The Designer's Toolbox logo

Home - UX Portfolio - Tips on presenting your UX case study

Tips on presenting your UX case study

Imagine this. You’ve made it through the first job interview. You’re now asked for a second round interview to show your work. But how? And what do you need to keep in mind? Here’s how to present a UX case study during a job interview.

  • Updated on November 17, 2022

Tips on how to present a UX case study

This article will teach you how to present your UX case study during a job interview. If you follow along, you’ll increase your chances of getting invited to the next round. We’ll talk about the basics, such as attending the meeting on time, and more advanced tactics, like how you structure your presentation.

I’ve based the following tips on presenting my UX portfolio to multiple potential clients for years and the UX mentorships I’ve hosted for aspiring designers. In other words, these tips are based on real-world experience.

Table of Contents

How to present a ux case study.

The most important aspect of giving an excellent UX case study presentation is showing that you can solve a business challenge.

Even though your main goal is to be there for the user, you can’t forget that you’re hired by a business to help that business make money. If you only talk about users and forget to mention how you can help your potential employer grow a business, you’re likely to miss out.

Then there are also some basic job interview rules to consider. Let’s discuss those basics first.

Presentation basics

These basics are essential. People expect you to follow them. Because of that, doing so will not get you any bonus points. However, failing to follow the basics will leave a bad taste during your interview. Make sure you can check the following basics off of your list.

  • Arrive on time.
  • Stable internet connection (remote only).
  • Position yourself in the middle of your frame (remote only).
  • Make sure you’re able to focus without disturbance (remote only).
  • Make sure your camera and mic are working correctly (remote only).

Pick your case study

At some point during the interview, the interviewer will ask you to present your work. This means you can choose which of your case studies to pick. And that’s a good thing.

In my experience, there’s always a case study you prefer over your other case studies. Creating that particular UX case study has been easier, or the project has been more fun than your other projects.

So make sure you’re ready to pick one of your case studies on the spot if asked to. Pick the one you’re most comfortable with.

Start with a case study summary

Once you’re asked to present your UX portfolio, it makes sense to start explaining everything you’ve done. Try and stay away from doing that. 

You’ll lose the attention of your crowd and put yourself in a position to receive challenging questions you can’t answer. Instead, give a summary first. Here’s what to include.

  • The business challenge, what you were asked to do, and your role.
  • What your main deliverable was. 
  • The results of your project and deliverable.

Here’s an example of what your UX case study summary might look like.

An example of a UX case study summary

As a product designer at my local recruitment firm, I’ve worked on redesigning the sign-up flow for job candidates. As a result, the recruitment firm has seen more applicants successfully go through the sign-up flow.

This is a very short summary. And by doing so, you give those listening to your presentation the opportunity to ask questions. Because you keep a lot of information to yourself, chances are you get questions about that information. You can answer these questions with ease.

If you had presented every detail of your case study, you’re more likely to get questions you can’t answer.

Answering case study questions

After presenting your UX case study summary, it is time to answer questions. As I said, you leave room for questions on purpose to have more control over the type of questions you get.

My main advice here is to be honest when you don’t have an answer to one of the questions. I’ve seen many designers desperately try to answer every question they get. However, the people listening to your presentation will notice this.

Instead, be honest when you’re not sure. Let your audience know you’re willing to learn or return the question by asking what they think or what the company expects you to do.

That way, you show you know what you can improve and that you’re willing to have a good talk about it. That’s way more valuable than being someone that pretends to know everything.

Frequently asked questions

With the above structure, presenting your UX case study during a job interview should go much better. However, there are still some questions to be answered. I’ve collected several in the list below.

How long should a UX case study presentation be?

The length of your case study presentation depends on the structure of the interview. In almost all cases, that’s up to the hiring company. It is common for an interview to take between 30 and 60 minutes.

However, your UX case study presentation can be shorter than that. Those 30 or 60 minutes include the introduction, asking questions, and discussing the next steps as well. That leaves between 5 to 15 minutes for the actual case study presentation.

How many slides are in a UX case study presentation?

The number of slides in your UX case study can vary between 5 and 15. Less than that would mean that you don’t include the basics like the cover page, challenge, things you’ve done during the project, and your results.

However, when you go over 15 slides, you risk losing your audience’s attention. Be strict in the number of slides you include!

What should a UX presentation include?

Your presentation should include at least the main building blocks of your project. These include the business problem you’re solving, what the client has asked you to do, what you actually did, and the impact of your work.

Try making it very visual with mockups, photos of you working on the project, and a user testimonial from your tests. Before and after images also help you tell a better story.

Case studies are what make up most of your UX portfolio. Therefore, being able to present them is a crucial skill you need to have when you want to get hired in UX .

These crucial steps will increase your chances of making it to the next round.

  • Get the basics right. Make sure you’re on time, in a place where you can focus, and with a stable internet connection.
  • Start with a summary of your case study to leave room for questions you can answer.
  • Accept the fact that you can’t answer everything. It is better to acknowledge that than to try and desperately answer every question you get.

Do you have feedback on this article? Missing something? Or just a question? Reach out to me and I’ll get back to you!

Profile picture of author Nick Groeneveld, a senior UX designer and mentor for The Designer's Toolbox

About the author

Hi! I'm Nick Groeneveld , a senior designer from the Netherlands with experience in UX, visual design, and research. I'm a UX coach that supports other designers and have completed design projects in finance, tech, and the public sector.

Through The Designer's Toolbox, I'm an Educational Partner for Interaction Design Foundation.

☎️ Book a 1:1 mentor meeting with me or let's connect on LinkedIn , Twitter and Medium .

Join our community & learn more about this topic.

Participate in weekly Q&A’s, live portfolio reviews, and more when you join our community of designers. Join here! 👇

$36 billed annually

Join our Slack community

Weekly UX Q&A’s

UX Career Track

$72 billed annually

Everything in Community, plus...

Join two UX master classes per month

Access to all UX master class recordings

Private Slack channel for async career support

20% discount on 1:1 UX coaching

Lifetime access

One-time payment

Access to our community and everything it includes.

Not a subscription. Pay once, join forever.

UX Jobs Handbook

Our best seller 💪

Step-by-step guide to getting hired in UX

UX resources icon

Our resources 💡

Community, books, guides, mentorship, and more

Cartoon icons of UX newsletters flying

Join 1,400+ designers building a career in UX

Every week, you’ll get one actionable tip from the UX Career Track to help you get hired and build a career in UX.

We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe at any time.

The Designer's Toolbox

The Designer’s Toolbox helps you get hired in UX and UI Design. We’re your collection of design community, tips, tricks, and best practices.

About The Designer’s Toolbox

UX Equipment

UX Design Tools

Build your UX portfolio

Get a job in UX

For brands and companies

Work with us

The UX Jobs Handbook

UX Job Board

All resources

Š 2024 All rights Reserved by the Designer's Toolbox

Privacy policy

How to Conduct a High-Value Case Study Interview (And 4 Mistakes To Avoid)

How To Conduct A High-Value Case Study Interview (And 4 Mistakes To Avoid)

Let’s talk about case study interviews.

Case studies allow brands to demonstrate exactly how they can help resolve specific pain points, how customers are using their products or tools, and an exact example of what kind of results people can expect. 

This is important because plenty of businesses make big claims, trying to outshine their competition. There isn’t a marketing agency out there that won’t promise to get you more reach or a law firm that doesn’t like to appear confident in their ability to win cases.

Every brand will proclaim that they can best solve their customer’s needs, but those claims on their own rarely mean much. They want to know that you can live up to what you promise, and seeing case studies from existing clients can win them over.

To create high-value case studies that can help you attract and convert customers, it only makes sense that you’ll need to start with a killer interview.

In this post, we’re going to look at how to conduct a case study interview that will help you create high-value case studies to draw attention and quality leads to your business.

Why Interviewing Clients Directly for Case Studies Is So Important 

We’re all busy, so it can be tempting to put off case studies or relegate the case study interviews to a quick Google form that asks specific questions.

While you can create basic case studies off of this information, especially if you only want to showcase quick results, it won’t be nearly as impactful as case studies created off of more in-depth interviews.

These interviews can take place by email, phone, Zoom, or in person, but the idea is that there is plenty of room for open discussion. Actual interviews can help you go beyond basic information so that you can get to the story and the pain points of how your clients have been impacted. 

There’s also a great chance that they’ll share more during an open conversation that can be a crucial component to the case study that they may not have thought to share on a form because you may not have thought to ask. 

Strong case study interviews are an essential part of creating dynamic, engaging content that can actually convince your target audience that you’re the right business to purchase from.

How to Prepare for Case Study Interviews 

Conducting a rocking case study interview all comes down to great preparation, so let’s take a look at how to do exactly this. 

Think About Your Target Audience’s Pain Points 

Before you start formulating your case study interview questions, you want to think about what you want your case studies to convey. 

Case studies allow you to go beyond sharing simple results (which are powerful enough on their own and should still be an important part of the content), allowing you to dive into more nuance to address the pain points of potential leads fully. 

For example, a virtual phone line company may want to consider going beyond stressing their 99% service uptimes and touch on additional features they offer. Emphasizing that offer call scheduling to give business owners more of their time back on an automated basis, for example. 

This case study from AdEspresso is an excellent example of what to look at when considering your audience’s pain points. There’s a client who ran highly seasonal campaigns who didn’t want to leverage discounts to drive sales to keep it fair for pre-order customers. It discusses her specific challenges and pain points and addresses the overall solution instead of simply listing results. 

Case Study Interview: Adespresso

As pain points can be a crucial part of writing compelling case studies , break down your audience’s niches and different needs that they may have. You can ask your interviewee questions that can help you tap into the pain points for the case study. We’ll look at specific questions for how to tackle this in a moment.

Expect Interviewee Objections 

When you first reach out to a potential case study subject and start discussing the idea of featuring their brand, know that you may encounter objections from the subject themselves.

They may be alright with you using some part of their story, strategy, or results while still being concerned about protecting their own or their business’s privacy. 

As a content marketer, for example, I know exactly how many of my posts are performing across some of my client sites, how much they drive in revenue, how much traffic they’re getting, and what’s bringing them there. 

A client may be okay with me talking about working with them or sharing samples but might be less than thrilled about me divulging information about their specific site pattern trends, the custom-for-them strategy we used, or their revenue. For example, the case study from SEMRush below is extremel y specific; not all clients may be comfortable with this.

Case Study Interview: Semrush

Be prepared for this before you reach out, and consider what you can do to accommodate requests. These objections may arise before the case study interview, but they may pop up during as well.

Here are a few examples of common workarounds: 

  • Instead of saying that my post for Bob’s Blog helped the site go from $100 in revenue to $200, I can say that it doubled the revenue or doubled conversion rates (whatever is accurate).
  • Maybe I can share the general strategy I used for Bob’s blog without actually naming them and omitting key identifying details, like the keywords used. 
  • They may be alright with you sharing the detailed strategy and general results (2x conversion rate instead of 5.6% conversion rate) and the brand name , OR they may only be okay with sharing their story and results. 

Each client is different and comfortable with sharing different information. While it is typically most beneficial to be able to name the client’s brand name, if this isn’t an option consider settling for a more specific industry tag like “a client in the women’s sustainable fashion industry” instead.

Watch what our customers say

“Life before Breadcrumbs was, I think you could call it the Dark Ages. We started with an SLA of two days to a week sometimes. And we’re getting within the 10 to 5-minute mark. So that’s so exciting for us.”

Photo

Christie Horsman, VP of Marketing, Thinkific

design case study interview

Ready Your Case Study Interview Questions 

After you’ve thought about potential objections and any key notes you really want to focus on with your case study, you can put together your case study interview questions.

We’ll discuss specific case study interview questions and templates a bit later on, but prepare these in advance. Ideally, research each individual case study subject in advance and try to ask questions that will be relevant to them. 

