Boundaries in Case Study Research - a Process-Oriented Perspective

In case study research, boundaries and process orientation seem to be interrelated. In the context of case studies in social science, the most frequently cited author defines a case study as “an empirical method that investigates a contemporary phenomenon (the ‘case’) in depth and within its real-world context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context may not be clearly evident” (Yin 2018, p. 15). The literature on case study research posits that case studies are not merely an empirical method. They are more commonly defined as a ‘research design’ (Merriam 1998) or a ‘research strategy’ (Pflüger 2023), which more accurately reflects the processual nature of case study research. Although Yin recommends defining the case and its boundaries at the outset, he acknowledges that these boundaries can be fuzzy. It is not only Yin who employs the term ‘boundaries’ to describe case studies. In her qualitative case study approach, Merriam also employs the term in her definition: “A case study is an in-depth description and analysis of a bounded system” (Merriam 2009, p. 40).

But how do we delineate the boundaries of a research process? What types of boundaries exist? Can the boundaries change during the research process? If so, how do they change and by whom? The aim of this contribution is to respond to these questions, by sharing and reflecting on my experiences in conducting a case study.

The case study material is part of a research project investigating paths of knowledge transfer in biomedical research at universities and non-university research institutions in Germany that lead to new drugs and therapies. Our case is the research and development process of PSMA-617, a medicine used to treat metastatic prostate cancer. The multi-methodological research design enables us to address micro-, meso-, and macro-perspectives on the research and development process.