7 99 2012 002

Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Case 1, 2 prepared by Professor Anne MESNY3

What is a case study?

A case study is a rich description of a real-life management situation for the purpose of generating
specific learning outcomes in students – notably, the development of judgment and critical
thinking skills in the management field. The case study method is based on a theory of learning
that emphasizes two key characteristics of learning activities: engagement and problem solving.
On the one hand, in order for students to learn effectively, it is believed that they must feel
“engaged” and have a sense that they are involved, beyond simple intellectual listening. On
the other hand, it is thought that activities that involve solving concrete problems are most
likely to generate learning. By describing actual management situations, many of which
require problem solving or decision- making, and by depicting the actions of employees,
managers or leaders with whom students can often identify, case studies seek to fulfil these two
key characteristics of learning.

Teaching using the case study method is also based on a particular conception of management,
which is considered a practice that is neither an art nor a science: in other words, management
does not depend solely on the talent or “intuition” of managers, nor is it based on the discovery
and application of a set of general rules. Rather, “good” management depends primarily on the
manager’s sense of judgment. Accordingly, professors of management seek to instill good
judgment in students. The use of case studies can be interesting in this regard to the extent that
their purpose is to foster skills that contribute to the development of good judgment; more than
a “simple” understanding or “application” of general principles, the pedagogical aims of cases
include developing a capacity for analysis and synthesis, an appreciation for context, exposing
students to a large number of situations and to decision-making in a situation of limited
information, developing a sense of urgency, categorizing problems, fostering a creative
approach to the search for answers and solutions, etc.

1 Translation from the French of the Guide de production de cas pédagogiques.

2 Although this guide was developed specifically for authors wishing to submit their cases to the HEC Montréal Case Centre
Catalogue or to the International Journal of Case Studies in Management (IJCSM), it can also be used as a more general reference.
3 Anne Mesny is a professor of management at HEC Montréal. She is a former director of the HEC Montréal Case Centre and past
editor-in-chief of International Journal of Case Studies in Management.
© HEC Montréal 2017
All rights reserved for all countries. Any translation or alteration in any form whatsoever is prohibited.
This case is intended to be used as the framework for an educational discussion and does not imply any judgement on the
administrative situation presented.
Deposited with the HEC Montréal Case Centre, 3000, chemin de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montréal (Québec) H3T 2A7 Canada.
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Case study versus exercise

A case study is not an exercise. In an exercise, the aim is to identify the one right solution to a
problem. As such, in an exercise, there is no beating around the bush about which answer or
solution is right or wrong. On the other hand, in a case study, there are often several possible
answers, solutions or points of view, and the issue of which is the “best” one is completely open to
debate. If there is nothing to discuss, it is not a case study.

Even when an exercise is “embellished” by the inclusion of contextual information, it remains an

exercise. If the context is not used to call into question or add nuance to “the” right answer, it
is an exercise, not a case.

The distinction between a case and an exercise does not extend to the distinction between qualitative
and quantitative data. It is possible, for example, to produce excellent cases in the areas of finance,
accounting, or logistics 1 even if the discussion is based on figures. On the other hand, a management
“case” based on a qualitative description of a manager’s facts and actions, where the sole aim is to
“classify” the activities based on Fayol’s PODC model qualifies as an exercise, not a case.

There is no denyi n g that exercises are valuable teaching tools – they play a key role in the management
instructor’s toolbox. However, it is important to understand the differences between an exercise and
a case study, particularly in terms of the teaching objectives pursued. In this regard, authors often
submit “cases” to the HEC Montréal Case Centre that are, in fact, exercises.

In concrete terms, case studies in management are most often in the form of a written text (varying
in length from as little as two to as many as 50 pages!). Multimedia cases combining text, audio,
video, web, etc. are becoming increasingly common as the costs associated with producing quality
video clips, for example, drop.

Thus, a “case” is, first and foremost, a “real-life story” related to the field of management. And,
like any good story, a case must be exciting, rich, intriguing, and interesting. Put even more simply,
the first criterion of a good case is that it arouses the curiosity, interest, and engagement of the
reader – in this case, the student. A “good” case generates two effects: you want to read it to the
end and you want to discuss it afterward.

1 The IJCSM regularly publishes these types of cases. Visit the website at: https://education.hec.ca/centredecas/app/en/ijcsm/.

© HEC Montréal 2
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Teaching case versus research case

Although teaching cases and research cases share similarities in terms of their production, there is a major
difference in the “final product” related to their respective objectives and purpose. The objective of a teaching
case is to describe a management situation in a manner that allows students to acquire skills and knowledge.
The objective of a research case is to describe and shed light on a “subject” of research based on a specific
conceptual and theoretical framework that is integrated into the case itself. Research cases are thus often aimed
at generating or supporting a research proposal or hypothesis. The tone of the research case is one of
“demonstration,” e.g., a demonstration of the relevance of a particular concept or theory, or of the analytical
skills of the case author.

