisis pregnancy.” CFC Vice President Greg Burt remarked, “This case is not merely about regulatory oversight; it’s about reaffirming the foundational values that respect life and prioritize genuine healthcare that serves both mothers and their children.” [California Family Council, 3/29/24 ] 
• On its Instagram account, the group declared, “The abortion pill is not a form of contraception; rather, it is an exceedingly hazardous drug, particularly when used without medical supervision.” The post added, “The abortion pill leads the death of an unborn baby and potential dangers to the mother.” [Instagram, 12/13/23 ]
• The group fearmongered that “Mifepristone and misoprostol put women at risk for infection, injury, loss of fertility, depression, and other life-threatening complications.” It concludes that “women deserve to know about their options and have access to life-saving medication,” referring to abortion pill reversal. [California Family Council, 9/25/23 ]
• In at least two other publications on its website, the group pushed misleading information about the safety of the abortion pill, calling it “dangerous,” and “highly controversial.” [California Family Council, 11/29/22 ,  2/7/22 ] 
• In a 2023 article on the Center for Family and Human Rights (C-FAM) website, director of research Rebecca Oas wrote that “period pills” or medication used to “induce menstrual bleeding or early pregnancy loss” are used for “the intentional destruction of an unborn life.” [Center for Family and Human Rights, 2/10/23 ; PeriodPills.org, accessed 5/15/24 ]
• In an article complaining about expanding access to abortion pills during the COVID-19 pandemic, Oas called use of mifepristone a “dangerous procedure.” [Center for Family and Human Rights, 5/8/20 ]
• C-FAM published multiple articles condemning the World Health Organization and Doctors Without Borders for supporting the distribution of abortion pills. In one piece C-FAM argues “mail-order abortion pills” put patients at risk of getting an abortion “without [their] consent by abusive partners, parents, or others, such as human traffickers.” [Center for Family and Human Rights, 6/28/19 ; 2/28/20 ]
• In an article for Pacific Standard on the WHO’s endorsement of mifepristone, Oas is quoted repeating her argument that expanding access to abortion pills will result in the use of the drugs by “abusive partners” for nonconsensual abortions. [Pacific Standard, 7/15/19 ]
• In a policy issue primer published on Center for Renewing America’s site, the organization supported the Fifth Circuit's ruling against the FDA’s interpretation of the Comstock Act, and claimed the “weaponized agency is willing to violate the law to advance its abortion agenda.” CRA also suggested Congress attempt to “prohibit chemical abortions at the federal level.” [Center for Renewing America, 5/2/23 ]
• In a piece on its website, Concerned Women for America noted its support for stricter abortion pill regulations alongside other anti-abortion groups, against the FDA in the ongoing Supreme Court case. The piece describes the agency’s actions as “reckless disregard for women’s safety.” [Concerned Women for America, 3/25/24 ] 
• CWA wrote a piece directly focused on the case heading to the Supreme Court, calling mifepristone “dangerous” and the FDA’s approval of it “reckless.” CWA CEO and President Penny Nance said, “Let’s be clear; there is nothing safe or effective about allowing people to perform their own DIY abortion.” [Concerned Women for America, 12/13/23 ]
• On CWA’s podcast, Nance said supporters of the medication “want there to be abortion, as I’ve said before many times, any time, any reason, in any number, all paid for by you.” She continued, “They don’t want a girl to even leave her dorm room to have it. They’re happy for her to struggle for several days to actually miscarry this baby alone and to be traumatized and maybe, you know, have consequences that render her sterile later or maybe even death.” Later on, she added, “This is not nearly over. We have a lot of work to do. We are winning.” [Concerned Women for America, 4/19/23 ,  4/19/23 ] 
• CWA’s Deanna Drogan wrote for the website, “We can see that increasing the ability to perform DIY abortions results in many health risks for mothers (known and unknown) and an increasing number of babies innocently murdered from abortion.” [Concerned Women for America, 4/23/21 ]
• In an opinion piece for Newsmax, Nance wrote that there is “nothing safe about DIY abortion.” She added, concerning the Texas case, “Americans who are concerned for the safety and well-being of young women should be grateful that this judge had the courage to make this decision.” [Newsmax, 5/15/23 ]
• Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism fellow Arina Grossu Agnew appeared on The Lars Larson Show to discuss “How many babies do abortion pills like Mifepristone kill?” In the interview, Grossu claimed the FDA “looked at flawed studies, irrelevant studies” when approving the drug “and there are a lot of complications that can happen.” She went on to call mifepristone “a very dangerous abortion drug.” [KXL, Lars Larson Show , 5/1/23 ]
• Senior fellow of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence Michael Egnor wrote in an article for The Stream that abortion drugs “cause significant physiological and behavioral harm.” Egnor’s article is based on a study by Dr. Stephen Sammut, whose research also pushes the unsupported science of “abortion-pill reversal.” [The Stream, 7/10/19 ; Franciscain, Accessed 5/15/24 ]
• President of Eagle Forum Kristen A. Ullman published an article in March arguing against use of the abortion pill. In the article, Ullman called mifepristone “dangerous” and repeated unverified claims that the abortion pill has a notably high number of documented negative effects. [Eagle Forum, 3/24/24 ]
• Eagle Forum joined a coalition of anti-abortion groups who called on Congress to send cease-and-desist letters to pharmacies mailing abortion pills. [Eagle Forum, 3/12/24 ]
• In an article fearmongering about mifepristone titled “Danger Lurks in Local Drug Stores,” Ullman called the drug a “dangerous pill that not only kills an unborn child but causes serious side effects and even death to countless women.” [Eagle Forum, 3/4/24 ]
• Ethics and Public Policy Center fellows submitted two amicus briefs for the Supreme Court case on mifepristone supporting Alliance of Hippocratic Medicine in its case against the abortion drug. The briefs claimed the FDA and Biden administration are in “violation of federal and state law” by expanding access to mifepristone. [EPPC, 3/1/24 ]
• President of EPPC Ryan T. Anderson, previously a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation, published an article with National Review titled “Making Abortion Illegal and Unthinkable,” in which he argued, “We’ll need laws to prevent cross-state transportation of abortion pills.” [National Review, 6/11/22 ; The Heritage Foundation, accessed 4/19/24 ]
• Focus on the Family's lobbying arm, Family Policy Alliance, submitted an amicus brief for the Supreme Court case on mifepristone in which it argued the FDA’s current mifepristone guidance is “dangerous for women” and claimed, “Medical Emergencies Caused by Mifepristone are Increasing” and cites the declaration of Dr. Christina Francis, the AAPLOG CEO. [U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , Brief of Amicus Curiae, 2/28/24 ]
• After Biden supported access to mifepristone in January, FPA called on its audience to push back against the dispensing of abortion pills in pharmacies, seemingly citing a now-retracted study that led FPA to falsely claim that “women who use abortion pills are 50 percent more likely to visit an ER than with a surgical abortion.” [Family Policy Alliance, 1/24/23 ; National Library of Medicine, 11/9/21 ]
• FPA also called on pharmacies to refuse to distribute abortion pills. The FPA director of government affairs claimed in the statement, “Abortion drugs are a health and safety threat to women and their children.” [Family Policy Alliance, 1/6/23 ]
• In an episode of Family Research Council’s Washington Watch with Tony Perkins , Senior Vice President Jody Hice interviewed Louisiana state Sen. Thomas Pressly about his legislation to classify mifepristone as a dangerous substance in Louisiana. Hice called the passing of the law “good news” and called it a “model” for other states. Hice went on to congratulate Pressly and claimed the “abortion industry” is “fearmongering” over the legislation. [Family Research Council, Washington Watch with Tony Perkins , 5/24/24 ]
• FRC’s affiliated blog The Washington Stand published a piece similarly praising the Louisiana law, which claims abortion pills “are not safe.” [The Washington Stand, 5/28/24 ]
• FRC filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case over mifepristone claiming that the FDA was “reckless” in approving the drug and that use of mifepristone creates “long-lasting psychological and spiritual distress.” [Family Research Council, 3/5/24 ]
• In 2022 FRC published an issue analysis on medication abortion, which it called “The Next Abortion Battleground.” The analysis summarized FRC’s issues with abortion pills, leveling claims that there are “profound dangers such poorly supervised medical care poses to women’s health” and that “the abortion industry” is pushing abortion pills for “political, ideological, and financial goals.” [Family Research Council, 2/22 ]