This is important- write your questions down, even if you’ll be having a phone call. Organize them with the natural progression you expect the call or conversation to take so you don’t lose your train of thought, and check back before the call is over to make sure you’ve asked everything you need to.

At the end of the interview, ask if there’s anything else they’d like to share. Don’t forget this: some of the best parts of case studies can surprise the interviewer at the time!

Look for a Story 

When you’re putting together your questions and interviewing the case study subject, keep your eyes open for a “story.” 

Stories don’t have to be long and complex; they should center your brand whenever possible. 

If your automation software helps a business owner save time, that’s an appealing benefit. But if they’re happy to share that it meant that they could put more time into expanding their business or that they could be at home more with their newborn child, that takes a simple fact and makes it more emotionally compelling. 

You can build an entire case study around a great story, and you can see exactly how effective this is with the headline of this case study from Freshbooks , reading “How Freshbooks Helped Marc Keep His New Year’s Resolution.

Case Study Interview: Freshbooks

4 Case Study Interview Mistakes to Avoid

When you’re preparing for and conducting case study interviews, there are a few common mistakes that you’ll want to avoid. These can cause you to miss out on potential interviews or lessen the impact of the interviews themselves.

Make sure to avoid the following mistakes:

  • Using a single form that’s emailed to case study subjects. Whenever possible, back-and-forth conversations can typically yield much more dynamic case studies. While some clients may firmly want to stick to email, try to opt for zoom calls or at least several emails if you can. 
  • Not being clear on what information you can use in the case study. Make sure they know that you’ll publish it on your site, and get their permission in writing (email is fine!) to feature them and their results. It’s considered a good practice to let the client review the case study before you publish it if they’re concerned. 
  • Trying to shoehorn a client into a predetermined story. I once worked with another content writer on a case study project, and during the interview, it was so clear they were trying to fit a subject’s experience into this perfect story the writer had concocted. This typically doesn’t work, however, and it can prevent you from finding the great and unique parts of each individual’s story and success. Go in with an open mind if you can. 
  • Skipping small talk. If you go in all-business, the case study subject may be more likely to answer only what’s asked. When you start on the basis of enjoying the conversation, however, they’ll share more, and that can be where the magic happens.

The Ultimate Performance Marketing Guide [Plus 4 Must-Have Tools]

The Ultimate Performance Marketing Guide [plus 4 Must-Have Tools]

As more consumers turn to the Internet for nearly everything, there’s a strong chance that…

8 Drawbacks Of Ai In B2B Marketing And How To Overcome Them

8 Drawbacks of AI in B2B Marketing and How to Overcome Them

Artificial intelligence is a hot topic, with people discovering the technology’s increasing benefits, efficiencies, and…

Ai And Abm: The Perfect Pair For Hyper-Personalized B2B Marketing

AI and ABM: The Perfect Pair for Hyper-Personalized B2B Marketing

If you operate in the B2B sector, there are really only two ways to do…

Case Study Interview Examples: What This May Look Like 

Need a case study interview template with plenty of questions to draw inspiration from? What you ask will vary depending on your industry, your client, and the type of case study you want to create, but there are some set questions you should ask across the board.

It’s good to break these down into different sections while asking open-ended questions so that there’s plenty of room for the subject to share more. 

Start by asking about the brand with questions like the following:

  • “Can you tell me about your brand and what you do?”
  • “Is there anything you’d like us to make sure our readers know about your brand?”

Then move on to asking about how they use the product and their challenges. Some case study interview questions for this may include:

  • “Why did you decide to use our brand/product/service? What feature made you choose us?”
  • “What pain points and challenges did you have before coming to us?”
  • “Have you tried other solutions before? If so, why did you decide to come to us?”

Next, focus on process and results:

  • “Can you tell us how you’ve used our product/service and how it’s helped your business?”
  • “What results did you get? Did it speed up your team/improve efficiency/drive more results/improve health/ insert use case here?”
  • How long were you able to maintain these results, and how did the results help you?

Final Thoughts 

A case study interview can seem like a daunting task, but with a little bit of research ahead of time, it can be a smooth process that can yield exceptional information for outstanding case studies. Remember that case studies can only be as strong as the information you have, so the importance of a great interview can’t be overstated.

For best results, take a look at a few case studies online that you liked as a customer, and think about what you’d need to ask in order to get that information. That can help you cover your bases and ensure that you’re asking everything you need to.

Interested in identifying and converting potential high-value leads? Breadcrumbs can help. Start for free today!

2 thoughts on “How to Conduct a High-Value Case Study Interview (And 4 Mistakes To Avoid)”

Very insightful tips on how to make case study interviews. Case studies can be crucial when it comes to testimonials of your product’s success and it can be tricky to ask the right questions – and avoid mistakes!

I’ve been researching about this topic for a while – thanks for the detailed plan you set out in this article about how to conduct case study interviews. Not only mistakes to avoid but also a communications plan to explain the benefits to clients giving interviews for case studies.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Table of Contents

The most common product manager case study question types.

  • December 30, 2020

Richard Chen

design case study interview

Congratulations on getting a Product Manager interview and making it to the case study round. Getting this far along the process is a real accomplishment, although it’s nowhere near the finish line. You have got to dominate the case study round first! To ace your Product Manager case study questions, first, you have to know what to expect. Given the plethora of companies and resources online, it might be tough to navigate your way to the right types of questions to solve when prepping for your next case study interview.

After mentoring more than a thousand members and helping them land the Product Manager job of their dreams, we have noticed a few trending patterns in the case studies they were given. While every company has its style when it comes to interviewing, there are certain types of questions that we continuously see appear in case study interviews.

In this article, we categorize these questions by what they ask you to do and how you should approach them. Here are the four common types of Product Manager case study questions that you should expect in your case study interview, ordered from the most common to least common:

  • Product Design Questions
  • Product Strategy Questions

Estimation and Analysis Questions

Scheduling/operational questions, product design case study questions.

If there is one thing we know about Product Manager case study interviews, it’s that you’ll get a product design question, regardless of where you interview. This should be no surprise to you as the Product Manager’s primary duty is to develop unique products that address the needs and desires of their target market.

Some companies will ask you to whiteboard your response within minutes while others will give you a week to turn your ideas into professional deliverables. Regardless, you’ll face product design questions.

Interviewers could ask these questions in many different ways. Here are eight common kinds of product design questions you should be expecting:

  • Design a product to help users find doctors on Facebook. ( Facebook )
  • How would you improve Google Maps? ( Google )
  • You’re a part of the Google Search webspam team: How would you detect duplicate websites? (Google)
  • Name any product you love and any product you despise and explain your reasoning for both cases. ( Amazon )
  • We aim to generate 100K monthly recurring customers with our product XYZ. What product or customer offerings would you create to help the team reach their goal? (Walmart)
  • You work for a mobile photo-sharing app that sees many users posting photos at shops and restaurants. The leadership team would like to figure out a way to monetize this organic relationship. What would you build? (Venmo)
  • You’re the Product Manager of a team that focuses on financial products for our drivers. You’re tasked with designing a financial product (or suite of products) that addresses our drivers’ needs in Brazil. ( Uber )
  • Go to our website and sign up as a Hiring Manager. Identify three places where the customer experience could be better. (Upwork)

Designing Everyday Products

Believe it or not, product management is not limited to complex software products. Every object you’ve encountered went through some sort of product management and design process!

So, in your case study interview, don’t be surprised if you encounter a couple of questions like these:

  • How would you redesign your shower?
  • How would you design an elevator for a 100-floor building?
  • How would you design sunglasses for babies?

Thinking about the problems faced by users is the key to answering these questions .

How to Answer Product Design Case Study Questions

Designing a new product out of the blue with a limited time might sound intimidating, but it’s not impossible.

Start by questioning the product that you were just asked about. Ask your interviewer for more constraints and understand what kinds of assumptions you should make before jumping into prototyping. Many candidates who receive take-home assignments think it’s impossible to ask your interviewer questions, but this is actually the most important first step to take in approaching your case study . Before you begin forming your own answers, you need to get as many details from them as you can.

Once you clarified the assumptions, think about the kinds of users this product would be serving. What are their needs? What are they actively looking for? Are there any existing products that satisfy these needs? The critical skill to demonstrate while addressing product design case study questions is customer empathy. You have to understand what the customer wants and design your product or feature accordingly.

After you define your target persona, think about all the features and metrics to measure the success of these features. Keep in mind that whatever you come up with is open for improvement. You want to show your interviewer that you can think beyond the MVP.

As you can see from the broad spectrum of questions above, you might be asked to design a product from scratch or to improve an existing product. Some questions will explicitly tell you to focus on a specific OKR, while others will leave everything ambiguous to challenge you to think more.  For some extra insight and examples, watch our case study instructor Roman Kolosovskiy solving a popular Facebook product design question:

Product Strategy Case Study Questions

Product strategy questions started trending recently as many companies seek intuitive Product Managers who can take ownership beyond the scope of the product they were hired to work on.

Unlike product design questions, strategy questions require you to think about the bigger picture. You’ll either be asked to find ways to make a product (and hence define success for the product) or to complete the overall organization more successfully.

Here are five of the most frequently asked product strategy questions to prep for:

  • If you were Google’s CEO, would you be concerned about Microsoft? (Google)
  • How would you improve product/feature X (where X is something that the company is currently working on or selling)?
  • How would you improve Google Maps? (Google)
  • How would you set goals and measure success for Facebook notifications? (Facebook)
  • How would you monetize Facebook messenger? (Facebook)
  • How would you determine the right price and method to promote product XYZ, and why? (Amazon)
  • Imagine you’re a PM that works with big data. Now what? (Microsoft)

How to Solve Product Strategy Case Study Questions

Remember: no product is created in a single iteration. Even the most perfect product has room for improvement. To solve these questions, you need to be well informed about the company and its products/services. Here are some of the main points you should be addressing with your response to strategy questions:

  • How does a particular product contribute to the company’s overall business?
  • What businesses, markets, or products should the company focus on to reach its targets?
  • What metrics should the company focus on to be successful?

Consider the company’s business model, competitors, and the recent developments in that industry. The essential skill you need to demonstrate here is analytical thinking. You should identify the key OKRs to define success for your product and organization. These questions also test your prioritization skills.

Note that these questions will most likely appear during the interview itself as it’s quite challenging to prepare deliverables for them. Like product design questions, they are very ambiguous. The only way to solve them entirely is by narrowing them down first with questions.

Many companies ask estimation questions during the case study round . If you are wondering how these questions assess your product management skills, you can consider them a method for the interviewers to understand how comfortable you are making decisions with limited data.

Long story short, they want to see how you use data to derive the KPIs you need for your product. Here are seven examples of estimation questions you might face:

  • How many queries per second does Gmail get? (Google)
  • As the Product Manager for Google Glass ‘Enterprise Edition’, which metrics would you track? How do you know if the product is successful? (Google)
  • How much revenue does YouTube make per day? (Google)
  • How would you go about estimating the number of gas stations in the USA? (Microsoft)
  • How would you track user engagement in an app, and what KPIs would you use to improve it? (Microsoft)
  • How would you measure the success of the Netflix recommendation engine? (Netflix)
  • Ride cancellations shot up 4.5% week-over-week (WoW). How would you investigate what’s going on? (Uber)

Most of these questions will require you to calculate how many users would use a product that the company is currently providing or thinking of producing, how much revenue a product would bring to the company, what the market acquisition percentage would be, etc.

These questions are mostly asked during the interview. To solve them without internet access is only possible by learning the fundamental values of the company beforehand. This includes the revenue it makes or the approximate number of users it has. You should also be able to calculate their critical KPIs.

Operational questions are scarce, but we have seen more companies lately relying on them to assess the candidates’ ability to turn ideas into deliverable tasks.

A significant aspect of product management is stakeholder management, and these questions challenge you to distribute work items to the related stakeholder or team member. You are also asked to come up with a realistic delivery schedule. Your knowledge of Agile principles — especially for software products — is also essential.