On the other hand, if there is one tone that a teaching case seeks to avoid, it is that of “demonstration.” Even
though any description necessarily has a conceptual or theoretical grounding, the conceptual or theoretical
models used to comprehend the management situation described should be as discreet as possible. 1 In a
teaching case, the emphasis is placed on providing as “neutral” a description as possible, so as to closely reflect
the manner in which the characters depicted would describe the situation themselves, 2 as well as on the
“uniqueness” of the situation and its context. In a research case, the priority is to reveal or confirm a hypothesis
or a proposal and to demonstrate the “typical” nature of the situation described in relation to a more general
category of situations.

In a teaching case, the spotlight is on the management situation, on the “facts,” and on the empirical material,
all of which are centre stage, whereas the concepts and theories are behind the scenes, in the wings. In a
research case, on the other hand, it is the ideas, hypotheses, theories, and concepts that occupy centre stage,
while the empirical material and the “specific case” play a supporting role in the background.

Given the importance of research in an academic career, management professors sometimes tend to submit
teaching cases that in fact more closely resemble research cases.3 For example, an author might use a corporate
or management situation to show how the theory of resources can help the reader understand what happened
in the case – the spotlight is on the theory of resources as opposed to the concrete situation, which serves
mainly to “illustrate” the theory. The theory of resources is thus integrated into the description of the situation.
In the end, the only option students have is to approve the “demonstration” offered; they cannot contest the
analysis (most such cases do not provide the necessary factual elements to do so), nor can they take it upon
themselves to figure out how the theory of resources sheds light on what happened in the case and to reflect
on this, since the authors have already done this work.

It should be noted, however, that the empirical approach (data collection and analysis) is the same for both
teaching and research cases. There are thus important links to be established between qualitative research and
the production of teaching cases. The field work that goes into producing a teaching case could very well be
converted into “data” for research purposes. 4 Conversely, the qualitative data gathered in the context of a
research project can effectively serve as the basis for the production of a teaching case. Thus, despite the basic
distinction that must be made between their respective “final products,” there are real synergies between
teaching cases and research cases.

1 It is in the teaching notes – as opposed to the case itself – that these conceptual frameworks can be presented.
2 This is why it is relevant to include quotations from the protagonists in the case.
3 This is one of the most frequent reasons for the refusal of cases submitted to the IJCSM.
4 It is important to note that the rules of research ethics that govern the collection of data for research purposes require the
informed consent of all participants at the time of data collection. If you are planning to use data gathered during the production
of a teaching case for a future research project, it is therefore essential to inform the respondents and to ensure that the data
collection complies fully with the rules of research ethics. For Canada, refer to the Policy Statement on Ethical Conduct for
Research Involving Humans: http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf.

© HEC Montréal 3
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Different types of teaching cases

There are different types of teaching cases. While not exhaustive, the following list makes
important distinctions between these case categories, each of which has its own merits 1 and
limitations.

1. Decision-making case

A decision-making case is one that concludes at the moment when one or more protagonists –
most commonly a manager or company leader – must make a decision about the situation or
issue described in the case. In a decision-making case, students are encouraged to put
themselves in the shoes of the characters to decide what they would do if they were in the same
position. 2

In a decision-making case, the question put to students to kick-start the discussion is always
of the type: “What would you do if you were in X’s shoes?” One of the main advantages of a
decision-making case is that it elicits students’ involvement by asking them to identify with
the decision maker.

2. Descriptive or analytical case

A descriptive or analytical case presents events or situations that took place in the past,
including the actors’ actions and decisions. The goal is to understand and assess the actions
taken in light of the context described in the case. 3

In descriptive cases, students are asked questions such as: “What do you think happened?”
“How would you evaluate the measures taken by X?” “How would you explain the
success/failure of this project/enterprise?”

1 The types of cases listed here correspond to the different types of cases considered eligible for publication by the HEC Montréal
Case Centre.
2 For an example of a decision-making case published in the IJCSM, see “Tour Planning at Cirque du Soleil,” by Marie- Hélène
Jobin and Jean Talbot (Vol. 9, No. 1, March 2011).
3 For an example of a descriptive case published in the IJCSM, see “L’approche Timpson par ‘l’absence’ de contrôle,” by Sophie
Tessier and Luis Cisneros (Vol. 10, No. 2, May 2012).

© HEC Montréal 4
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Decision-making case versus analytical case

Many advocates of the case study method swear by decision-making cases. When there is a decision or
choice to be made or a problem to be solved, students are thought to get more involved in the
discussion, to provide more accurate and concrete arguments, to be more aware of the context and more
action-oriented. In short, the in-class discussion of a decision-making case is said to be more dynamic
than in the case of an analytical case, and the learning outcomes tend to be more detailed and diversified.