• Also in its analysis on abortion pills, FRC argued that easing regulations of mifepristone would “complicate the detection of sexual abuse and sex trafficking.” In a section on “Sexual Abuse and Sex Trafficking” FRC claimed, “Abusers, along with those in the sexual exploitation industry ... would love an environment in which they can compel women to repeatedly have abortions.” The section also claimed that Planned Parenthood is aiding sex traffickers by providing abortions. [Family Research Council, 2/22 ]
• The analysis also laid out policy suggestions, such as “complete removal of the chemical abortion regimen from the market,” forcing manufacturers of the drug to “report all adverse events” from mifepristone, and prohibiting the prescription of abortion pills over telehealth. FRC claims its final goal is “to see the sale and the approval of drugs meant to intentionally kill life in the womb eliminated from our society.” [Family Research Council, 2/22 ]
• In a 2021 report, legislative assistant Chantel Hoyt claimed expansion of access to mifepristone means “the abortion industry seems willing to gamble with women's lives and health” in order to expand access to abortion. [Family Research Council, 7/19/21 ; FRC, accessed 5/15/24 ]
• Starting in 2013 First Liberty Institute represented Joe Holland in a case against the federal government challenging the so-called  “Abortion Pill Mandate.” First Liberty argued he should not have to provide insurance coverage for abortion pills because of his faith. [First Liberty Institute, accessed, 4/16/24 ]
• ForAmerica president David Bozell joined a Washington Times podcast to attack the use of mifepristone, calling it “unfathomable.” He went on to claim, “The left will not stop until there is abortion on demand funded by the United States taxpayer up to and perhaps even including the moment of birth." [The Washington Times, 3/29/24 ]
• Liberty Counsel, an anti-abortion legal organization, filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Frederick Douglass Foundation to the Supreme Court asking it to uphold the Fifth Circuit’s decision to reinstate restrictions on mifepristone. [World News Group, 3/12/24 ]
• Ashley Bateman, a policy writer for the Heartland Institute, wrote a piece for The Federalist regarding anti-abortion activists protesting at the Supreme Court about the FDA case, describing mifepristone as a “high-risk drug.” [The Federalist, 3/27/24 ]
• Heartland Daily News, a publication affiliated with the Institute, has been attacking abortion medication for years. Recently Bateman published an article where she labeled mifepristone a “high-risk drug” and a different piece by Harry Painter attempted to raise concerns about the safety of telemedicine prescriptions for mifepristone while conflating the use of the medication with “back-alley abortions.” [The Heartland Daily News, 4/15/24 ,  3/27/24 ,  12/6/22 ,  9/18/21 ]
• The James Dobson Family Institute in a piece titled “Baby-Killing Pills” claimed the Biden Administration wants to distribute mifepristone “like candy,” and said it continues to “use every tool it has to keep the number of abortions in America as high as possible.” Later on, the author describes the medication as a “killer abortion pill.” [Dr. James Dobson Family Institute, 4/14/23 ]
• The institute was one of many organizations to sign an amicus brief to the Supreme Court on the FDA battle over the drug. [U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , Brief of Amicus Curiae, 2/29/2024 ]
• A commentary piece for the organization described mifepristone described as “death by mail,” and attacked pro-choice organizations, writing, “See you in court, NARAL! JDFI proudly signed onto an amicus brief in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and we look forward to making the case for life before the U.S. Supreme Court.” [Dr. James Dobson Family Institute, 8/30/23 ] 
• A 2021 piece by Dobson himself endorsed a bill that aimed to strip universities of their federal funding if they distribute reproductive medication to students. [Dr. James Dobson Family Institute, 8/3/21 ]
• Media Research Center’s affiliated news outlet, NewsBusters, published an article claiming NBC “fear mongers” about Louisiana’s new law classifying mifepristone and misoprostol as dangerous substances. The piece said an NBC correspondent stating the new law will create confusion around the safety of the drugs is “fear-mongering” and tries to rebut the idea by claiming the law “isn’t banning the drugs.” [NewsBusters, 5/22/24 ]