If you need to review agile principles, check out this video:

Note that for most operational case study questions, the interviewer will require you to write a detailed delivery schedule and write user stories and tasks.

Here are two examples of case study questions to get you familiar with the task:

  • Write the Jira ticket(s) for engineering for the idea you want to execute. (Upwork)
  • Outline a brief (1-2 page) launch plan that would cover the activities and tasks needed to launch the feature successfully. Be sure to touch on both internal and external stakeholders, and include potential launch goals. (Stitch Data)

Need More Case Study Advice?

Or if you need a hand with the job-hunting process as a whole, let us help you. We’re scheduling free 20-minute career coaching sessions with our in-house team. Give us a call and learn how Product Gym can help you ace every round of the Product Manager interview.

design case study interview

The Only Leading Metric to Measure Product-Market Fit and How to Use It

microsoft new grad pm interview prep and experience

Microsoft New Grad PM Interview Preparation and Experience: Spring 2022

types of product managers feature image

Types of Product Managers: Which Specialization Will Ignite Your Career?

Thing I Wish More Candidates Asked in Product Management Interviews

The One Thing I Wish More Candidates Asked in Their Product Management Interviews

1412 Broadway, New York City, NY, 10018 (800) 978-2719

Notice:  We do not currently accept members with Utah residency.

Tuesday Class Time*: 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM Saturday Class Time*: 9:30 AM to 3:30 PM

Š 2023 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Terms of Service     Privacy Policy

  • Reviews / Why join our community?
  • For companies
  • Frequently asked questions

design case study interview

How to Write Great Case Studies for Your UX Design Portfolio

Well, the answer is really simple: write your UX case studies like stories. You see, when you present your case study as a story, you’ll find it far easier to give it a satisfying structure and captivate your reader. What’s more, you’ll make it easy for recruiters to imagine what it’s like to work with you, as they get to understand how you work. This makes your case study powerful and increases your chances of getting your first interview. Let’s take a closer look at what makes story-based case studies so impactful.

Since your case studies first and foremost serve to help you get an interview in your job application, they should answer the following questions (grouped into three categories, based on you as a person, your skill set and the way you do things):

Who are you? What drives you and what’s your background?

What UX skills do you possess?

How do you approach and solve a problem? How do you work with others?

As it turns out, when you tell a narrative through your case studies, you answer these questions effectively. Here are the 3 main reasons why you should write your UX case studies like stories and how this helps you stand out from other applicants.

Because Stories Allow Recruiters to Imagine What it’s Like to Work with You

“Narrative imagining—story—is the fundamental instrument of thought. Rational capacities depend upon it. It is our chief means of looking into the future, of predicting, of planning, and of explaining.” —Mark Turner, cognitive scientist and author

When a recruiter reads your case study, they want to find out if you’ll be a great addition to their team. They want to know not only if you have the right skills and attitude, but also whether they’d enjoy working with you.

When you tell a story, you make it intuitive for a recruiter to imagine what it’s like to work with you . That’s because we use stories to learn and imagine all the time—in fact, people have since the dawn of human history. Therefore, recruiters will find it easier to look into the future and predict if they’d like to work with you when they read a story-based case study. They’ll find it easier to understand who you are and how you solve a problem.

design case study interview

Since the dawn of human history, we have used stories to imagine and learn about our world. Help recruiters understand you by telling a story about your design process .

Š Mike Erskine, Fair Use

This sentiment is echoed by Sarah Bellrichard, Senior Vice President of Wholesale Internet Solutions & UX at the American bank Wells Fargo. She shared her tip on case studies and interviews:

“My tip would be, tell stories. When designers present a flat portfolio it doesn’t tell me about how they approach the work they do and how they deal with the ebbs and flows of design. Tell me how you navigate from start to end of a project.” —Sarah Bellrichard, SVP of Wholesale Internet Solutions & UX, Wells Fargo

Because Stories Give Your Case Studies Structure

“Sometimes reality is too complex. Stories give it form.” —Jean Luc Godard, French-Swiss film director

If you’ve worked on a design project before, then you’re painfully aware of just how messy life can be. Deadlines change, project goals shift, and new findings can fundamentally alter design specifications.

Stories will give your past experiences form and make your case studies better organized . You can re-arrange your experience into a meaningful sequence of events—i.e., progress—towards your results. Otherwise, your case study will likely seem chaotic.

The arc of a story—introduction, middle, conclusion—is the perfect order to tell your messy progress towards a project’s final results. Let’s illustrate:

In the introduction :

You set up the context of your project, for instance through a design brief.

You introduce your team’s main goals and some of the main obstacles you faced

In a classic story, this is where we meet the heroes and learn about the venture/goal they’re reaching for and why they’re not satisfied with their current lives.

In the middle :

You illustrate your approach to solving the problem.

You bring your reader through your journey of how you used industry standard practices to tackle the problem. It’s important that you describe what you did and what your team members did, so the recruiter knows what skills and knowledge you possess.

In a classic story, this is where we follow our heroes struggling to conquer the beasts, villains and problems as they strive to reach their goals.

Finally, in the conclusion :

You showcase the final product and the results you and your team achieved.

You reflect upon what you’ve learnt and recount any follow-up tweaks you’ve made to the product.

In a classic story, this is where the heroes reach their goals―they experience personal growth , reap the rewards of their hard work and live happily ever after.

See how nicely it all fits into a story arc?

design case study interview

When you arrange your case study in a story arc, your journey becomes more ordered and meaningful.

Š Teo Yu Siang and the Interaction Design Foundation, CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

There’s more! You’ll also find it easier to write your case study when you arrange it like a story. You see, the introduction-middle-conclusion structure of a story forms a skeleton for you to fill in the “meat” of your journey. On top of that, recruiters who read your case study will also find the familiar arc of a story satisfying. Talk about a win-win situation!

Because Stories Captivate

“Tell me the facts and I’ll learn. Tell me the truth and I’ll believe. But tell me a story and it will live in my heart forever.” —Native American proverb

Okay, your case study will most likely not live in your recruiter’s heart forever, but your story-based case study will definitely stand out from other purely fact-based case studies, as your story will engage and captivate your recruiter. You see, a narrative is more engaging and provides a better reading experience than a dry, factual account ever could. It naturally makes the reader feel involved in the story and weaves a common thread throughout the case study.

UX recruiters are incredibly busy. They’ll typically spend only 5 minutes scanning your case studies because they have so many applicants to process. Given that, you have a much better chance if you can capture your reader’s attention for the whole 5 minutes.

And there’s no better way to captivate someone than through a story.

Let’s demonstrate that in an ultra-brief case study―yours should be more detailed and in-depth. Below, you’ll find the same journey told in two ways: first in a factual manner, then in a narrative fashion. See which version you find more engaging.

Factual : User interviews were conducted with 12 people to evaluate the effectiveness of the prototype. The main finding was that the assumption that users shopped based on their weekly nutritional needs was invalid. This finding was used to create a new iteration of the product, which was tested and found to be 50% more successful than the previous version.

Narrative : We conducted interviews with 12 people to evaluate if our prototype was effective. Our finding threw a giant spanner in the works. We realized our assumption—that users shopped based on their weekly nutritional needs—was dead wrong. Undefeated, we scrambled to create a new iteration, and ran another round of tests. This time, it worked—the success rate shot up by a whopping 50%!

You probably find the narrative version way more interesting—and so will your recruiters.

Notice in the factual version how flat and lifeless the account is? Sure, the figures are there, but it looks as if you’re reporting on what someone else did. This tells a recruiter that you’re distant and non-engaged—that you didn’t take ownership in what you’re talking about.

So, embrace the liberating and captivating format of a story. Go ahead and describe how your finding proved you dead wrong and how you scrambled upon meeting a temporary setback.

Best practice:

Convey your emotions and write in an active, engaging tone of voice .

Include the team’s frustrations, problems you faced and new insights you learnt.

Include people: write “we”, “I” and “our team”.

This way, you’ll give your case studies flavor . Furthermore, you’ll reveal who you are and how you work―and your recruiters will come back for more.

design case study interview

Stories naturally captivate us—use that power to captivate your recruiters, too.

Š Prasanna Kumar, Fair Use

Turn Your Case Studies into Stories

Of course, we’re not saying that you should write a novel to explain what happened in your project. Your case studies should still be short and sweet, but they also should be punchy and engaging.

In fact, when we sat down with Stephen Gay, Design Lead at Google’s AdWords, to ask him about the importance of a portfolio, he explained that he sees UX case studies as stories about the applicants.

  • Transcript loading...

To a recruiter like Stephen Gay, case studies are stories that tell him about the applicants. Author / copyright holder: The Interaction Design Foundation. Copyright terms and license: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

As Stephen astutely pointed out, we UX designers regularly use the power of stories in our work. So, use this same storytelling approach in your case studies, too!

The Take Away

The best way to write a case study is to tell it like a story. This way, your case studies become a vessel through which recruiters can imagine a future working with you, since they get to experience and understand exactly how you solve a design problem. Your recruiters will also enjoy the familiarity and structure of a story arc, and they’ll find the reading experience much more engaging. So, go ahead—inject humanity, color and passion into your case studies. Be a storyteller.

References and Where to Learn More

You can find Sarah Bellrichard’s tip on case studies in this article by Justinmind, which gathers tips and insights on how to do well in interviews.

Hero image: Š Rawpixel, Fair Use.

Mobile UX Design: The Beginner's Guide

design case study interview

Get Weekly Design Insights

What you should read next, the tipping point in ux design.

design case study interview

Empathy Map – Why and How to Use It

design case study interview

  • 1.2k shares
  • 2 weeks ago

Scamper: How to Use the Best Ideation Methods

design case study interview

  • 4 weeks ago

Top 5 Customer Journey Mapping Tools (+ Templates)

design case study interview

Native, Web or Hybrid App: Which One is Better?

design case study interview

User Story Mapping in Design

design case study interview

Before the Design Process Starts: It’s Time to Get Out Of the Building

Ux tools matter less than you think.

design case study interview

10 Free-to-Use Wireframing Tools [Updated for 2024]

design case study interview

Card Sorting: The Ultimate Guide (in 2024)

design case study interview

Open Access - Link to us!

We believe in Open Access and the  democratization of knowledge . Unfortunately, world class educational materials such as this page are normally hidden behind paywalls or in expensive textbooks.

If you want this to change , cite this article , link to us, or join us to help us democratize design knowledge !

Cite according to academic standards

Simply copy and paste the text below into your bibliographic reference list, onto your blog, or anywhere else. You can also just hyperlink to this article.

New to UX Design? We’re giving you a free ebook!

The Basics of User Experience Design

Download our free ebook The Basics of User Experience Design to learn about core concepts of UX design.

In 9 chapters, we’ll cover: conducting user interviews, design thinking, interaction design, mobile UX design, usability, UX research, and many more!

New to UX Design? We’re Giving You a Free ebook!

  • Case Interview: A comprehensive guide
  • Pyramid Principle
  • Hypothesis driven structure
  • Fit Interview
  • Consulting math
  • The key to landing your consulting job
  • What is a case interview?
  • What do I need to learn to solve cases?
  • How do I practice for case interviews?
  • Fit interviews
  • Interview day - what to expect, with tips
  • How we can help

1. The key to landing your consulting job.

Case interviews - where you are asked to solve a business case study under scrutiny - are the core of the selection process right across McKinsey, Bain and BCG (the “MBB” firms). This interview format is also used pretty much universally across other high-end consultancies; including LEK, Kearney, Oliver Wyman and the consulting wings of the “Big Four”.

If you want to land a job at any of these firms, you will have to ace multiple case interviews.

It is increasingly likely that you will also have to solve online cases given by chatbots etc. You might need to pass these before making it to interview or be asked to sit them alongside first round interviews.

