Use Of Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research Articles

Tactical choices of diaspora movements: comparing Hongkonger, Thai, Burmese, and Ukrainian mobilizations in Taiwan

ABSTRACT Diaspora movements are campaigns launched by migrant minorities who maintain allegiance to their homelands. This article investigates the recent mobilization of the Hongkonger, Thai, Burmese, and Ukrainian diasporas in Taiwan to understand the factors behind their tactical choices. While the existing literature pays more attention to the protester-government interaction to understand how movement leaders decide on their movement strategy, we contend that certain pre-existing characteristics of the diaspora communities matter more. The use of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) leads us to conclude: (1) ethnic discrimination, migrants’ class position, and the host government’s support do not affect the tactical choices; (2) a sufficiently large community with available mobilizing networks makes it possible to recruit and collect resources entirely from ethnic compatriots (reach-in); (3) linkages to local civil society enable it to speak to a broader audience and activate local responses (reach-out).

Making Sense of Socio-Political Risks in International Business: A Configurational Approach to Embracing Complexity

As social and political contexts have become major sources of uncertainty for international business, we have witnessed renewed efforts to study the impact of socio-political risks on multinational enterprises. However, predominant methods in the field of international business are, for the most part, limited in their capacity to directly address the complexity intrinsic to socio-political risks. We propose overcoming this limitation by adopting a configurational approach that enables researchers to embrace the complexity of socio-political risks in international business. We explain the fundamental principles of a configurational approach and the typical stages for using its methodological tool, Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA). We then outline how scholars can use QCA to pursue future research avenues that identify the configurations of conditions that constitute socio-political risks or the effects of socio-political risks on diverse outcomes of interest. We also clarify how the international business field can benefit from the use of QCA in the study of socio-political risks by advancing knowledge of international business in emerging and informal markets, where data access is limited. These efforts aim to motivate international business and management scholars to broaden their empirical toolbox for the study of socio-political risks by engaging in configurational thinking and theorizing.

Study design and baseline to evaluate water service provision among peri-urban communities in Kasai Oriental, Democratic Republic of the Congo.

We present a study design and baseline results to establish the impact of interventions on peri-urban water access, security and quality in Kasai Oriental province of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In standard development practice, program performance is tracked via monitoring and evaluation frameworks of varying sophistication and rigor. Monitoring and evaluation, while usually occurring nearly concurrently with program delivery, may or may not measure parameters that can identify performance with respect to the project's overall goals. Impact evaluations, often using tightly controlled trial designs and conducted over years, challenge iterative program evolution. This study will pilot an implementation science impact evaluation approach in the areas immediately surrounding 14 water service providers, at each surveying 100 randomly-selected households and conducting water quality assessments at 25 randomly-selected households and five water points every three months. We present preliminary point-of-collection and point-of-use baseline data. This study is utilizing a variety of short- and medium-term monitoring and impact evaluation methods to provide feedback at multiple points during the intervention. Rapid feedback monitoring will assess the continuity of water services, point-of-consumption and point-of-collection microbial water quality, household water security, household measures of health status, ability and willingness to pay for water and sanitation service provision, and service performance monitoring. Long-term evaluation will focus on the use of qualitative comparative analysis whereby we will investigate the combination of factors that lead to improved water access, security and quality.

Approaches to Qualitative Comparative Analysis and good practices: A systematic review

AbstractThe Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) methodology has evolved remarkably in social science research. Simultaneously, the use of QCA too often lags behind methodological recommendations of good practice. Improper use is a serious obstacle for QCA to enrich the social science ‑methodology toolkit. We explore whether the coherence of analytic approaches can help us understand good practices in applied QCA by performing a systematic review of 86 QCA studies. Although adherence to technical GPs has improved over time, we find a high prevalence of incoherent, “hybrid” approaches. As the hybridity of a study increases, its adherence to good practices decreases. The case‐oriented, realist, exploratory QCA studies do not consistently follow recommendations of good practice. Instead, the only consistently good‐practice approach is case‐oriented, realist, but explicitly theory‐evaluating. We conclude that consistently aligning methodological choice with the underlying analytic approach and the use of theory can help foster good practices in applied QCA.