• The right-wing “media watchdog” organization has been releasing content railing against abortion and mifepristone for years. In many pieces, the titles refer to the drugs as “harmful,” dangerous”, and “deadly.” [NewsBusters, 3/20/24 ,  4/24/23 ,  4/22/23 ,  3/24/23 ,  11/18/22 ]
• The organization has also cherry-picked stories to bolster its fearmongering about the pill. In one example, it describes a “chemical abortion nightmare” where a woman on YouTube described witnessing the heartbeat of the fetus and the health issues she faced afterward. The Media Research Center used the story as an opportunity to attack Planned Parenthood for what it describes as “its prioritization of killing babies over keeping women out of harm's way.” [Media Research Center, 1/5/24 ]
• In a commentary piece for its parent organization, the National Center for Public Policy Research, Project 21 member Patrina Mosley described mifepristone as a “lethal regime,” and compared the fight to end abortion with the fight to end slavery. She went on to claim the medication “has led to untold physical and psychological harm” to patients. Mosley also went on to claim drugs like mifepristone are an easy way for pharmaceutical organizations to make quick profits, and allow for “sexual abusers and partners who are unwilling fathers” to coerce people into taking the drug. [The National Center for Public Policy Research, 4/20/23 ] 
• Both groups also signed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court asking it to reverse the approval of the drug. In a concurring statement, Project 21 chairman Horace Cooper said, “Project 21 supports ending the FDA’s attempt to radically expand the use of mifepristone into some sort of ‘morning after’ abortion pill.” He went on to call the medicine “dangerous” and claimed that pro-life doctors should be exempt from prescribing the medication as it would make them “an accessory to an evil act.” [The National Center for Public Policy Research, 3/26/24 ]
• Students for Life of America has been a leading force behind a push to prohibit reproductive medication — the organization’s website even has a “chemical abortion” landing page, which fearmongers about the safety of mifepristone. [Students for Life of America, accessed 5/15/24 ; Politico, 4/19/23 ] 
• Students for Life Action, the political arm of the organization, released a statement praising Louisiana’s new law categorizing mifepristone and misoprostol as controlled dangerous substances. The statement called the drugs “dangerous” and repeated claims that chemical abortions result in significantly more complications and death than surgical ones. [Students for Life Action, 5/23/24 ]
• Students for Life president Kristan Hawkins posted on X praising the Louisiana law and calling abortion pills “dangerous” and, in another post, claimed Vice President Kamala Harris was “protecting sexual predators” by speaking out against the law.  [Twitter/X, 5/22/24 , 5/23/24 ]
• I n a press call reported on by NPR, Hawkins described the process as tantamount to “death by mail delivered to your doorstep.” [NPR, 12/16/21 ]
• The group has spread debunked claims about medication abortion having a harmful impact on wildlife and the environment, and filed a petition with the FDA to require providers of the medication to be responsible for the disposal of fetal tissue similar to medical waste. Hawkins was quoted in an organization blog saying that “tainted blood, tissue, and human remains have been flushed away, without any hard look at what happens next, or what happens to us and the environment.” [Media Matters, 3/12/24 ; USA Today, 12/12/22 ; Students for Life for America, 11/23/22 ] 
• A different blog post focused on the supposed dangers of using abortion medicine and the “abortion pill myths perpetuated by the abortion industry.” It argued that it is a “myth” that the majority of patients who take the medication don’t experience “serious complications,” and claimed that it is illegal and unsafe for the medication to be sent through the mail. Additionally, the group said abortion medicine is “uniquely traumatic” to patients. [Students for Life for America, 4/26/23 ] 
• Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America released a statement congratulating Louisiana for the The Catherine and Josephine Herring Act categorizing abortion drugs as controlled substances. The statement, by Southern Regional Director Caitlin Connors, claims “pro-abortion Democrats have enabled abusers to coerce and poison mothers with dangerous abortion drugs,” seemingly referencing the FDA easing restrictions on the drugs. The organization repeated these claims in a blog posted to Substack. [Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, 5/21/24 ; Substack, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, 5/23/24 ]