Importantly, case studies aren’t something you can just wing . Firms explicitly expect you to have thoroughly prepared and many of your competitors on interview day will have been prepping for months.

Don’t worry though - MCC is here to help!

This article will take you through a full overview of everything you’ll need to know to do well, linking to more detailed articles and resources at each stage to let you really drill down into the details.

As well as traditional case interviews, we’ll also attend to the new formats in which cases are being delivered and otherwise make sure you’re up to speed with recent trends in this overall part of consulting recruitment.

Before we can figure out how to prepare for a case interview, though, we will first have to properly understand in detail what exactly you are up against. What format does a standard consulting case interview take? What is expected of you? How will you be assessed?

Let's dive right in and find out!

Professional help

Before going further, if this sounds like a lot to get your head around on your own, don't worry - help is available!

Our Case Academy course gives you everything you need to know to crack cases like a pro:

Case Academy Course

To put what you learn into practice (and secure some savings in the process) you can add mock interview coaching sessions with expereinced MBB consultants:

Coaching options

And, if you just want an experienced consultant to take charge of the whole selection process for you, you can check out our comprehensive mentoring programmes:

Explore mentoring

Now, back to the article!

2. What is a case interview?

Before we can hope to tackle a case interview, we have to understand what one is.

In short, a case interview simulates real consulting work by having you solve a business case study in conversation with your interviewer.

This case study will be a business problem where you have to advise a client - that is, an imaginary business or similar organisation in need of guidance.

You must help this client solve a problem and/or make a decision. This requires you to analyse the information you are given about that client organisation and figure out a final recommendation for what they should do next.

Business problems in general obviously vary in difficulty. Some are quite straightforward and can be addressed with fairly standard solutions. However, consulting firms exist precisely to solve the tough issues that businesses have failed to deal with internally - and so consultants will typically work on complex, idiosyncratic problems requiring novel solutions.

Some examples of case study questions might be:

  • How much would you pay for a banking licence in Ghana?
  • Estimate the potential value of the electric vehicle market in Germany
  • How much gas storage capacity should a UK domestic energy supplier build?

Consulting firms need the brightest minds they can find to put to work on these important, difficult projects. You can expect the case studies you have to solve in interview, then, to echo the unique, complicated problems consultancies deal with every day. As we’ll explain here, this means that you need to be ready to think outside the box to figure out genuinely novel solutions.

2.1. What skills do case interviews assess?

Reliably impressing your interviewers means knowing what they are looking for. This means understanding the skills you are being assessed against in some detail.

Overall, it’s important always to remember that, with case studies, there are no strict right or wrong answers. What really matters is how you think problems through, how confident you are with your conclusions and how quick you are with the back of the envelope arithmetic.

The objective of this kind of interview isn’t to get to one particular solution, but to assess your skillset. This is even true of modern online cases, where sophisticated AI algorithms score how you work as well as the solutions you generate.

If you visit McKinsey , Bain and BCG web pages on case interviews, you will find that the three firms look for very similar traits, and the same will be true of other top consultancies.

Broadly speaking, your interviewer will be evaluating you across five key areas:

2.1.1.One: Probing mind

Showing intellectual curiosity by asking relevant and insightful questions that demonstrate critical thinking and a proactive nature. For instance, if we are told that revenues for a leading supermarket chain have been declining over the last ten years, a successful candidate would ask:

“ We know revenues have declined. This could be due to price or volume. Do we know how they changed over the same period? ”

This is as opposed to a laundry list of questions like:

  • Did customers change their preferences?
  • Which segment has shown the decline in volume?
  • Is there a price war in the industry?

2.1.2. Two: Structure

Structure in this context means structuring a problem. This, in turn, means creating a framework - that is, a series of clear, sequential steps in order to get to a solution.

As with the case interview in general, the focus with case study structures isn’t on reaching a solution, but on how you get there.

This is the trickiest part of the case interview and the single most common reason candidates fail.

We discuss how to properly structure a case in more detail in section three. In terms of what your interviewer is looking for at high level, though, key pieces of your structure should be:

  • Proper understanding of the objective of the case - Ask yourself: "What is the single crucial piece of advice that the client absolutely needs?"
  • Identification of the drivers - Ask yourself: "What are the key forces that play a role in defining the outcome?"

Our Problem Driven Structure method, discussed in section three, bakes this approach in at a fundamental level. This is as opposed to the framework-based approach you will find in older case-solving

Focus on going through memorised sequences of steps too-often means failing to develop a full understanding of the case and the real key drivers.

At this link, we run through a case to illustrate the difference between a standard framework-based approach and our Problem Driven Structure method.

2.1.3. Three: Problem Solving

You’ll be tested on your ability to identify problems and drivers, isolate causes and effects, demonstrate creativity and prioritise issues. In particular, the interviewer will look for the following skills:

  • Prioritisation - Can you distinguish relevant and irrelevant facts?
  • Connecting the dots - Can you connect new facts and evidence to the big picture?
  • Establishing conclusions - Can you establish correct conclusions without rushing to inferences not supported by evidence?

2.1.4. Four: Numerical Agility

In case interviews, you are expected to be quick and confident with both precise and approximated numbers. This translates to:

  • Performing simple calculations quickly - Essential to solve cases quickly and impress clients with quick estimates and preliminary conclusions.
  • Analysing data - Extract data from graphs and charts, elaborate and draw insightful conclusions.
  • Solving business problems - Translate a real world case to a mathematical problem and solve it.

Our article on consulting math is a great resource here, though the extensive math content in our MCC Academy is the best and most comprehensive material available.

2.1.5. Five: Communication

Real consulting work isn’t just about the raw analysis to come up with a recommendation - this then needs to be sold to the client as the right course of action.

Similarly, in a case interview, you must be able to turn your answer into a compelling recommendation. This is just as essential to impressing your interviewer as your structure and analysis.

Consultants already comment on how difficult it is to find candidates with the right communication skills. Add to this the current direction of travel, where AI will be able to automate more and more of the routine analytic side of consulting, and communication becomes a bigger and bigger part of what consultants are being paid for.

So, how do you make sure that your recommendations are relevant, smart, and engaging? The answer is to master what is known as CEO-level communication .

This art of speaking like a CEO can be quite challenging, as it often involves presenting information in effectively the opposite way to how you might normally.

To get it right, there are three key areas to focus on in your communications:

  • Top down : A CEO wants to hear the key message first. They will only ask for more details if they think that will actually be useful. Always consider what is absolutely critical for the CEO to know, and start with that. You can read more in our article on the Pyramid Principle .
  • Concise : This is not the time for "boiling the ocean" or listing an endless number possible solutions. CEOs, and thus consultants, want a structured, quick and concise recommendation for their business problem, that they can implement immediately.
  • Fact-based : Consultants share CEOs' hatred of opinions based on gut feel rather than facts. They want recommendations based on facts to make sure they are actually in control. Always go on to back up your conclusions with the relevant facts.

For more detail on all this, check out our full article on delivering recommendations .

Prep the right way

2.2. where are case interviews in the consulting selection process.

Not everyone who applies to a consulting firm will have a case interview - far from it!

In fact, case interviews are pretty expensive and inconvenient for firms to host, requiring them to take consultants off active projects and even fly them back to the office from location for in-person interviews. Ideally, firms want to cut costs and save time by narrowing down the candidate pool as much as possible before any live interviews.

As such, there are some hoops to jump through before you make it to interview rounds.

Firms will typically eliminate as much as 80% of the applicant pool before interviews start. For most firms, 50%+ of applicants might be cut based on resumes, before a similar cut is made on those remaining based on aptitude tests. McKinsey currently gives their Solve assessment to most applicants, but will use their resulting test scores alongside resumes to cut 70%+ of the candidate pool before interviews.

You'll need to be on top of your game to get as far as an interview with a top firm. Getting through the resume screen and any aptitude tests is an achievement in itself!

For readers not yet embroiled in the selection process themselves, let’s put case interviews in context and take a quick look at each stage in turn. Importantly, note that you might also be asked to solve case studies outside interviews as well…

2.2.1. Application screen

It’s sometimes easy to forget that such a large cut is made at the application stage. At larger firms, this will mean your resume and cover letter is looked at by some combination of AI tools, recruitment staff and junior consulting staff (often someone from your own university).

Only the best applications will be passed to later stages, so make sure to check out our free resume and cover letter guides, and potentially get help with editing , to give yourself the best chance possible.

2.2.2. Aptitude tests and online cases

This part of the selection process has been changing quickly in recent years and is increasingly beginning to blur into the traditionally separate case interview rounds.

In the past, GMAT or PST style tests were the norm. Firms then used increasingly sophisticated and often gamified aptitude tests, like the Pymetrics test currently used by several firms, including BCG and Bain, and the original version of McKinsey’s Solve assessment (then branded as the Problem Solving Game).

Now, though, there is a move towards delivering relatively sophisticated case studies online. For example, McKinsey has replaced half the old Solve assessment with an online case. BCG’s Casey chatbot case now directly replaces a live first round case interview, and in the new era of AI chatbots, we expect these online cases to quickly become more realistic and increasingly start to relieve firms of some of the costs of live interviews.

Our consultants collectively reckon that, over time, 50% of case interviews are likely to be replaced with these kinds of cases. We give some specific advice for online cases in section four. However, the important thing to note is that these are still just simulations of traditional case interviews - you still need to learn how to solve cases in precisely the same way, and your prep will largely remain the same.

2.2.3. Rounds of Interviews

Now, let’s not go overboard with talk of AI. Even in the long term, the client facing nature of consulting means that firms will have live case interviews for as long as they are hiring anyone. And in the immediate term, case interviews are still absolutely the core of consulting selection.

Before landing an offer at McKinsey, Bain, BCG or any similar firm, you won’t just have one case interview, but will have to complete four to six case interviews, usually divided into two rounds, with each interview lasting approximately 50-60 minutes .

Being invited to first round usually means two or three case interviews. As noted above, you might also be asked to complete an online case or similar alongside your first round interviews.

If you ace first round, you will be invited to second round to face the same again, but more gruelling. Only then - after up to six case interviews in total, can you hope to receive an offer.

2.3. Typical case interview format

Before we dive in to the nuts and bolts of case cracking, we should give you a bit more detail on what exactly you’ll be up against on interview day.

Case interviews come in very similar formats across the various consultancies where they are used.

The standard case interview can be thought of as splitting into two standalone sub-interviews. Thus “case interviews” can be divided into the case study itself and a “fit interview” section, where culture fit questions are asked.

This can lead to a bit of confusion, as the actual case interview component might take up as little as half of your scheduled “case interview”. You need to make sure you are ready for both aspects.

To illustrate, here is the typical case interview timeline:

  • First 15-30 minutes: Fit Interview - with questions assessing your motivation to be a consultant in that specific firm and your traits around leadership and teamwork. Learn more about the fit interview in our in-depth article here .
  • Next 30-40 minutes: Case Interview - solving a case study
  • Last 5 minutes: Fit Interview again - this time focussing on your questions for your interviewer.

Both the Case and Fit interviews play crucial roles in the finial hiring decision. There is no “average” taken between case and fit interviews: if your performance is not up to scratch in either of the two, you will not be able to move on to the next interview round or get an offer.

NB: No case without fit

Note that, even if you have only been told you are having a case interview or otherwise are just doing a case study, always be prepared to answer fit questions. At most firms, it is standard practice to include some fit questions in all case interviews, even if there are also separate explicit fit interviews, and interviewers will almost invariably include some of these questions around your case. This is perfectly natural - imagine how odd and artificial it would be to show up to an interview, simply do a case and leave again, without talking about anything else with the interviewer before or after.

2.4. Differences between first and second round interviews

Despite interviews in the first and second round following the same format, second/final round interviews will be significantly more intense. The seniority of the interviewer, time pressure (with up to three interviews back-to-back), and the sheer value of the job at stake will likely make a second round consulting case interview one of the most challenging moments of your professional life.