Configurational approaches to theory development in supply chain management: Leveraging underexplored opportunities

AbstractIn introducing the 2020 Emerging Discourse Incubator, Flynn et al. (2020, https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12227) urged supply chain scholars to leverage fresh approaches in order to develop supply chain‐specific theory, including approaches that are underutilized within the discipline. In response, we explain how more examination of configurations—meaningful sets of observations within a sample—can enhance theory development and, in particular, fuel the construction of supply chain‐specific theory. First, we describe the value of configurational theorizing while contrasting it with two more popular approaches: one that centers on linear relationships and one that spotlights the unique features of individual observations. Second, we explain the main configurational approaches available to scholars. Here, we pay special attention to qualitative comparative analysis (QCA)—an approach to configurational theorizing that is relatively new to organizational research. Third, we offer examples of how configurational theorizing via the use of QCA can be used to develop supply chain management theory. Although QCA is employed regularly in neighboring fields, QCA remains something of a conceptual curiosity within supply chain management research. This state of affairs represents an important opportunity because QCA's emphasis on causal complexity fits well with the fact that supply chain outcomes usually arise from an array of variables—often at different levels of analysis—and the interplay among them. Thus, better leveraging configurational theory development can facilitate the creation of novel conceptualizations and useful advice for practice.

Understanding perceptions of recovery from psychological distress in Sierra Leone through qualitative comparative analysis

Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) is a relatively new method that examines causal complexity. Its use in mental health research is nascent. In low-income and fragile settings, with weak mental health service provision, identifying pathways of recovery from psychological distress can inform the appropriate deployment of scarce community and public resources. This paper examines the use of QCA to identify predictors of recovery in Sierra Leone. Our study explored lay perceptions of the signs of recovery from psychological distress caused by such events as the loss of a family member, severe sickness, and loss of a relationship. The data drew upon 75 interviews with women and men, across four districts of Sierra Leone, who described the signs of recovery from psychological distress they have observed in one person known to them. The truth table generated through QCA software indicated two signs of recovery— work/study and healthy relations—to be the most prevalent across different combinations of predictive factors. Further analysis of the truth table and sub-set relations suggested that work/study and healthy relations frequently served as sufficient conditions for reported recovery from distress to occur. QCA provided a means to identify sufficient predictive factors for recovery from psychological distress to occur. The findings suggest that to enable recovery from psychological distress, support needs to be broad and bring together services that will enable individuals to improve their social and relational wellbeing. Responses to distress need to involve a wide range of community-based stakeholders who will help individuals to engage in constructive activity and strengthen relations with their family members, friends, and the broader community. QCA is potentially well-positioned to unpack complexity in mental health research.

The use of QCA in science, technology and innovation studies: a review of the literature and an empirical application to knowledge transfer

This article analyses the use of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) in social studies on science, technology and innovation. The goals are to address how and why the method is used, and to explore the advantages and shortcomings for this research area. A review of the literature and practical application are combined. Firstly, the article finds that the acceptance of QCA is unevenly distributed in the major research fields related to knowledge production. It is used mainly to study innovation in firms but is largely absent in science and technology studies. Second, an original study on university–industry links provides a strategic site that displays how research unfolds. Its findings demonstrate the combinations of factors that shape knowledge transfer and the configurational nature of the process. The article offers an account of challenges and directions for future research and discusses the possibilities of the method as a third way between qualitative and quantitative traditions in science, technology and innovation.

The use of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to address causality in complex systems: a systematic review of research on public health interventions

BackgroundQualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a method for identifying the configurations of conditions that lead to specific outcomes. Given its potential for providing evidence of causality in complex systems, QCA is increasingly used in evaluative research to examine the uptake or impacts of public health interventions. We map this emerging field, assessing the strengths and weaknesses of QCA approaches identified in published studies, and identify implications for future research and reporting.MethodsPubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were systematically searched for peer-reviewed studies published in English up to December 2019 that had used QCA methods to identify the conditions associated with the uptake and/or effectiveness of interventions for public health. Data relating to the interventions studied (settings/level of intervention/populations), methods (type of QCA, case level, source of data, other methods used) and reported strengths and weaknesses of QCA were extracted and synthesised narratively.ResultsThe search identified 1384 papers, of which 27 (describing 26 studies) met the inclusion criteria. Interventions evaluated ranged across: nutrition/obesity (n = 8); physical activity (n = 4); health inequalities (n = 3); mental health (n = 2); community engagement (n = 3); chronic condition management (n = 3); vaccine adoption or implementation (n = 2); programme implementation (n = 3); breastfeeding (n = 2), and general population health (n = 1). The majority of studies (n = 24) were of interventions solely or predominantly in high income countries. Key strengths reported were that QCA provides a method for addressing causal complexity; and that it provides a systematic approach for understanding the mechanisms at work in implementation across contexts. Weaknesses reported related to data availability limitations, especially on ineffective interventions. The majority of papers demonstrated good knowledge of cases, and justification of case selection, but other criteria of methodological quality were less comprehensively met.ConclusionQCA is a promising approach for addressing the role of context in complex interventions, and for identifying causal configurations of conditions that predict implementation and/or outcomes when there is sufficiently detailed understanding of a series of comparable cases. As the use of QCA in evaluative health research increases, there may be a need to develop advice for public health researchers and journals on minimum criteria for quality and reporting.

Sustainability-Oriented Innovation with Stakeholders: Achieving System Level Impacts

Given the centrality of innovation to addressing grand societal challenges, this paper uses a Europe wide data set to identify conditions for sustainability-oriented innovation (SOI). Such challenges cannot be resolved by firms alone but rather in collaboration with stakeholders within the innovation process. Using the focus of ‘doing good by doing new things with others’ we connect the often technical orientation of SOI research to a relational account of stakeholder collaboration in innovation. We operationalise different measures to distinguish innovation leading to incremental or system level impact, bringing the latter to an empirical level. The use of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) reveals a causal complexity behind SOI. Our findings identify concrete configurations of firm-stakeholder collaboration associated with incremental and system level impact. We demonstrate the influence of timing and stakeholder selection on the innovation outcome. In this way we contribute to understanding how and when collaborating with stakeholders can bolster the system level impacts of innovations and enlighten the future for organisations and institutions faced with grand societal challenges.

Unfolding the Strategic Choices Behind Technology Transfer Activities: A QCA Approach

The growing importance that knowledge and innovation are acquiring as the basis for economic development and growth has led universities to expand their traditional functions, spreading their commitment in the contribution to economic and social welfare through their so-called third mission. Certainly, universities have turned into one of the most important engines for regional development. However, these demands are not accompanied by a greater availability of resources. Universities are struggling to carry out their teaching and research activities simultaneously, alongside technology transfer efforts. In this study we argue that due to the scarcity of resources and because of different strategies with regard the three core missions (teaching, research and technology transfer), the assessment of universities’ performance should acknowledge this reality. Accordingly, we propose the use of qualitative comparative analysis to do so. More specifically we investigate the portfolio of technology transfer activities (including patents, spin-offs and R&D contracts) relaxing the traditional constraint that universities should conduct all types of technology transfer activities. Instead, our model allows universities to concentrate in the activity in which each university performs best. Data from the Spanish public higher education system is used. Two points of time are compared: 2008 and 2015.

Protocol for a systematic review of the use of qualitative comparative analysis for evaluative questions in public health research

BackgroundThere is an increasing recognition that health intervention research requires methods and approaches that can engage with the complexity of systems, interventions, and the relations between systems and interventions. One approach which shows promise to this end is qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), which examines casual complexity across a medium to large number of cases (between 10 and 60+), whilst also being able to generalise across those cases. Increasingly, QCA is being adopted in public health intervention research. However, there is a limited understanding of how it is being adopted. This systematic review will address this gap, examining how it is being used to understand complex causation; for what settings, populations and interventions; and with which datasets to describe cases.MethodsWe will include published and peer-reviewed studies of any public health intervention where the effects on population health, health equity, or intervention uptake are being evaluated. Electronic searches of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (incorporating Social Sciences Citation Index and Arts & Humanities Citation Index), Microsoft Academic, and Google Scholar will be performed. This will be supplemented with reference citation tracking and personal contact with experts to identify any additional published studies. Search results will be single screened, with machine learning used to check these results, acting as a ‘second screener’. Any disagreement will be resolved through discussion. Data will be extracted from full texts of eligible studies, which will be assessed against inclusion criteria, and synthesised narratively, using thematic synthesis methods.DiscussionThis systematic review will provide an important map of the increasing use of QCA in public health intervention literature. This review will identify the current scope of research in this area, as well as assessing claims about the utility of the method for addressing complex causation in public health research. We will identify implications for better reporting of QCA methods in public health research and for reporting of case studies such that they can be used in future QCA studies.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO, CRD42019131910