While there is undoubtedly some truth in these observations (although there is a lack of research
confirming them), both descriptive and analytical cases have their place in the instructor’s arsenal of
teaching tools. Moreover, it is entirely possible to add a decision-making aspect to most analytical cases.
For example, rather than being content to ask: “What do you think of what happened?”, the discussion
can be taken in a more concrete direction with a question such as: “What would need to be done to
replicate this project in another company?”

An example of how a predominantly descriptive case can be converted into a decision-making case
can be found in “Musi-Blox,” 1 a case that describes the actions and reflections of a new project manager
who is having problems moving forward on a music composition software project. There is no
decision to be made, but an assessment is required of the project manager’s in such a context. At the
end of the case, however, the author introduces an interesting shift toward decision- making:

“Last week, I received an email from my manager. He had just signed a contract on the West Coast of
the U.S. to design licensed learning software for French punctuation aimed at the high school market.
He announced that he had a candidate in mind to head up this project. This person has a master’s
degree in French and a bachelor’s degree in education, but virtually no experience in management. My
manager has therefore asked me to use my experience to develop a project management training plan
for this new hire. He wants me to assume the role of coach. I was hoping that, based on everything I
just told you, you might be able to help me establish the outlines of this training plan?”

Moreover, before deciding on a decision-making case that describes the decisions and actions taken,
the authors can always ask themselves whether, from a pedagogical perspective, it wouldn’t be more
interesting to “stop” the case before the decision or action is taken (even if it means moving the
description of the decision or action into a “Part B” to which students would only have access after
having “resolved” Part A, which would thereby become a decision-making case). 2

3. Success cases, best practice cases, and showcase cases

Some descriptive cases present the success stories of firms or managers based on an account
of good or best practices. These are called best practice cases. Such cases, in which the firms
and individuals are most commonly clearly identified by name, represent an advantageous
showcase for them. 3

1 Produced by Laurent Simon, published in the IJCSM (Vol. 1, No. 3, November 2003).
2 For an example of a case in which Part A has decision-making elements and Part B is analytical and describes what happened
following the situation described in Part A, see “Putting on the Best Face for the Customers!” by Maurice Lemelin and Virginia
Bodolica (IJCSM, Vol. 5, No. 1, April 2007).
3 For an example of a “best practice case” published in the IJCSM, see “Les Services d’accès Desjardins : le ‘triangle du succès’
d’un centre d’appels,” by Jacqueline Dahan and Sylvie St-Onge (Vol. 9, No. 2, June 2011).

© HEC Montréal 5
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

In this type of case, students can be asked questions such as: “How would you explain the
success?” “What are some of the factors that led to the success?” “Is it possible to replicate
this success in any other firm?”

4. Failure cases and “dark side” cases

Contrary to best practice cases, other cases describe situations marked by failure 1 or offer a
glimpse into the darker, less attractive, or even outright unethical aspects of the management
practices of certain managers or firms. The latter are referred to as “dark side” cases. Unless
they are based on publicly available information (for example, if the case deals with an “affair”
or “scandal” that has been made public, most failure cases and dark side cases are disguised to
conceal the identity of the individuals and companies involved. 2 Indeed, with some exceptions,
companies are rarely willing to air their dirty laundry.

When considering failure cases or dark side cases, students can be asked questions such as:
“How do you explain this failure?” “What do you think went wrong?” “What would need to
be done to prevent a similar situation from occurring?”

Showcase case versus dark side case

Some journals publish only undisguised cases in which the companies or individuals are clearly
identified. 3 In choosing this approach, they almost exclusively present “showcase” cases
depicting aspects of firm management that range from relatively neutral to outright flattering.
While it is undoubtedly pedagogically relevant to have students work on cases that present good
or “best” practices in management, we believe that it is very risky to focus exclusively on such
cases. Failure cases and dark side cases are also an indispensable and extremely valuable
teaching tool.

On the one hand, the cases to which students are exposed during their management training must
provide a portrait that is at least minimally “representative” of the reality of the business world.
However, in the real world of business, failures are at least as numerous as successes, and
practices that are undistinguished, less than stellar and sometimes even unacceptable are
unfortunately quite common. As such, it is useful for students to be confronted with this type of
case during their training. The very credibility of the case method of teaching depends on it.

On the other hand, just as we can learn more from our failures than from our successes in real
life, students can learn a great deal from cases that describe the failures, blunders, mistakes, or
erring ways of managers or leaders. These cases help demystify the profession of manager,
making it more accessible and “human” and less intimidating, while also, crucially, generating
ideas and debates on the issue of values.