There are three key differences between the two rounds:

  • Time Pressure : Final round case interviews test your ability to perform under pressure, with as many as three interviews in a row and often only very small breaks between them.
  • Focus : Since second round interviewers tend to be more senior (usually partners with 12+ years experience) and will be more interested in your personality and ability to handle challenges independently. Some partners will drill down into your experiences and achievements to the extreme. They want to understand how you react to challenges and your ability to identify and learn from past mistakes.
  • Psychological Pressure: While case interviews in the first round are usually more focused on you simply cracking the case, second round interviewers often employ a "bad cop" strategy to test the way you react to challenges and uncertainty.

2.5. Differences between firms

For the most part, a case interview is a case interview. However, firms will have some differences in the particular ways they like to do things in terms of both the case study and the fit component.

As we’ll see, these differences aren’t hugely impactful in terms of how you prepare. That said, it's always good to know as much as possible about what you will be going up against.

2.5.1. Candidate led vs interviewer led case formats

Most consulting case interview questions test your ability to crack a broad problem, with a case prompt often going something like:

" How much would you pay to secure the rights to run a restaurant in the British Museum? "

You, as a candidate, are then expected to identify your path to solve the case (that is, provide a structure), leveraging your interviewer to collect the data and test your assumptions.

This is known as a “candidate-led” case interview and is used by Bain, BCG and other firms.

However, a McKinsey case interview - especially in the first round - is slightly different, with the interviewer controlling the pace and direction of the conversation much more than with other case interviews.

At McKinsey, your interviewer will ask you a set of pre-determined questions, regardless of your initial structure. For each question, you will have to understand the problem, come up with a mini structure, ask for additional data (if necessary) and come to the conclusion that answers the question.

McKinsey’s cases are thus referred to as “interviewer-led”. This more structured format of case also shows up in online cases by other firms - notably including BCG’s Casey chatbot (with the amusing result that practising McKinsey-style cases can be a great addition when prepping for BCG).

Essentially, these interviewer-led case studies are large cases made up of lots of mini-cases. You still use basically the same method as you would for standard (or candidate-led) cases - the main difference is simply that, instead of using that method to solve one big case, you are solving several mini-cases sequentially.

2.5.2. The McKinsey PEI

McKinsey brands its fit aspect of interviews as the Personal Experience Interview or PEI. Despite the different name, this is really much the same interview you will be going up against in Bain, BCG and any similar firms.

McKinsey does have a reputation for pushing candidates a little harder with fit or PEI questions, focusing on one story per interview and drilling down further into the specific details each time. We discuss this tendency more in our fit interview article. However, no top end firm is going to go easy on you and you should absolutely be ready for the same level of grilling at Bain, BCG and others. Thus any difference isn’t hugely salient in terms of prep.

2.6. How are things changing in 2023?

For the foreseeable future, you are going to have to go through multiple live case interviews to secure any decent consulting job. These might increasingly happen via Zoom rather than in person, but they should remain largely the same otherwise.

However, things are changing and the rise of AI in recent months seems pretty much guaranteed to accelerate existing trends.

Even before the explosive development of AI chatbots like ChatGPT we have seen in recent months, automation was already starting to change the recruitment process.

As we mentioned, case interviews are expensive and inconvenient for firms to run. Ideally, then, firms will try to reduce the number of interviews required for recruitment as far as possible. For many years, tests of various kinds served to cut down the applicant pool and thus the number of interviews. However, these tests had a limited capacity to assess candidates against the full consulting skillset in the way that case interviews do so well.

More recently, though, the development of online testing has allowed for more and more advanced assessments. Top consulting firms have been leveraging screening tests that better and better capture the same skillset as case interviews. Eventually this is converging on automated case studies. We see this very clearly with the addition of the Redrock case to McKinsey’s Solve assessment.

As these digital cases become closer to the real thing, the line between test and interview blurs. Online cases don’t just reduce the number of candidates to interview, but start directly replacing interviews.

Case in point here is BCG’s Casey chatbot . Previously, BCG had deployed less advanced online cases and similar tests to weed out some candidates before live case interviews began. Now, though, Casey actually replaces one first round case interview.

Casey, at time of writing, is still a relatively “dumb” chatbot, basically running through a pre-set script. The Whatsapp-like interface does a lot of work to make it feel like one is chatting to a “real person” - the chatbot itself, though, cannot provide feedback or nudges to candidates as would a human interviewer.

We fully expect that, as soon as BCG and other firms can train a truer AI, these online cases will become more widespread and start replacing more live interviews.

We discuss the likely impacts of advanced AI on consulting recruitment and the industry more broadly in our blog.

Here, though, the real message is that you should expect to run into digital cases as well as traditional case interviews.

Luckily, despite any changes in specific format, you will still need to master the same fundamental skills and prepare in much the same way.

We’ll cover a few ways to help prepare for chatbot cases in section four. Ultimately, though, firms are looking for the same problem solving ability and mindset as a real interviewer. Especially as chatbots get better at mimicking a real interviewer, candidates who are well prepared for case cracking in general should have no problem with AI administered cases.

2.6.1. Automated fit interviews

Analogous to online cases, in recent years there has been a trend towards automated, “one way” fit interviews, with these typically being administered for consultancies by specialist contractors like HireVue or SparkHire.

These are kind of like Zoom interviews, but if the interviewer didn’t show up. Instead you will be given fit questions to answer and must record your answer in your computer webcam. Your response will then go on to be assessed by an algorithm, scoring both what you say and how you say it.

Again, with advances in AI, it is easy to imagine these automated interviews going from fully scripted interactions, where all candidates are asked the same list of questions, to a more interactive experience. Thus, we might soon arrive at a point where you are being grilled on the details of your stories - McKinsey PEI style - but by a bot rather than a human.

We include some tips on this kind of “one way” fit interview in section six here.

3. What do I need to learn to solve cases?

If you’re new to case cracking. You might feel a bit hopeless when you see a difficult case question, not having any idea where to start.

In fact though, cracking cases is much like playing chess. The rules you need to know to get started are actually pretty simple. What will make you really proficient is time and practice.

In this section, we’ll run through a high level overview of everything you need to know, linking to more detailed resources at every step.

3.1. Business fundamentals

Obviously, you are going to need to be familiar with basic business concepts in order to understand the case studies you are given in the first instance.

If you are coming from a business undergrad, an MBA or are an experienced hire, you might well have this covered already.

However, many consultants will be entering from engineering or similar backgrounds and the major consulting firms are hiring more and more PhDs and non-MBA master's graduates from all subjects. These individuals will need to get up to speed on business fundamentals.

Luckily, you don’t need a degree-level understanding of business to crack interview cases, and a lot of the information you will pick up by osmosis as you read through articles like this and go through cases.

However, some things you will just need to sit down and learn. We cover everything you need to know in some detail in our Case Academy course. However, some examples here of things you need to learn are:

  • Basic accounting (particularly how to understand all the elements of a balance sheet)
  • Basic economics
  • Basic marketing
  • Basic strategy

Note, though, that learning the very basics of business is the beginning rather than the end of your journey.

Once you are able to “speak business” at a rudimentary level, you should try to “become fluent” and immerse yourself in reading/viewing/listening to as wide a variety of business material as possible, getting a feel for all kinds of companies and industries - and especially the kinds of problems that can come up in each context and how they are solved.

The material put out by the consulting firms themselves is a great place to start, but you should also follow the business news and find out about different companies and sectors as much as possible between now and interviews. Remember, if you’re going to be a consultant, this should be fun rather than a chore!

3.2. How to solve cases like a real consultant

This is the really important bit.

If you look around online for material on how to solve case studies, a lot of what you find will set out framework-based approaches. However, as we have mentioned, these frameworks tend to break down with more complex, unique cases - with these being exactly the kind of tough case studies you can expect to be given in your interviews.

To address this problem, the MyConsultingCoach team has developed a new, proprietary approach to case cracking that replicates how top management consultants approach actual engagements.

MyConsultingCoach’s Problem Driven Structure approach is a universal problem solving method that can be applied to any business problem , irrespective of its nature.

As opposed to just selecting a generic framework for each case, the Problem Driven Structure approach works by generating a bespoke structure for each individual question and is a simplified version of the roadmap McKinsey consultants use when working on engagements.

The canonical seven steps from McKinsey on real projects are simplified to four for case interview questions, as the analysis required for a six-month engagement is somewhat less than that needed for a 45-minute case study. However, the underlying flow is the same.

This video has more information on how frameworks can be unreliable and how we address this problem:

Otherwise, let's zoom in to see how our method actually works in more detail:

3.2.1. Identify the problem

Identifying the problem means properly understanding the prompt/question you are given, so you get to the actual point of the case.

This might sound simple, but cases are often very tricky, and many candidates irretrievably mess things up within the first few minutes of starting. Often, they won’t notice this has happened until they are getting to the end of their analysis. Then, they suddenly realise that they have misunderstood the case prompt - and have effectively been answering the wrong question all along!

With no time to go back and start again, there is nothing to do. Even if there were time, making such a silly mistake early on will make a terrible impression on their interviewer, who might well have written them off already. The interview is scuppered and all the candidate’s preparation has been for nothing.

This error is so galling as it is so readily avoidable.

Our method prevents this problem by placing huge emphasis on a full understanding of the case prompt. This lays the foundations for success as, once we have identified the fundamental, underlying problem our client is facing, we focus our whole analysis around finding solutions to this specific issue.

Now, some case interview prompts are easy to digest. For example, “Our client, a supermarket, has seen a decline in profits. How can we bring them up?”. However, many of the prompts given in interviews for top firms are much more difficult and might refer to unfamiliar business areas or industries. For example, “How much would you pay for a banking license in Ghana?” or “What would be your key areas of concern be when setting up an NGO?”

Don’t worry if you have no idea how you might go about tackling some of these prompts!

In our article on identifying the problem and in our full lesson on the subject in our MCC Academy course, we teach a systematic, four step approach to identifying the problem , as well as running through common errors to ensure you start off on the right foot every time!

This is summarised here:

Four Steps to Identify the Problem

Following this method lets you excel where your competitors mess up and get off to a great start in impressing your interviewer!

3.2.2. Build your problem driven structure

After you have properly understood the problem, the next step is to successfully crack a case is to draw up a bespoke structure that captures all the unique features of the case.

This is what will guide your analysis through the rest of the case study and is precisely the same method used by real consultants working on real engagements.

Of course, it might be easier here to simply roll out one an old-fashioned framework, and a lot of candidates will do so. This is likely to be faster at this stage and requires a lot less thought than our problem-driven structure approach.

However, whilst our problem driven structure approach requires more work from you, our method has the advantage of actually working in the kind of complex case studies where generic frameworks fail - that is exactly the kind of cases you can expect at an MBB interview .

Since we effectively start from first principles every time, we can tackle any case with the same overarching method. Simple or complex, every case is the same to you and you don’t have to gamble a job on whether a framework will actually work

In practice, structuring a problem with our method means drawing up either an issue tree or an hypothesis tree , depending on how you are trying to address the problem.

These trees break down the overall problem into a set of smaller problems that you can then solve individually. Representing this on a diagram also makes it easy for both you and your interviewer to keep track of your analysis.

To see how this is done, let’s look at the issue tree below breaking down the revenues of an airline:

Frame the Airline Case Study

These revenues can be segmented as the number of customers multiplied by the average ticket price. The number of customers can be further broken down into a number of flights multiplied by the number of seats, times average occupancy rate. The node corresponding to the average ticket price can then be segmented further.

It is worth noting that the same problem can be structured in multiple valid ways by choosing different means to segment the key issues.

That said, not all valid structures are equally useful in solving the underlying problem. A good structure fulfils several requirements - including MECE-ness , level consistency, materiality, simplicity, and actionability. It’s important to put in the time to master segmentation, so you can choose a scheme isn’t only valid, but actually useful in addressing the problem.