Qualitative comparative analysis: justifying a neo-configurational approach in management research

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically reflect and offer insights on how to justify the use of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) as a research method for understanding the complexity of organizational phenomena, by applying the principles of the neo-configurational approach. Design/methodology/approach We present and critically examine three arguments regarding the use of QCA for management research. First, they discuss the need to assume configurational theories to build and empirically test a causal model of interest. Second, we explain how the three principles of causal complexity are assumed during the process of conducting QCA-based studies. Third, we elaborate on the importance of case knowledge when selecting the data for the analysis and when interpreting the results. Findings We argue that it is important to reflect on these arguments to have an appropriate research design. In the true spirit of the configurational approach, we contend that the three arguments presented are necessary; however, each argument is insufficient to warrant a QCA research design. Originality/value This paper contributes to management research by offering key arguments on how to justify the use of QCA-based studies in future research endeavors.

The use of qualitative comparative analysis to identify pathways to successful and failed sanitation systems

Sanitation systems globally fail at high rates. Researchers and practitioners attribute the causes of both sanitation success and failure to numerous factors that include technical and non-technical issues. A comprehensive understanding of what leads to sanitation failure and how to achieve sanitation success is imperative to prioritize the use of limited resources. To determine which combinations of causal conditions led to successful and failed sanitation systems, we applied fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to 20 cases in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, India with small-scale sanitation systems. Two pathways led to successful sanitation systems, and four pathways led to failed sanitation systems. All successful systems required Sufficient O&M Funds, a Clear O&M Plan, and Technical Support in addition to either Addressed Sanitation Priorities and Community Participation in Planning or Behavior Change Education and Municipality Involved in Planning. All failed systems had Lack of Municipality in Planning, Unaddressed Sanitation Priorities, and No Technical Support. Most failed systems also had No Clear O&M Plan, Poor Construction Quality, Lack of Community Participation in Planning, and Insufficient O&M Funds. Two failed cases had unique pathways because Government Barriers permanently disrupted use and maintenance. Overall, implementing organizations who initiate sanitation projects in resource-limited communities should ensure that (1) communities have adequate technical and financial resources for maintenance; (2) community and municipality stakeholders are engaged in planning and know their maintenance responsibilities; and (3) appropriate technologies are selected that meet community needs and achieve community buy-in.

Improving the use of qualitative comparative analysis for inferring complex causation in development and planning research

AbstractEmpirical research methods provide the necessary means to extract relevant information from data. Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), one such method, is currently making first inroads into the development and planning (D&P) community. On the one hand, QCA is well suited for building empirically founded theories emphasizing causal complexity. On the other hand, however, current use of QCA in D&P research is marked by problematic applications of this method whose results misrepresent the empirical evidence marshaled to support them. Policy recommendations that stand on shaky grounds have been issued in consequence. By reanalyzing a recent empirical study on school sanitation maintenance in Belize, this method workshop article shows how the use of QCA can be improved, which should in turn lead to more solid, evidence-based policy recommendations for development interventions.

El <i>Qualitative Comparative Analysis</i> (QCA) como herramienta analítica. Dos aplicaciones para el análisis de entrevistas.

El objetivo del presente artículo es presentar una técnica que aborda de manera consistente y sistemática la etapa analítica de datos cualitativos: el llamado Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) o Análisis Comparativo Cualitativo. En la primera parte se presentan los conceptos básicos vinculados a las herramientas lógicas (álgebra booleana) que son el fundamento del QCA. En la segunda, se ejemplifica la aplicación del QCA a partir de la información producida en dos investigaciones: un estudio sobre los trabajadores de la cosecha de algodón en Chaco y una investigación sobre las empresas vitivinícolas en la provincia de Mendoza.

An overview of qualitative comparative analysis: A bibliometric analysis

This study is organized in two parts. We conduct a general analysis of the use of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), and a bibliometric study of the use of QCA to analyze the specificities of the research publications that apply this methodology. Our results show the differences in quantitative terms of the three variants of this methodology: fsQCA, csQCA, and mvQCA.