1 For an example of a “failure case” published in the IJCSM, see “Strategic Planning at Saint Francis de Sales Schools,”
by Malvina Klag, Hélène Giroux and Ann Langley (Vol. 10, No. 2, May 2012).
2 For an example of a Dark side case based on public documents and published in the IJCSM, see “The Dark Side of Light- Handed
Regulation: Mercury Energy and the Death of Folole Muliaga,” by Todd Bridgman (Vol. 9, No. 4, November 2011). For an
example of a Dark Side case based on private data, see “Intolérances,” by Vincent Calvez and Vanessa Duthu (Vol. 7, No. 3,
September 2009).
3 This is the case, for example, of the Revue des cas en gestion (http://www.revuecasgestion.com/RCG1S22009.pdf).

© HEC Montréal 6
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

5. Brief cases

Some cases are deliberately short (three pages or less) and can be read in a mere 5 to 10
minutes. 1 Most often, these are decision-making cases. Pedagogically speaking, this type of
case has several advantages, including allowing for an on-the-spot discussion with students
immediately after they have read the case in class (as opposed to reading the case at home in
preparation for the class). Since such cases necessarily present only a limited amount of
information about the situation described, they also meet the pedagogical objectives of
problem-based learning to the extent that they require students to reflect on the information
that is missing from the case and on what they need to know to develop an approach to the
situation.

In a brief case, the questions put to students are often the same as those for decision-making
cases: “What would you do if you were in X’s shoes?” Another interesting question would be:
“If you had access to additional information before giving your view on the case, what would
it be?” or “If you could ask one of the actors in the case a question, what would it be and who
would you put it to?”

6. Multimedia cases

By combining written text, images, photos, audio, and video, multimedia cases have the
advantage of breaking away from the monotony of exclusively text-based cases to present
“raw” data, which can include a video excerpt of a meeting, an audio recording of an interview
with a leader, photos of a factory, etc. As such, these cases often succeed better than written
cases in developing students’ ability to select, interpret, and synthesize disparate information
and diverse data.

Producing a multimedia case requires more time and resources than a traditional case. In many
cases, it is more difficult to update a multimedia case than a traditional one. Given the short
shelf life of many teaching cases, case authors should think twice before embarking on the
production of a multimedia case in order to ensure that their case does not become obsolete
prematurely. Finally, despite the current popularity of all things multimedia, from a
pedagogical perspective, it is not always apparent that cases of this type are systematically
more interesting than traditional cases.

Steps to producing a case study

The steps described in the following section apply to cases that require the collection of non-public
data directly from the “respondents.” For cases based on the consultation of public documents,
some of the steps are different (see Table 1 below), but the general logic is the same.

1 For an example of a brief case published in the IJCSM, see “Intolérances,” by Vincent Calvez and Vanessa Duthu (Vol. 7,
No. 3, September 2009).

© HEC Montréal 7
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Steps for producing a case involving Steps for producing a case based
first-hand data collection solely on public documents
1. Come up with the “idea” for the case 1. Idem
and the main challenge or issue
2. Establish preliminary contact with the 2. Locate and browse the documents
firm and individuals on which the case will be based
3. Determine or validate the narrative and 3. Idem
the type of case
4. Proceed with data collection 4. Read the documents in-depth
5. Draft a preliminary version of the case 5. Idem
6. Obtain the authorization of the Not applicable
individuals concerned and produce a
second version of the case
7. Test the case in class 6. Idem
8. Produce the final version of the case 7. Idem
Table 1 – Steps to producing cases based on first-hand data collection and
cases based on public documents

1. Come up with the “idea” for the case and the main challenge or issue

There are two ways of finding the “idea” for a teaching case and identifying the potential theme
or issue at the centre of the case. There are two main approaches to initiating the production of a
case:

a) Take advantage of opportunities. Most management instructors like to keep a foot in the
business world, maintaining contact with various managers or businesspeople. The best cases
are often the result of unexpected or unplanned opportunities that arise: for instance, a manager
might tell you about a delicate situation he encountered; a student might confide in you about
problems she is having with a superior; a business leader might contact you for advice on a
problem involving your area of expertise; a company you know well might be facing a major
strategic challenge; one of your MBA students might have talked to you about a firm he
launched a few years earlier, etc. For this type of case, the initial impetus is a management
situation you have caught wind of and that you deem sufficiently interesting, typical or unusual,
revolting or admirable, but in any case complex, to warrant producing a case about it.

These types of opportunities offer at least two advantages:

(1) The author does not approach the organizational reality in question with a predefined
framework in mind: faced with a complex management situation, their priority is to
describe the situation as faithfully as possible and to attempt to understand it without
reducing it to a “typical problem” or to the illustration of a theory or concept. In other
words, cases that emerge in this way are often very rich and can be used to serve several
teaching objectives.
(2) The author is already in contact with one of the individuals involved in the situation in
question, and has privileged access to certain data. This simplifies the task of convincing
the individuals or firms involved to participate in the production of the teaching case (cf.
step 2).

