Directorates
·	Director General's Office
·	Data Development
·	Strategic Evaluations
·	Partnership and Continuous Evaluations
Publications
·	Evaluation Reports
·	Evaluation Briefs
·	Labour Market Development Agreement Series
·	Lessons Learned Series
·	Evaluation Tool Kit Series
·	Evaluation Forum Newsletter
·	From Theory To Practice

Sources of Case Studies

In this appendix, we describe the sources for the case studies used in this project, identify the subjects covered, and then raise some methodological considerations associated with research based on case studies. We also provide, in Appendix B, a brief summary of each case study updated for the purpose of this report.

The research that provides the analytical basis for this project comes from case studies of workplace change. No new cases have actually been carried out. Rather, we have reviewed and, in some situations, updated case studies that had already been undertaken.

Ekos Case Studies

The case studies reviewed by Ekos Research were selected from the existing literature dealing with workplace and organizational change. At the start of the project, a search was undertaken to identify potentially relevant case studies (both published and unpublished) that were in the public domain. This search was assisted by a series of discussions with experts in the field. The process generated a large list of case studies that served as the basis for the final group of studies reviewed by Ekos.²⁸ That final selection was based on a number of factors: capturing diversity in terms of the type of innovation, and degree of success/failure; getting variation with respect to industry, establishment size, union status, and region; the currency of the available study; the extensiveness of the available documentation; and a willingness to cooperate in updating the case since the time of last reporting.²⁹

Once cases had been selected, reports were prepared summarizing the relevant aspects of the already reported material plus more recently available information obtained through phone follow-up interviews with key informants. These reports generally adhere to the structure of the case study template prepared for this report. This template essentially follows the conceptual framework reproduced in Exhibit 1 and discussed in section 2 of this report.³⁰

Canadian Labour Market and Productivity Centre Cases

The Canadian Labour Market and Productivity Centre (CLMPC) cases come from a number of sources:

• Case studies of about 15 workplaces that were presented to CLMPC seminars held in different regions between 1994 and 1996. These cases had been selected on the basis of two criteria: being innovative workplace responses to the challenges of change and involving joint processes between management and the union. Key observations from these cases were drawn out in a synthesis report (CLMPC 1996a).
• Five case studies involving alternative working arrangements that were undertaken by the CLMPC for the Task Force on Alternative Working Arrangements and Changes in Working Time. These cases involve a range of flexible work arrangements including job sharing, various working time innovations, and home-based work and are reported in CLMPC (1997b).
• Brief summaries of 19 Quebec-based cases that were reported in an overview of workplace innovations in that province (CLMPC 1997a).
• Summaries of 19 cases of workplace change in Europe that were reported in an overview of workplace innovation in the European context (CLMPC 1996b).

Case Methodology Considerations

Case studies, by their very nature, cannot offer a valid profile of the adoption of organizational changes nor can they provide a statistical base for undertaking representative analysis of related questions such as the driving forces, barriers and obstacles, or outcomes of workplace innovation. This is because samples tend to be small due to the intensiveness of this research method and because they typically are not “random” In fact, a willingness to participate in case studies may, in itself, signal something atypical about the organization. That is, despite attempts by some research studies (including this one) to get “failures” as well as “successes,” the reality is that the latter type of organization will usually be more forthcoming in terms of participating. Indeed, in some instances, cases are selected on the basis of a particular feature such as success; note, for example, the “joint” and “innovative” criteria used for the CLMPC seminar cases. Where representative, quantitative measurement is required; then, surveys and other databases are necessary.

Nevertheless, case studies have been an important tool for advancing our understanding of workplace innovation.³¹ In fact, because of its complexity and the intangible nature of many of its features, organizational change poses special challenges for collecting and analyzing quantitative data through surveys. The key issue driving this project — linking workplace strategies, practices, and processes to positive outcomes — cannot easily be addressed through quantitative data and, in many respects, is more amenable to the qualitative analysis which is afforded by case studies. Case studies can accommodate complex phenomena which may differ from the perspective of various stakeholders. They represent a flexible research method and one which is well suited to the “best practices” style of this project.

---

Footnotes

28	The list of existing case studies and the list of experts contacted in the search process is available upon request, or on our internet website at http://hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd
29	Another criterion involved not overlapping with other case reports being prepared for HRDC under various research initiatives.
30	The case study template, and the interview guide which is based on it, is available upon request or on our internet website at http://hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd
31	For a listing of some influential workplace case studies over the years, see Ichniowski et al. (1996).