• In March of 2024, SBA published a piece on its site titled “Five big lies about the Supreme Court mail-order abortion drug case” in which it focuses on potential harmful side effects of the drug and the effects on patients. [Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, 3/25/24 ]
• Notably, two publications cited as key studies in the Texas lawsuit against the drug, produced by the research arm of SBA, the Charlotte Lozier Institute, were retracted from a medical journal for issues regarding flaws and conflict of interest. [The Associated Press, 2/7/24 ]
• The SBA was also one of several organizations to sign an amicus brief in support of reinstating the rule requiring an in-person visit to be prescribed mifepristone. [ U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , Brief of Amicus Curiae, 2/24 ]
• According to Vox, SBA has been reaching out to right-wing governors in numerous states to discuss restrictions on the shipment of abortion medication. The organization’s state director of affairs told Vox that she expects states to be “creative” in finding ways to enforce restrictions against reproductive rights. [Vox, 1/9/23 ]
• SBA has released numerous press releases following the litigation of abortion medication, in many cases describing the pills and their distribution as “dangerous” and “reckless.” [The Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, 4/13/23 ,  2/8/23 ,  1/25/23 ,  1/19/23 , 1/3/23 ,  11/18/22 ]
• In January 2022, SBA, alongside a coalition of other organizations, released a letter to the Senate arguing against the nomination of Dr. Robert Califf for commissioner of the FDA due to his support of abortion pills. The letter claimed Califf approved “unsafe mail-order abortion.” The letter was also signed by other Project 2025 partners such as Concerned Women for America, Americans United for Life, Family Policy Alliance, and The Ethics and Public Policy Center. [Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, 1/12/22 ,  2/14/22 ]
• In 2023, The Texas Public Policy Foundation filed an amicus brief in  U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, defending other Project 2025 partners' effort to limit access to mifepristone.  [ U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , Brief of Amicus Curiae, 2/29/24 ]
• Turning Point USA has published several opinion pieces from contributors attacking mifepristone. In one piece titled “NY Passes Law Requiring Public Universities to Provide the Abortion Pill to Students,” Turning Point USA contributor Morgan Zegers highlighted mail-ordered pills, writing, “Recently, some states have approved the sale of these abortion drugs via online order and mail delivery, a move that has been called reckless as it endangers not just the pre-born child, but also the life of the mother.” [Turning Point USA, 5/3/23 ]
• Turning Point USA contributor Erin Elmore took aim at mifepristone again in a piece asking, “Did the FDA Classify Pregnancy as an Illness to Approve ‘Abortion Pill?’” Elmore said the drug is “has several side effects, doesn’t always work as intended, is linked to the deaths of nearly 30 women, and has caused life-threatening illnesses in hundreds of women.” [Turning Point USA, 4/20/23 ]
• In another blog, Morgonn McMichael wrote about FDA regulations allowing for mifepristone to be sold at retail pharmacies, heavily accentuating the negative side effects of the medication. She writes, “Despite the innumerable side effects, some tolerable, others life-threatening, Plan C, a medical abortion pill provider, still claims that abortion is ‘safer than continuing a pregnancy and having a baby.’” She goes on to add, “Making the abortion pill more accessible is not the win for women that the left is branding it as.” [Turning Point USA, 1/4/23 ]
• Young America’s Foundation published a blog on its website in July 2023 attacking a seminar at Texas A&M University which included information about mifepristone, titled “Pregnant Woman Teaches Texas A&M Students How to Perform Illegal Abortions.” YAF wrote, “Universities should never allow students or guest speakers to use official resources to promote illegal activity. Hopefully, the investigation will result in consequences for the leftist student organization as well as the administrators who approved the all-school invitation.” [Young America’s Foundation, 7/19/23 ]
• In April 2023, YAF filed an amicus brief alongside several other right-wing organizations, which argued that the “FDA abused its own regulation in approving mifepristone in 2000.”  [ U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , Brief of Amicus Curiae, 4/18/23 ]