© HEC Montréal 8
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Of course, both of these advantages can also pose certain challenges or limitations:
(1) Authors who take advantage of an opportunity to describe a complex management
situation may find themselves in a position where the “elucidation” of the situation
exceeds their skills or expertise. In such cases, they can turn to one or more colleagues
for assistance in producing the teaching notes. Because such cases are not
undertaken with specific teaching objectives in mind, the case can ultimately diverge
from the themes taught by the author(s). The case can therefore be used by
instructors other than just the authors, although this can complicate the step involving
the initial in-class testing (cf. step 7).
(2) An “inside contact” who provides their “version” of the situation can sometimes have
too strong an influence on how the situation is presented in the case. The author
must therefore either diversify the information sources to ensure that the case is not
based on a single point of view, or indicate through the writing technique used in the
case itself that the situation is being presented from the perspective of this particular
actor (this technique can also be very rich from a pedagogical standpoint).

b) Actively seek out “cases” based on specific teaching objectives. In the second approach
to finding the “idea” for a case study, the author starts with a particular pedagogical “need”
and looks for an “environment” that can fulfil this need. For example:
− “I don’t have a case on the financial aspects of the acquisition decision for my
course on mergers and acquisitions. Let’s try and produce a case on the topic.”
− “There is much talk in the media lately about the success of company X. We
should write a case about it.”

Unlike cases based on “opportunities,” the main theme or the primary teaching objectives
of needs-based cases are determined in advance (e.g., “understand the financial issues
associated with the decision to make an acquisition”). As with the first approach, this
represents both an advantage (data collection is more targeted, the author remains in his
area of expertise, the production of teaching notes is facilitated, etc.) and a disadvantage
(it can lead to “monolithic” cases that focus too narrowly on a single teaching objective,
the organizational reality may be deliberately truncated or overly simplified, the
predefined teaching objectives can act as blinders, preventing the author from
considering other aspects of the situation, etc.).

In addition, when producing this type of case, authors do not always have specific
individuals or firms in mind. They must therefore search for an appropriate setting,
identify firms and contacts and convince them to participate in the production of a
case focusing on them, which can make it harder to access the data required.

2. Establish preliminary contact with the firm and individuals

Once the “idea” and general theme of the case have been determined, one of the next steps
is to secure the co-operation of two categories of people: (1) those who will be directly
involved in data collection; and (2) those who have the power to authorize the publication
of the case. These two categories are often merged into one. For example, if the case

© HEC Montréal 9
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

focuses on a firm and if the data collection requires conducting interviews with the
firm’s leader in addition to accessing internal corporate documents, the leader will be
both the interview respondent and the person authorizing publication of the case.

However, respondents do not always have the authority to approve a case’s publication.
For example, if the case focuses on project management and involves observing and
interviewing members of a project team within a firm, who should sign the official
publication authorization? Any member of the team? All members of the team? The team
leader, if there is one? The head of the firm? The director of communications and public
relations?

There is no simple answer to this question. 1 It depends on several factors, including:

1) Do the respondents involved in data collection have middle- or upper-management
status?
If the answer is yes, we can assume that they are authorized to act “on behalf of
their organization” and that they can personally sign-off on the publication of the case.
Otherwise, it will likely be necessary to obtain the authorization of a manager or
company executive in addition to the consent of the individuals who participated as
respondents.
2) Does the case deal with a topic or a delicate situation that could harm the reputation
or competitiveness of the individuals or companies involved?
If so, it is crucially important to clearly determine – jointly with the individuals and
the company – the terms and conditions for the writing and distribution of the case,
in particular as regards the potential anonymization and masking of data.
3) Can the names and some data be easily disguised in order to make it impossible
to identify the firms or individuals, but without compromising the proposed teaching
objectives?
If the data can be easily masked without affecting the teaching objectives, it is generally
recommended that this be done, as it can greatly help reassure respondents and
firm leaders. However, in many management cases, it is impossible to remove all
identifying elements and, in some cases, using the company’s real name (although
this is rarely the case for individuals) and actual data is indispensable to meeting the
teaching objectives. In such cases, these conditions must be clearly established in
advance with the firm and the individuals involved in order to avoid the possibility
of the company changing its mind later.

Virtually all professors who regularly produce case studies have encountered this type of
frustrating situation where, after investing a great deal of time and energy to produce a case,
they discover that it will never be used or published because the individuals involved have
refused to sign the publication authorization. It is therefore important for case authors to
minimize the chances of this happening.
1 These questions are similar to those that apply when collecting data within a firm as part of a research project. The rules of
research ethics regarding the consent of individuals and organizations to participate in research therefore also apply to
participation in the production of teaching cases: http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf.