Embracing Causal Complexity

Causal complexity has long been recognized as a ubiquitous feature underlying organizational phenomena, yet current theories and methodologies in management are for the most part not well-suited to its direct study. The introduction of the Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) configurational approach has led to a reinvigoration of configurational theory that embraces causal complexity explicitly. We argue that the burgeoning research using QCA represents more than a novel methodology; it constitutes the emergence of a neo-configurational perspective to the study of management and organizations that enables a fine-grained conceptualization and empirical investigation of causal complexity through the logic of set theory. In this article, we identify four foundational elements that characterize this emerging neo-configurational perspective: (a) conceptualizing cases as set theoretic configurations, (b) calibrating cases’ memberships into sets, (c) viewing causality in terms of necessity and sufficiency relations between sets, and (d) conducting counterfactual analysis of unobserved configurations. We then present a comprehensive review of the use of QCA in management studies that aims to capture the evolution of the neo-configurational perspective among management scholars. We close with a discussion of a research agenda that can further this neo-configurational approach and thereby shift the attention of management research away from a focus on net effects and towards examining causal complexity.

Social innovation for bridging societal divides: Process or leader? A qualitative comparative analysis

This study builds on literature about inclusive growth, social innovation, and collaborative leadership, and uses case studies of alumni of the Asian Institute of Management's (AIM) Bridging Leadership program to build frameworks for understanding the role of social innovation (SI) in bridging societal divides (BSD), and the role of the bridging leader (BL) in implementing BSD initiatives. The study examines two process variables: Stakeholder engagement (SE) and formalization, and three leadership variables: Formal authority, formal influence, and personal experience, and their effect on BSD activities. This study combines a deep qualitative review of case studies with the use of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to develop configurations that result in positive impact of BSD activities. The study concludes that process variables appear the most in configurations that achieve positive outcomes. This result means that training and education on process tools can lead to successful BSD initiatives. Formal authority and formal influence both play roles in success configurations. The article also provides brief descriptions of case studies illustrating each of the three success configurations. These results have significance for policy makers, managers, educators, and researchers.

Using qualitative comparative analysis in a systematic review of a complex intervention.

BackgroundSystematic reviews evaluating complex interventions often encounter substantial clinical heterogeneity in intervention components and implementation features making synthesis challenging. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) is a non-probabilistic method that uses mathematical set theory to study complex phenomena; it has been proposed as a potential method to complement traditional evidence synthesis in reviews of complex interventions to identify key intervention components or implementation features that might explain effectiveness or ineffectiveness. The objective of this study was to describe our approach in detail and examine the suitability of using QCA within the context of a systematic review.MethodsWe used data from a completed systematic review of behavioral interventions to improve medication adherence to conduct two substantive analyses using QCA. The first analysis sought to identify combinations of nine behavior change techniques/components (BCTs) found among effective interventions, and the second analysis sought to identify combinations of five implementation features (e.g., agent, target, mode, time span, exposure) found among effective interventions. For each substantive analysis, we reframed the review’s research questions to be designed for use with QCA, calibrated sets (i.e., transformed raw data into data used in analysis), and identified the necessary and/or sufficient combinations of BCTs and implementation features found in effective interventions.ResultsOur application of QCA for each substantive analysis is described in detail. We extended the original review findings by identifying seven combinations of BCTs and four combinations of implementation features that were sufficient for improving adherence. We found reasonable alignment between several systematic review steps and processes used in QCA except that typical approaches to study abstraction for some intervention components and features did not support a robust calibration for QCA.ConclusionsQCA was suitable for use within a systematic review of medication adherence interventions and offered insights beyond the single dimension stratifications used in the original completed review. Future prospective use of QCA during a review is needed to determine the optimal way to efficiently integrate QCA into existing approaches to evidence synthesis of complex interventions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0256-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

On the Use of Qualitative Comparative Analysis in Management

Researchers now use Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) beyond its original purposes in political and sociological sciences and apply this method of analysis in the field of management. This article offers a comprehensive and critical review of all the uses of QCA in management studies up until February 2015. This study shows how QCA extends beyond an empirical technique and how this method offers a genuine formalization of qualitative analysis, which opens new ways of knowledge production in management scholarship. This also study provides important implications for business management research.