After taking the effort to identify the problem properly, an advantage of our method is that it will help ensure you stay focused on that same fundamental problem throughout. This might not sound like much, but many candidates end up getting lost in their own analysis, veering off on huge tangents and returning with an answer to a question they weren’t asked.

Another frequent issue - particularly with certain frameworks - is that candidates finish their analysis and, even if they have successfully stuck to the initial question, they have not actually reached a definite solution. Instead, they might simply have generated a laundry list of pros and cons, with no clear single recommendation for action.

Clients employ consultants for actionable answers, and this is what is expected in the case interview. The problem driven structure excels in ensuring that everything you do is clearly related back to the key question in a way that will generate a definitive answer. Thus, the problem driven structure builds in the hypothesis driven approach so characteristic of real consulting practice.

You can learn how to set out your own problem driven structures in our article here and in our full lesson in the MCC Academy course.

Join thousands of other candidates cracking cases like pros

3.2.3. lead the analysis.

A problem driven structure might ensure we reach a proper solution eventually, but how do we actually get there?

We call this step " leading the analysis ", and it is the process whereby you systematically navigate through your structure, identifying the key factors driving the issue you are addressing.

Generally, this will mean continuing to grow your tree diagram, further segmenting what you identify as the most salient end nodes and thus drilling down into the most crucial factors causing the client’s central problem.

Once you have gotten right down into the detail of what is actually causing the company’s issues, solutions can then be generated quite straightforwardly.

To see this process in action, we can return to our airline revenue example:

Lead the analysis for the Airline Case Study

Let’s say we discover the average ticket price to be a key issue in the airline’s problems. Looking closer at the drivers of average ticket price, we find that the problem lies with economy class ticket prices. We can then further segment that price into the base fare and additional items such as food.

Having broken down the issue to such a fine-grained level, solutions occur quite naturally. In this case, we can suggest incentivising the crew to increase onboard sales, improving assortment in the plane, or offering discounts for online purchases.

Our article on leading the analysis is a great primer on the subject, with our video lesson in the MCC Academy providing the most comprehensive guide available.

3.2.4. Provide recommendations

So you have a solution - but you aren’t finished yet!

Now, you need to deliver your solution as a final recommendation.

This should be done as if you are briefing a busy CEO and thus should be a one minute, top-down, concise, structured, clear, and fact-based account of your findings.

The brevity of the final recommendation belies its importance. In real life consulting, the recommendation is what the client has potentially paid millions for - from their point of view, it is the only thing that matters.

In an interview, your performance in this final summing up of your case is going to significantly colour your interviewer’s parting impression of you - and thus your chances of getting hired!

So, how do we do it right?

Barbara Minto's Pyramid Principle elegantly sums up almost everything required for a perfect recommendation. The answer comes first , as this is what is most important. This is then supported by a few key arguments , which are in turn buttressed by supporting facts .

Across the whole recommendation, the goal isn’t to just summarise what you have done. Instead, you are aiming to synthesize your findings to extract the key "so what?" insight that is useful to the client going forward.

All this might seem like common sense, but it is actually the opposite of how we relay results in academia and other fields. There, we typically move from data, through arguments and eventually to conclusions. As such, making good recommendations is a skill that takes practice to master.

We can see the Pyramid Principle illustrated in the diagram below:

The Pyramid principle often used in consulting

To supplement the basic Pyramid Principle scheme, we suggest candidates add a few brief remarks on potential risks and suggested next steps . This helps demonstrate the ability for critical self-reflection and lets your interviewer see you going the extra mile.

The combination of logical rigour and communication skills that is so definitive of consulting is particularly on display in the final recommendation.

Despite it only lasting 60 seconds, you will need to leverage a full set of key consulting skills to deliver a really excellent recommendation and leave your interviewer with a good final impression of your case solving abilities.

Our specific article on final recommendations and the specific video lesson on the same topic within our MCC Academy are great, comprehensive resources. Beyond those, our lesson on consulting thinking and our articles on MECE and the Pyramid Principle are also very useful.

3.3. Common case types and the building blocks to solve them

You should tackle each new case on its own merits. However, that’s not to say there aren’t recurring themes that come up fairly reliably in cases - there absolutely are. Business is business and case studies will often feature issues like profitability, competition etc.

Old fashioned framework approaches would have you simply select a defined framework for each kind of case and, in effect, just run the algorithm and wait for a solution to fall out.

We’ve already explained how frameworks can let you down. In this context, too many candidates will fall into the trap of selecting a framework for that case type that simply won’t work for their specific case.

The counterpoint in favour of frameworks, though, is that they are at least fast and prevent you having to start from the ground up with a common kind of case.

Ideally, you should have the best of both worlds - and this is why, in our articles on this site and in our MCC Academy course, we have developed a set of “building bocks” for common case themes.

As they name suggests, building blocks give you modular components for different kinds of case to help build out your own custom structures faster. These then allow you to leverage the symmetries between cases without inheriting the inflexibility of frameworks.

Let’s take a look at five different case types and get a brief idea of how our building block approach helps you with each. You can find more detail on each in the full length articles linked, as well as in the full-length video lessons in our MCC Academy course.

3.3.1. Estimation

Consultants need to push forward to provide definitive recommendations to clients in a timely manner despite typically not having access to full information on a problem. Estimation of important quantities is therefore at the heart of real life consulting work.

Estimation is thus just as fundamental to case cracking.

A case interview might centre on an estimation question, and this might be quite common for a first round interview. However, estimation is also very likely to be a crucial part of pretty well any other kind of case question you receive is likely to include estimation as a crucial component of your analysis.

The kinds of estimation you might be asked to make in a case interview can be very daunting:

  • How many bank branches are there in Italy?
  • How many cars are sold in Berlin in one year?
  • How many people will buy the latest high-tech smartphone on the market?

You might have no idea where to begin with these examples. However, tempting as it might be, your answer cannot ever be a simple guess .

A decent estimation does have a guessed element - though this should really be an educated guess based on some pre-existing knowledge. However, this guessed element is always then combined with a rigorous quantitative method to arrive at a reasonable estimation.

In context of a case interview, it’s important to realise that your interviewer doesn’t really care about the right answer (they don’t need to ask you to find out, after all). What’s important is showing the rational process by which you get to your answer.

A guess that was somehow exactly correct is no good compared to a “wrong” answer that was reached by a very sensible, intelligent process of estimation. In cases, this method will often be a matter of segmentation.

So, where would we start in working out how many cars are sold in Berlin, for example?

The key to estimation case questions is the ability to logically break down the problem into more manageable pieces. In consulting case studies, this will generally mean segmenting a wider population to find a particular target group. For example, starting from the total population of Berlin and narrowing down to the cohort of individuals who will buy a car that year.

There are usually many ways to segment the same starting population, and several different segmentation schemes might be equally valid. However, it is crucial to choose the specific method best suited to the goal in answering the question and allowing you to best leverage the data you have available.

Segmentation must be allied with assumptions in order to arrive at an estimation. These assumptions are the “guessed” element of estimations we mentioned above. Assumptions cannot just be plucked from thin air, but must always be reasonable .

The example below showcases both the segmentation and assumptions made in an estimation of the size of the wedding planning market in London:

Estimation Example Structure

Our articles on estimation and the MECE concept are great starting points in getting to grips with consulting estimation. However, the best place to learn how to make estimations is with the dedicated building block video lesson in our MCC Academy course.

Those of you from physics or engineering backgrounds will probably see a lot in common with Fermi questions . We have plenty of estimation cases for you to work through in our free case library. However, Fermi questions are a great way of getting a little extra practice and you can find a lifetime’s supply online.

3.3.2. Profitability

The fundamental goal of any normal business is to maximise profits - nobody is getting up and going to work to lose money. Even Silicon Valley tech start-ups are supposed to be profitable some day!

Profitability problems are thus bread and butter issues for management consultants.

Clients often tell consultants broadly the same story. The business was doing in well in recent years, with strong profits. However, some recent turn of events has upset the status quo and led to concerns around profit levels. Consultants are brought in as businesses are often sufficiently complex that it can be difficult to figure out precisely where and why the company is losing money - let alone how to then reverse the situation and restore healthy profits.

Despite steady growth in customer flow, the Walfort supermarket chain has seen falling profits in the past year. What is the reason for this decline?

Understanding profitability ultimately means understanding the various components that determine a company’s profit. You will need to learn to decompose profit first into revenues and costs (profit being the synthesis of these two factors). Crucially, you then need to segment further, distinguishing different specific revenue streams and separating various fixed and variable costs.

To take an example, just examining the revenue side of profit, the incoming revenues for an insurance firm might be broken down as follows:

Insurance Revenues

Improving profitability will inherently mean increasing revenues and/or decreasing costs. To solve profitability problems, we thus have to understand the ways we can minimise different costs, as well as ways to drive sales and/or optimise pricing to increase revenue. Importantly, you must be able to judge which of these options is best suited to address specific scenarios.

The key to tackling the complex kind of profitability questions given by MBB-level consultancies lies in this proper segmentation.

By contrast, old-fashioned case interview frameworks will simply have you look at aggregate cost and revenue data before recommending generic cost-cutting or revenue-driving measures. However, this will often lead to negative outcomes in more involved cases, making matters worse for the client.

For example, it might well be that a company actually makes a loss when it serves a certain cohort of customers. An airline, for instance, might lose money on economy class customers but make a healthy profit on each business class customer. Attempts to boost revenue by increasing sales across the board might actually reduce profit further by increasing the number of economy class customers. What is required is targeted measures to increase focus on business class and/or mitigate economy class losses.

You can start learning to segment these kinds of cases properly in our article on profitability , whilst the best way to really master profitability questions is our full lesson on the subject in the Building Blocks section of our MCC Academy course.

3.3.3. Pricing

For a company to be profitable at all, it is a pre-requisite that it charges the right price for whatever it sells. However, establishing what price to charge for any one product - or indeed a whole suite of related products - can be a highly complex business.

Consultants are often engaged to negotiate the many variables, with all their complex interdependencies, at play in pricing. Correspondingly, then, pricing is a common theme in case interviews.

  • A company launches a new smartphone with a significantly improved camera. How much should they charge?
  • A doughnut chain wants to start selling coffee in their shops. How much should they charge per cup?

Clearly, lot of different factors can influence the answers to these questions, and it can be difficult to know where to start. To get a handle on all this complexity, you will need to take a methodical, structured approach.

To really understand pricing, you must begin from fundamentals like the customer’s willingness to pay, the value captured by the company, and the value created for the customer. These basics are shown in the diagram below:

Pricing Basics

This might seem simple enough, but the exact level at which prices are ultimately set is determined by a whole host of factors, including product availability, market trends, and the need to maintain a competitive position within the market. In particular, if we are changing the price of an existing product, we must consider how the price elasticity of demand might cause sales to fluctuate.

Our four-step method for pricing starts from establishing the customer’s next best alternative, calculating the value added by our own product, and working from there. A summary of this method is given, along with an overview of pricing in general, in our article on the subject . However, the most complete resource is our pricing lesson in the MCC Academy .

3.3.4. Valuation

Valuation is fundamental to any kind of investment. Before allocating capital towards a particular opportunity, an investor must understand precisely what value it holds and how this compares to the other available options.

In short, valuation tells us how much we should be willing to pay to acquire a company or an asset.

There are many ways to value an asset - indeed the finer points are still subject to research in both the academic and private sectors.

Standard ways to assign value include asset-based valuations (notably the Net Asset Value or NAV) and the various multiples so widely used by market traders.

However, in consulting case interviews, you will only usually need to be familiar with Net Present Value (NPV) . This means you need to learn and master the NPV equation:

NPV Equation

CF = Cash Flow r = Discount Rate

Whilst this is a pretty simple equation on the face of it, in order to make proper use of it, you will also need to develop a feel for interest/discount rates appropriate to different cases. This will be essential, as you will often have to estimate rational values for these rates for different investments before plugging those values into the NPV equation. Our Case Academy course has more detail here.