© HEC Montréal 10
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

The first contact with the individuals or firms thus involves first confirming that there is
suitable “material” present to produce a case and, second, ensuring the collaboration of
potential respondents and of the person who will sign the authorization to publish.

3. Determine or validate the narrative and the type of case

Following the first contact with the firm and, often, an initial gathering of public and private
documents regarding the situation to be described in the case, the author can prepare a two-
page synopsis containing the following elements:
- The anticipated content of the case (What is the “story” we want to tell?);
- The type of case: decision-making or analytical, disguised or undisguised;
- The planned data collection procedure: the collection method (interviews,
observation, documents, etc.), the individuals from whom data will be collected,
the type of documents to which the author would like to have access, the data
collection timetable, etc.

It is recommended that this synopsis be sent to the contact person in the firm for validation.

4. Collect data

Data collection for a case study is very similar to that required to produce a research case.
Interviews, if applicable, must be carefully prepared, preferably recorded (with the consent of
respondents) and transcribed. During the interviews or observation periods, the reflexivity of
the case writer is the same as that of the researcher. While the notions of data reliability and
validity apply mainly to research cases, the producer of a teaching case must nonetheless be
concerned with the credibility of the data gathered, as well as with their quality, completeness,
richness, etc.

The amount and scope of data required to write a “good” teaching case vary greatly. At one
end of the scale, we have cases based on a single interview. At the other extreme, we have
cases based on multiple interviews with many different stakeholders, site visits and
observations, internal documents, etc. Cases in the latter category are not necessarily “better.”
It all depends on the targeted teaching objectives, on the particularities of the situation
described and, finally, on the availability of data.

If we were to describe the “average” or most “typical” data collection method for the
production of a good management case study, we would say that it is usually necessary to
conduct several interviews and to complement them with information collected from both
internal and public documents.
5. Draft a preliminary version of the case

Using the data gathered in the previous steps, a first version of the case can now be written. In
this step, the following elements must be taken into account:

© HEC Montréal 11
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

− Review the type of case during production.

While writing the first draft of the case, the author has the opportunity to modify
the storyline or the nature of the case if needed. For example, an author may decide
to turn what was initially supposed to be a decision-making case into an analytical
case (or vice-versa). In other cases, the author may determine that it would be better
to divide the case into several parts. Alternatively, an author may realize that the
masked data contain too many identifying elements, making it very difficult to
produce a convincing disguised case. And so on.
− Determine whether any important information is missing.
Is the point of view of another person required? Would it be useful to add quantitative
data? Generally speaking, are the data collected sufficiently rich to support the targeted
teaching objectives?
− Don’t “overdo” it.
Contrary to the previous point, there is often a tendency to “overdo” it by adding
information that may be unnecessary. Just because the author has collected data
they think will be useful doesn’t mean they have to include it in the case. It is important
to ask the following questions: Do the students need these elements for a clear
understanding of the situation? Are these data necessary to help students achieve the
teaching objectives established for the case?
− Avoid importing the analysis into the case.
At this stage, it is essential to ensure that the analysis or interpretation of the
facts described is not surreptitiously imported into the case. During the data
collection and case-writing process, authors gradually develop their own
comprehension and analysis of the situation, but these elements must be reserved for
the teaching notes and should not interfere in the case.

6. Obtain authorization from the individuals concerned and produce a second version of the
case

Once the author is satisfied with the first version, it can be sent to the persons concerned for
approval, notably the person responsible for signing the publication authorization. In some
cases, the respondents or person in authority may ask for changes to be made or they may have
comments or wish to provide new information that the author can choose to include in the case.

At this stage, it is a good idea to ask the person in charge to sign the authorization to publish
the case. Even if further modifications are made to the case at a later time, they are usually
minor and do not affect the authorization (if substantial changes are made, the author can
always request a new authorization based on the new version of the case).

© HEC Montréal 12
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

7. Test the case in class

The first use of the case in class is a critical test and can lead to substantial changes, not only
in the teaching notes, but also in the case itself. Students sometimes run into difficulty
understanding an aspect of the situation that would gain from further development; at other
times, they have questions regarding cultural elements that are not sufficiently explained by
the author; in some cases, students may detect errors or incongruities in the quantitative data,
which can “contaminate” the discussion; etc.

Testing the case in the classroom thus offers a last opportunity to go back to the questions
listed in step 5 concerning the suitability of the case’s narrative, its type (decision-making or
analytical) and its structure. Is any information missing? Are there any sections that are not
useful? Are students being unduly “steered” in one direction or another due to the interference
of conceptual or theoretical elements in the case? Most importantly, the in-class testing of the
case is an opportunity to validate whether or not the case “works”; in other words, does it
generate interest and foster discussion?