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Things to know about the gender-affirming care case as the Supreme Court prepares to weigh in

FILE - A flag supporting LGBTQ+ rights decorates a desk on the Democratic side of the Kansas House of Representatives during a debate, March 28, 2023, at the Statehouse in Topeka, Kan. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider whether a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for minors is constitutional. (AP Photo/John Hanna, File)

• Copy Link copied

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it will hear arguments on the constitutionality of state bans on gender-affirming care for transgender minors.

The issue has emerged as a big one in the past few years. While transgender people have gained more visibility and acceptance in many respects, half the states have pushed back with laws banning certain health care services for transgender kids.

Things to know about the issue:

What is gender-affirming care?

Gender-affirming care includes a range of medical and mental health services to support a person’s gender identity, including when it’s different from the sex they were assigned at birth.

The services are offered to treat gender dysphoria, the unease a person may have because their assigned gender and gender identity don’t match. The condition has been linked to depression and suicidal thoughts.

Gender-affirming care encompasses counseling and treatment with medications that block puberty, and hormone therapy to produce physical changes. Those for transgender men cause periods to stop, increase facial and body hair, and deepen voices, among others. The hormones used by transgender women can have effects such as slowing growth of body and facial hair and increasing breast growth.

Gender-affirming care can also include surgery, including operations to transform genitals and chests. These surgeries are rarely offered to minors .

What laws are states passing?

Over the past three years, 26 Republican-controlled states have passed laws restricting gender-affirming care for minors. Most of the laws ban puberty blockers, hormone treatment and surgery for those under 18. Some include provisions that allow those already receiving treatment to continue.

The laws also make exceptions for gender-affirming treatments that are not part of a gender transition, such as medications to stop breast growth in boys and excessive facial hair in girls.

One of the laws — in Arkansas — was nixed by a federal court and is not being enforced.

Meanwhile, at least 14 Democratic-controlled states have adopted laws intended to protect access to gender-affirming care.

The gender-affirming care legislation is a major part of a broader set of laws and policies that has emerged in Republican-controlled states that rein in rights of transgender people. Other policies, adopted in the name of protecting women and girls, bar transgender people from school bathrooms and sports competitions that align with their gender.

What have courts said so far?

Most of the bans have faced court challenges, and most are not very far along in the legal pipeline yet.

The law in Arkansas is the only one to have been struck down entirely, but the state has asked a federal appeals court to reverse that ruling.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, one step below the Supreme Court, last year ruled that Kentucky and Tennessee can continue to enforce their bans amid legal challenges. The high court has agreed to hear the Tennessee case in the term that starts later this year.

The U.S. Supreme Court in April ruled that Idaho can enforce its ban while litigation over it proceeds. A lower court had put it on hold.

What does the medical community think?

Every major U.S. medical group, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association, has opposed the bans and said that gender-affirming treatments can be medically necessary and are supported by evidence.

But around the world, medical experts and government health officials are not in lockstep. Some European countries in recent years have warned about overdiagnosis of gender dysphoria.

In England, the state-funded National Health Service commissioned a review of gender identity services for children and adolescents, appointing retired pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass to lead the effort. The final version of the Cass Review , published in April, found “no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress.”

England’s health service stopped prescribing puberty blockers to children with gender dysphoria outside of a research setting, following recommendations from Cass’ interim report.

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health and its U.S. affiliate issued a statement in May saying they’re deeply concerned about the process, content and consequences of the review, saying it “deprives young trans and gender diverse people of the high-quality care they deserve and causes immense distress and harm to both young patients and their families.”