Note, though, that NPV is only really half the story.

NPV provides a kind of “absolute” value for an asset. However, the fact is that the worth of any asset will be different for different buyers , depending largely upon what the buyer already owns. In just the same way a spare clutch for a 1975 Ford will be a lot less valuable to a cyclist than to someone restoring the relevant classic car, so a courier business will be more valuable to an online retailer than to an airline.

As such, what we call the Total Enterprise Value (TEV) of an asset is calculated as a function of that asset’s NPV and of the potential cost and revenue synergies resulting from an acquisition. This is shown in the useful structure below:

TEV

You can learn more about all aspects of valuation in our article here , as well as in our dedicated video lesson in MCC Academy . These include guides to the kind of interest rates typically required to finance different kinds of investment.

3.3.5. Competitive Interactions

Most of what we’ve discussed so far in terms of case themes and our building block approach to them will all depend upon the prevailing competitive landscape our client exists within. Product prices, profit levels and ultimately valuations can all change over time in response to competition.

What is more, the zero sum dynamics of competitive interactions mean that these things can change quickly .

Companies enjoying near monopolies for years or even decades can quickly see their values go to zero, or near enough, in the face of some innovation by a competitor coming onto the market.

Nokia and Kodak thoroughly dominated the mobile phone and photography markets respectively - until new companies with new products pulled the rug out from under them and led to precipitous collapses.

New market entrants or old competitors with new ideas can throw a company’s whole business model up in the air overnight . Complex decisions about profound changes need to be made yesterday. Firms trying to save themselves will often slash prices in attempts to maintain sales - though this can actually make things worse and result in a corporate death-spiral. Consultants are then frequently called in to help companies survive - with this type of engagement carrying over to inform case interview questions.

You are running an airline and a low-cost competitor, like Ryanair, decides to start operating on your routes. You are rapidly losing customers to their lower fares. How do you respond?

Your eventual solutions to competitive interaction problems will likely need to be novel and unique to the situation. However, the process by which we understand competitive interactions and move towards those solutions is usually very methodical, moving through the limited dimensions in which a company can take action.

The following structure neatly encodes the general options open to responding to new sources of competition:

Competitive Interaction Structure

Of course, we would never suggest that you blanket-apply any strict, inflexible methodology to a whole swathe of case questions – this is precisely the approach that causes so much trouble for candidates using old-fashioned frameworks.

This structure is only a starting point - a shortcut to a bespoke framework specific to the case question in hand. You might well have to alter the details of the structure shown and you will almost certainly have to expand it as you lead the analysis . How you build out your structure and the solutions you provide are necessarily going to depend upon the specific details of the case question.

Thus, in order to deal with competitive interactions, you will need to put in the time to understand how the different strategies available function - as well as how competitors might then react to implementing such strategies. With enough practice, though, soon you won’t be fazed by even the most complex cases of competition between firms.

You can learn more in our article here and in our dedicated video lesson on competitive interaction in the MCC Academy case interview course.

3.4. Mental mathematics

Almost every interview case study will feature some mental mathematics and this is an area where many many candidates let themselves down.

As such, it makes sense to out in the time and make sure you are fully proficient.

Nothing beyond high school level is required, but you probably don’t do much mental arithmetic day to day and will likely need to practice quite a lot to get good enough to reliably perform at pace, under pressure.

We give a high-level overview of what you need to know in our consulting math article , but devote a whole section of our MCC Academy course to a deep dive on consulting math, with plenty of practice material to get you up to scratch.

4. How do I practice for case interviews?

As we said above - case interviews are much like chess. The rules are relatively quick to learn, but you need to practice a lot to get good.

If you’re working through our MCC Academy course, we recommend getting through the core Problem Driven Structure section. After that, you should be practising alongside working through the remainder of the course and beyond. However you do things, you need to get up to speed with the fundamentals before practice is going to do much more than confuse you.

Of course, if you’re enrolled in one of our mentoring programmes , your mentor will let you know precisely when and how you should be scheduling practice, as well as tracking your progress throughout.

4.1. Solo Practice

For solitary preparation, one of the best uses of your time is to work on your mental mathematics . This skill is neglected by many applicants - much to their immediate regret in the case interview. Find our mental math tool here or in our course, and practice at least ten minutes per day, from day one until the day before the interview.

Once you've covered our Building Blocks section, you should then start working through the cases in My Consulting Coach's case bank alongside your work on the course. This is a large library of case interview questions and answers in different formats and difficulties.

To build your confidence, start out on easier case questions, work through with the solutions, and don't worry about time. As you get better, you can move on to more difficult cases and try to get through them more quickly. You should practice around eight case studies on your own to build your confidence.

4.2. Peer practice

One you have worked through eight cases solo, you should be ready to simulate the interview more closely and start working with another person.

Here, many candidates turn to peer practice - that is, doing mock case interviews with friends, classmates or others also applying to consulting.

If you’re in university, and especially in business school, there will very likely be a consulting club for you to join and do lots of case practice with. If you don’t have anyone to practice, though, or if you just want to get a bit more volume in with others, our free meeting board lets you find fellow applicants from around the world with whom to practice.

4.3. Professional practice

You can do a lot practising by yourself and with peers. However, nothing will bring up your skills so quickly and profoundly as working with a real consultant.

Perhaps think about it like boxing. You can practice drills and work on punch bags all you want, but at some point you need to get into the ring and do some actual sparring if you ever want to be ready to fight.

Of course, it isn’t possible to secure the time of experienced top-tier consultants for free. However, when considering whether you should invest to boost your chances of success, it is worth considering the difference in your salary over even a just few years between getting into a top-tier firm versus a second-tier one. In the light of thousands in increased annual earnings (easily accumulating into millions over multiple years), it becomes clear that getting expert interview help really is one of the best investments you can make in your own future.

Should you decide to make this step, MyConsultingCoach can help, offering the highest quality case interview coaching service available . Each MCC case coach is selected as an MBB consultant with two or more years of experience and strong coaching expertise.

Case interview coaching is hugely beneficial in itself. However, for those who want to genuinely maximise their chances of securing a job offer - and especially for time-poor, busy professionals or hard-pressed students who want to take the guesswork and wasted time out of their case interview prep - we also offer a much more comprehensive service .

With one of our bespoke mentoring programmes , you are paired with a 5+ year experienced, ex-MBB mentor of your choosing, who will then oversee your whole case interview preparation from start to finish - giving you your best possible chance of landing a job!

4.4. Practice for online cases

Standard preparation for interview case studies will carry directly over to online cases.

However, if you want to do some more specific prep, you can work through cases solo to a timer and using a calculator and/or Excel (online cases generally allow calculators and second computers to help you, whilst these are banned in live case interviews).

Older PST-style questions also make great prep, but a particularly good simulation is the self-assessment tests included in our Case Academy course . These multiple choice business questions conducted with a strict time limit are great preparation for the current crop of online cases.

5. Fit interviews

As we’ve noted, even something billed as a case interview is very likely to contain a fit interview as a subset.

We have an article on fit interviews and also include a full set of lessons on how to answer fit questions properly as a subset of our comprehensive Case Academy course .

Here though, the important thing to convey is that you take preparing for fit questions every bit as seriously as you do case prep.

Since they sound the same as you might encounter when interviewing for other industries, the temptation is to regard these as “just normal interview questions”.

However, consulting firms take your answers to these questions a good deal more seriously than elsewhere.

This isn’t just for fluffy “corporate culture” reasons. The long hours and close teamwork, as well as the client-facing nature of management consulting, mean that your personality and ability to get on with others is going to be a big part of making you a tolerable and effective co-worker.

If you know you’ll have to spend 14+ hour working days with someone you hire and that your annual bonus depends on them not alienating clients, you better believe you’ll pay attention to their character in interview.

There are also hard-nosed financial reasons for the likes of McKinsey, Bain and BCG to drill down so hard on your answers.

In particular, top consultancies have huge issues with staff retention. The average management consultant only stays with these firms for around two years before they have moved on to a new industry.

In some cases, consultants bail out because they can’t keep up with the arduous consulting lifestyle of long hours and endless travel. In many instances, though, departing consultants are lured away by exit opportunities - such as the well trodden paths towards internal strategy roles, private equity or becoming a start-up founder.

Indeed, many individuals will intentionally use a two year stint in consulting as something like an MBA they are getting paid for - giving them accelerated exposure to the business world and letting them pivot into something new.

Consulting firms want to get a decent return on investment for training new recruits. Thus, they want hires who not only intend to stick with consulting longer-term, but also have a temperament that makes this feasible and an overall career trajectory where it just makes sense for them to stay put.

This should hammer home the point that, if you want to get an offer, you need to be fully prepared to answer fit questions - and to do so excellently - any time you have a case interview.

6. Interview day - what to expect, with tips

Of course, all this theory is well and good, but a lot of readers might be concerned about what exactly to expect in real life . It’s perfectly reasonable to want to get as clear a picture as possible here - we all want to know what we are going up against when we face a new challenge!

Indeed, it is important to think about your interview in more holistic terms, rather than just focusing on small aspects of analysis. Getting everything exactly correct is less important than the overall approach you take to reasoning and how you communicate - and candidates often lose sight of this fact.

In this section, then, we’ll run through the case interview experience from start to finish, directing you to resources with more details where appropriate. As a supplement to this, the following video from Bain is excellent. It portrays an abridged version of a case interview, but is very useful as a guide to what to expect - not just from Bain, but from McKinsey, BCG and any other high-level consulting firm.

6.1. Getting started

Though you might be shown through to the office by a staff member, usually your interviewer will come and collect you from a waiting area. Either way, when you first encounter them, you should greet your interviewer with a warm smile and a handshake (unless they do not offer their hand). Be confident without verging into arrogance. You will be asked to take a seat in the interviewer’s office, where the interview can then begin.

6.1.1. First impressions

In reality, your assessment begins before you even sit down at your interviewer’s desk. Whether at a conscious level or not, the impression you make within the first few seconds of meeting your interviewer is likely to significantly inform the final hiring decision (again, whether consciously or not).

Your presentation and how you hold yourself and behave are all important. If this seems strange, consider that, if hired, you will be personally responsible for many clients’ impressions of the firm. These things are part of the job! Much of material on the fit interview is useful here, whilst we also cover first impressions and presentation generally in our article on what to wear to interview .

As we have noted above, your interview might start with a fit segment - that is, with the interviewer asking questions about your experiences, your soft skills, and motivation to want to join consulting generally and that firm in particular. In short, the kinds of things a case study can’t tell them about you. We have a fit interview article and course to get you up to speed here.

6.1.2. Down to business

Following an initial conversation, your interviewer will introduce your case study , providing a prompt for the question you have to answer. You will have a pen and paper in front of you and should (neatly) note down the salient pieces of information (keep this up throughout the interview).

It is crucial here that you don’t delve into analysis or calculations straight away . Case prompts can be tricky and easy to misunderstand, especially when you are under pressure. Rather, ask any questions you need to fully understand the case question and then validate that understanding with the interviewer before you kick off any analysis. Better to eliminate mistakes now than experience that sinking feeling of realising you have gotten the whole thing wrong halfway through your case!

This process is covered in our article on identifying the problem and in greater detail in our Case Academy lesson on that subject.

6.1.3. Analysis

Once you understand the problem, you should take a few seconds to set your thoughts in order and draw up an initial structure for how you want to proceed. You might benefit from utilising one or more of our building blocks here to make a strong start. Present this to your interviewer and get their approval before you get into the nuts and bolts of analysis.

We cover the mechanics of how to structure your problem and lead the analysis in our articles here and here and more thoroughly in the MCC Case Academy . What it is important to convey here, though, is that your case interview is supposed to be a conversation rather than a written exam . Your interviewer takes a role closer to a co-worker than an invigilator and you should be conversing with them throughout.