If it is not possible to conduct a preliminary test of the case in class, it is recommended that
the author have it read by a student or other individual who closely matches the profile of the
students for whom the case is intended.

8. Produce the “final” version of the case

After the case has successfully passed the in-class test, the author can produce the final
version. However, it should be noted that there are still several factors that can influence this
final version. For example, if the case is submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal
(e.g., the International Journal of Case Studies in Management) or in a case catalogue (e.g.,
that of the HEC Montréal Case Centre or Ivey Publishing), there is a good chance that further
modifications will be necessary. In addition, in order to prolong the shelf life of a teaching
case, it can be a good idea to update it after a few years. In short, the final version is still a
work in progress.

Structure of a teaching case

The form and structure of teaching cases can vary widely. This variety is important, as students
risk losing interest if they are constantly served the same types of cases course after course,
even if the cases themselves are interesting. Accordingly, without wishing to stifle the creativity
of case writers, the indications below are intended as a guide to help support and enhance
that creativity.

Title of the case

A “good” title has several notable characteristics:

It must be catchy, meaning that is must capture the attention or arouse the curiosity of readers,
making them want to read the case. For example, titles such as “Danièle Sauvageau : l’or”

© HEC Montréal 13
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

(2005); 1 “Fired Because of a $20 Loan”; 2 “Quand Victor Sanschagrin découvre Wikipédia”; 3 or
“Visioning Information Technology at Cirque du Soleil” 4 are intriguing and pique the curiosity of
the reader.

The title should not “give away” the case – it shouldn’t reveal the outcome of the case or the “right”
assessment of the situation and it shouldn’t indicate a suitable theoretical framework to guide
reflection on the case. For example, titles such as “The Bad Decisions of Mr. ABC, Manager” or
“The Conflict Opposing Firm X and Organization Y: An Illustration of Stakeholder Theory” (both
titles are made up) unduly influence how the reader reads and judges the case.

The advantage of using a relatively “neutral” title is that it allows other professors to use the case
to shed light on elements that may be very different from what the case writer had in mind. For
example, if, contrary to the case author, a professor believes that Mr. ABC made the right decisions
in some respects and wants to discuss them with his students, a title such as “The Decisions of Mr.
ABC, Manager” makes this possible, whereas the title “The Bad Decisions of Mr. ABC, Manager”
creates an unnecessary bias. Similarly, if a professor has no intention of using stakeholder theory
to explore the conflict between firm X and organization Y, it helps that the theory is not mentioned
in the case title.

However, the title can be sufficiently clear to give an idea of the general theme or main issue at the
centre of the case, which also facilitates a keyword search in the case catalogue. For example, a
title such as “The Future of Espoir Cafés: Balancing Human Resources and Marketing” 5 is
preferable to “The Future of Espoir Cafés” – the reader knows right away that the case deals with
human resources and marketing.

The first lines

It is a well-known fact that the fate of a case is determined in the first lines: will it be read, or –
in the case of students who are “forced” to read it to the end – will it be read with pleasure
and interest, or with reluctance?

The first lines (comprising the first paragraph or, if they are short, the first two or three
paragraphs) should not be a summary of the case. Rather, their purpose is to “set the stage” by
giving the readers a general idea of what the case is about and what is expected of them. If it is a
decision-making case, the first paragraph should give a clear indication of the type of decision
required and of whom the decision maker is. If it is an analytical case, the first paragraph provides
information on the type of events that readers will be called upon to analyze. If there is a “twist”
to the case, it should not be revealed in order to keep an element of surprise regarding the
outcome. This is also where a broad outline of the case context should be given, with information
on the type of firm, area of activity, etc.

1 Case produced by Laurence Prud’Homme and Laurent Lapierre (IJCSM, Vol. 4, No. 5, Dec. 2006).
2 Case produced by Maurice Lemelin and Virginia Bodolica (IJCSM, Vol. 5, No. 3, Dec. 2007).
3 Case produced by Yves-Marie Abraham, Olivier Irrmann, and Antoine Roy-Larouche (IJCSM, Vol. 5, No. 3, Dec. 2007).
4 Case produced by Anne-Marie Croteau, Suzanne Rivard, and Jean Talbot (IJCSM, Vol. 9, No. 3, Sept. 2011).
5 Case produced by Normand Turgeon, Sara Loudyi, and Michel Tremblay (IJCSM, Vol. 10, No. 2, May 2012).

© HEC Montréal 14
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

The following text provides what we consider to be a “good” start to a decision-making case. 1

– Where?
– Istanbul.
– Which show?
– I don’t know. We have to discuss it. The promoters behind the proposals we received
suggested names of shows, but I believe that the choice of show is open for discussion.

Louise Murray, Vice-President, Tour Planning and Partnerships at Cirque du Soleil, considers
the information given to her by Ines Lenzi, the Director of Partnership Management, before
answering: “Let me think about it a little longer. It seems like an interesting project, but we’re
not very familiar with the region. I’m going to take a close look at the proposals you’ve given
me and we’ll talk about it again after the Christmas holidays. By the way, Happy New Year in
2009!
Ciao!” She hangs up the phone, deep in thought. Cirque du Soleil regularly receives unsolicited
business proposals. But receiving two serious proposals for the same city one right after the
other can be interpreted as a strong signal.

Main body of the text

We cannot be too specific about what should go into the main body of the case, as it is this part of
the document that varies the most from one case to another. However, there are a few elements
that authors should keep in mind:
− The “macrostructure” of the text, that is, its division, where applicable, into
clearly identified and subtitled sections. These subtitles are important “signposts,”
but, as with the title of the case, the author must be careful not to give too many
indications to the reader.
− Figures, tables, and images. Sometimes it makes sense to include tables, figures,
or images in a case. Here again, the important thing is to strike the right balance
and to consider the teaching objectives. How far does the author want to go in
“facilitating” the reading of the case and structuring the information provided?
− Quantitative data. Even cases that deal with “soft” management issues can benefit
from a certain amount of numerical data. However, unless one of the teaching
objectives is for students to learn how to select relevant figures out of a large mass
of information, it is important not to bombard readers with quantified data that may be
of limited use.
− Quoting protagonists. If the case is based on interviews, it is usually a very good idea
to quote the people that were interviewed. In fact, some cases are based exclusively
on quotations, without the presence of a “narrative” to frame them.

1 Excerpt from “Tour Planning at Cirque du Soleil,” by Marie-Hélène Jobin and Jean Talbot (IJCSM, Vol. 9, No. 1,
March 2011).

© HEC Montréal 15
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Ultimately, just as if they were telling a story, the author must pay careful attention to the manner
in which the case unfolds, its fluidity and the pace it sets for the reader. In some cases, a section
can have the effect of disrupting the plot or causing the reader to lose interest. In such cases, the
author should consider either moving these sections to the exhibits, shortening them, redistributing
them throughout the case, converting them into a diagram or table… or simply removing them.

The final paragraph

The last paragraph, like the first, is crucially important in that it determines the other half of the
“fate” of the case – i.e., whether or not it triggers reflection and discussion. Even descriptive cases
frequently conclude with one or several questions. However, it is important to distinguish these
questions from those the author wants to put to students, which belong in the teaching notes rather
than in the case itself. The reason, here again, is to preserve the versatility of the case, allowing it
to be used for various purposes. Depending on the instructor, the questions asked of students in
relation to the same case can be quite different.

The questions or preoccupations that are often placed at the end of a case are the same as those
facing the protagonists themselves. Here are two examples of a final paragraph, the first concerning
a decision-making case, and the second a descriptive case:

(Decision-making case)
“Upon assuming his new role, Martin Valiquette told himself that Liberté had undeniable
advantages that would enable it to overcome the challenges of the sector. He was already
planning his next meeting with Roger Dickhout to present Liberté’s future strategic directions.
Following his reflection on the future of Liberté products, he still had several questions on his
mind: Should he include sustainable development in this strategy? If so, what would the
organizational consequences be? Would it be sufficiently profitable to do so? And, how would
Roger Dickhout react to this idea?”1

(Descriptive case)
“On a December afternoon, faced with all these concerns and with the opposition triggered by
his project, the mayor, disappointed but not discouraged, is contemplating what he should do:
Abandon the project? Revise it and submit a new version of the ‘New Deal,’ as several members
of his municipal team were recommending? Or answer the call from federal Liberals to enter
politics at the federal level (an opportunity offered by the upcoming federal election)? Before
answering these questions, as well as several others he can think of, Glen Murray wants to
understand: understand what it was about the ‘New Deal’ that didn’t work, understand what he
could have done to ensure that the project was accepted by Winnipeggers, and, finally,
understand the lessons to be drawn from this experience.” 2

1 Translated excerpt from “La réorientation stratégique de Liberté vers le développement durable (A),” by Florence Leport
and Serge Poisson-de Haro (IJCSM, Vol. 7, No. 4, Dec. 2009)
2 Translated excerpt from “La Nouvelle Donne du maire Murray : les péripéties d’un changement radical à la Ville de Winnipeg,”
by Jacob Atangana-Abé (IJCSM, Vol. 8, No. 1, February 2010).

© HEC Montréal 16
 Guidelines for the Production of Case Studies

Exhibits

If the author chooses to include exhibits, they must be relevant and useful. Each exhibit must be
referenced in the main body of the text. Given the technological tools available today, with some
exceptions, there is often no need to present screen shots of web pages or entire articles in the
exhibits: the tendency now is to simply add a reference to these pages or articles.

2017-12-21

© HEC Montréal 17