Indeed, how you communicate with your interviewer and explain your rationale is a crucial element of how you will be assessed. Case questions in general, are not posed to see if you can produce the correct answer, but rather to see how you think . Your interviewer wants to see you approach the case in a structured, rational fashion. The only way they are going to know your thought processes, though, is if you tell them!

To demonstrate this point, here is another excellent video from Bain, where candidates are compared.

Note that multiple different answers to each question are considered acceptable and that Bain is primarily concerned with the thought processes of the candidate’s exhibit .

Another reason why communication is absolutely essential to case interview success is the simple reason that you will not have all the facts you need to complete your analysis at the outset. Rather, you will usually have to ask the interviewer for additional data throughout the case to allow you to proceed .

NB: Don't be let down by your math!

Your ability to quickly and accurately interpret these charts and other figures under pressure is one of the skills that is being assessed. You will also need to make any calculations with the same speed and accuracy (without a calculator!). As such, be sure that you are up to speed on your consulting math .

6.1.4. Recommendation

Finally, you will be asked to present a recommendation. This should be delivered in a brief, top-down "elevator pitch" format , as if you are speaking to a time-pressured CEO. Again here, how you communicate will be just as important as the details of what you say, and you should aim to speak clearly and with confidence.

For more detail on how to give the perfect recommendation, take a look at our articles on the Pyramid Principle and providing recommendations , as well the relevant lesson within MCC Academy .

6.1.5. Wrapping up

After your case is complete, there might be a few more fit questions - including a chance for you to ask some questions of the interviewer . This is your opportunity to make a good parting impression.

We deal with the details in our fit interview resources. However, it is always worth bearing in mind just how many candidates your interviewers are going to see giving similar answers to the same questions in the same office. A pretty obvious pre-requisite to being considered for a job is that your interviewer remembers you in the first place. Whilst you shouldn't do something stupid just to be noticed, asking interesting parting questions is a good way to be remembered.

Now, with the interview wrapped up, it’s time to shake hands, thank the interviewer for their time and leave the room .

You might have other interviews or tests that day or you might be heading home. Either way, if know that you did all you could to prepare, you can leave content in the knowledge that you have the best possible chance of receiving an email with a job offer. This is our mission at MCC - to provide all the resources you need to realise your full potential and land your dream consulting job!

6.2. Remote and one-way interview tips

Zoom case interviews and “one-way” automated fit interviews are becoming more common as selection processes are increasingly remote, with these new formats being accompanied by their own unique challenges.

Obviously you won’t have to worry about lobbies and shaking hands for a video interview. However, a lot remains the same. You still need to do the same prep in terms of getting good at case cracking and expressing your fit answers. The specific considerations around remote interviews are, in effect, around making sure you come across as effectively as you would in person.

6.2.1. Connection

It sounds trivial, but a successful video interview of any kind presupposes a functioning computer with a stable and sufficient internet connection.

Absolutely don’t forget to have your laptop plugged in, as your battery will definitely let you down mid-interview. Similarly, make sure any housemates or family know not to use the microwave, vacuum cleaner or anything else that makes wifi cut out (or makes a lot of noise, obviously)

If you have to connect on a platform you don’t use much (for example, if it’s on Teams and you’re used to Zoom), make sure you have the up to date version of the app in advance, rather than having to wait for an obligatory download and end up late to join. Whilst you’re at it, make sure you’re familiar with the controls etc. At the risk of being made fun of, don’t be afraid to have a practice call with a friend.

6.2.2. Dress

You might get guidance on a slightly more relaxed dress code for a Zoom interview. However, if in doubt, dress as you would for the real thing (see our article here ).

Either way, always remember that presentation is part of what you are being assessed on - the firm needs to know you can be presentable for clients. Taking this stuff seriously also shows respect for your interviewer and their time in interviewing you.

6.2.3. Lighting

An aspect of presentation that you have to devote some thought to for a Zoom interview is your lighting.

Hopefully, you long ago nailed a lighting set-up during the Covid lockdowns. However, make sure to check your lighting in advance with your webcam - bearing in mind what time if day your interview actually is. If your interview is late afternoon, don’t just check in the morning. Make sure you aren’t going to be blinded from light coming in a window behind your screen, or that you end up with the weird shadow stripes from blinds all over your face.

Natural light is always best, but if there won’t be much of that during your interview, you’ll likely want to experiment with moving some lamps around.

6.2.4. Clarity

The actual stories you tell in an automated “one-way” fit interview will be the same as for a live equivalent. If anything, things should be easier, as you can rattle off a practised monologue without an interviewer interrupting you to ask for clarifications.

You can probably also assume that the algorithm assessing your performance is sufficiently capable that it will be observing you at much the same level as a human interviewer. However, it is probably still worth speaking as clearly as possible with these kinds of interviews and paying extra attention to your lighting to ensure that your face is clearly visible.

No doubt the AIs scoring these interviews are improving all the time, but you still want to make their job as easy as possible. Just think about the same things as you would with a live Zoom interview, but more so.

7. How we can help

There are lots of great free resources on this site to get you started with preparation, from all our articles on case solving and consulting skills to our free case library and peer practice meeting board .

To step your preparation up a notch, though, our Case Academy course will give you everything you need to know to solve the most complex of cases - whether those are in live interviews, with chatbots, written tests or any other format.

Whatever kind of case you end up facing, nothing will bring up your skillset faster than the kind of acute, actionable feedback you can get from a mock case interview a real, MBB consultant. Whilst it's possible to get by without this kind of coaching, it does tend to be the biggest single difference maker for successful candidates.

You can find out more on our coaching page:

Explore Coaching

Of course, for those looking for a truly comprehensive programme, with a 5+ year experienced MBB consultant overseeing their entire prep personally, from networking and applications right through to your offer, we have our mentoring programmes.

You can read more here:

Comprehensive Mentoring

Account not confirmed

What Are Product Management Case Study Interviews?

Author: Product School

Updated: January 24, 2024 - 10 min read

What is a product management case study interview?

A case study interview, also known as a case interview, is a tool used by many companies to assess a candidate’s analytical, creative, and problem-solving skills. Similar to coding interviews for engineers, they allow the interviewers to simulate a situation that allows your skills to be put into practice.

Quite simply, you’ll be given a situation, and asked to make suggestions or come up with a hypothetical solution or improvement.

In product management, this can be about any number of things. The realm of product managers is vast, and covers many different aspects of product development. As product managers sit at the intersection of business, technology, and design, you could be asked case questions under these umbrellas.

This means that you could be given a case question based on product design, monetization, market research, user segmentation, trends, data, technical development, go-to-market , prioritization…pretty much anything product managers are into!

Example case study interview questions

What’s your favorite product? How would you improve its design?

Which company do you think we should acquire next?

How would you go about launching our product in an emerging market, say, India?

What new feature would you build for Instagram?

How to ace a case study interview

Blog image 1: Product Management Case Study Interviews

The product design case interview

No, the interview isn't going to hand you a Wacom tablet and ask you to mock up an entire product on the spot! Instead, you’ll be asked to think through some solutions to pretty common design problems. Things like:

How would you improve our in-app messenger?

If we tasked you with making our user interface more inclusive of those with disabilities, how would you approach that?

How would you redesign our homepage to make it more appealing for X demographic?

We’re finding that X number of users don’t make it through the entire onboarding process. What would you do/design to fix that?

The key when being asked a question about how you’d improve the company’s product is not to insult it too heavily. Remember, the people who built it are in the room with you, so if you come in hot with “well, for starters, your homescreen is absolutely hideous and needs a complete do-over”, you’re not going to endear yourself to them. A product manager is a diplomat, so be as diplomatic as possible.

Instead of focusing on how you’d fix what you see as glaring problems, try to come up with something that adds to the product. “I think a chatbot in your user onboarding process would help people to navigate through the process. Here’s where I’d implement it…”

How to ace it

Give your hypothesis: Because everything in product starts with why .

Lay out your approach : Briefly summarize what your approach would be, given your hypothesis. Include things like the research you would need to do, and the preparation the team would need to make.

Identify the user: Companies want user-driven product managers, so definitely make sure you know which user you’re building for.

Describe the solution : How would you actually build the solution? No need to get too technical if that’s not where your skills lie. If that’s the case, talk about how you’d lead the engineering teams to build the solution.

Suggest testing: If you’ve got 2 ideas and you’re not sure which one is better, describe both and talk about the test you’d run to discover which one to roll with.

Prioritize features : Show off your prioritization skills if you’re suggesting more than one feature.

Suggest features for an MVP and plans for a V1 launch:

Finish off by helping the interviewers to visualize what the finished MVP would be like, as well as the plans you’d have for a full release later down the line.

The business-thinking case interview

Blog image 2: Product Management Case Study Interviews

Business thinking is vital for product managers, as you’re the person that ties what’s being built to the needs of the business. This is why you may be presented with a business problem, so that the interviewer can assess your thought process, and how you approach product strategy.

Business case questions may include things like:

Management wants to build X because a competitor has launched something similar. How would you respond?

If we wanted to move more into the B2B market by launching X, what would you do first?

How would you increase customer adoption for the feature we released last month?

We want to become more product-led in our growth strategy. What recommendations would you make in terms of pricing structure/increasing customer adoption?

Establish market characteristics : This is especially important if your case question is a go-to-market question. If you’re not sure what the market characteristics are, talk about what you would find out before starting the work.

Layout your approach: Briefly summarize what your approach would be.

Prioritize your actions: If you’ve been asked for a step-by-step approach, talk about why you’re doing things in that order.

Provide analysis : Business decisions require a heavy amount of analysis, so be sure to include some competitor/customer/market analysis.

Make recommendations: Talk about the end result in a business sense. Instead of getting into the weeds of feature building etc, give a step-by-step approach of how you’d take a new feature to market, or make business-oriented improvements to a product.

Remember that a business-thinking case question requires an answer that would make C-suite happy. Try to think through your answer for the eyes of management. Think about what brings most business value, and tailor your answer around that.

The technical interview

Here, by technical interview, we don’t necessarily mean the tech interviews that engineers can expect to go through. It’s very rare for product managers to be asked technical questions in an interview, unless they’re specifically applying for a technical product manager role. You’ll usually get some warning in advance that your technical prowess will be tested, either by the recruiter or a hiring manager.

The chances of being given an in-depth technical case interview (aka, a coding interview) are rare, so you’re more likely to be asked a few general questions to gauge your technical ability.

Things like:

What’s your experience with X or Y technology?

Do you feel comfortable managing a team of engineers?

Can you explain the most technical project you’ve worked on?

These are questions that you should be able to answer in the room, because they’re based on your direct experience. So you don’t need to put any special level of preparation into their answers.

You may also be asked some technical questions that allow you to show off your technical knowledge, but are open-ended enough that you can still answer even if you’re not very techy. The goal is to gauge how much technical know-how you already have, not to embarrass you and put you on the spot for not having a computer science degree.

These questions might include:

What feature do you think we should build next? How should we approach building it?

Would you build X solution in-house, or would you outsource development elsewhere?

What partners do you think we should integrate with next? (eg. Slack, Trello)

These are questions that you can approach in your own way, from a technical perspective if you come from that background, or from a people-management/design/business perspective if you don’t.

Product managers and tech skills…what’s the deal?

Blog image 3: Product Management Case Study Interviews

It’s highly unlikely that you’ll be asked to go through a technical interview, as product managers aren’t the ones who physically build the product. They provide the direction and the insights, and the engineers provide the solutions and the finished product. So what’s gained by seeing how well you can code?

Well, some roles are more technical than others, so obviously in these roles you’d need either a computer science degree or a proven record of technical work, like an engineering background.

But for a regular product manager, you’re less likely to be given a technical case interview, and more likely to just be asked a few very general questions to gauge your knowledge.

1. Give yourself time to think

The worst thing you can do is panic, and rush in with an answer. It’s OK to give yourself time to think. An interview is not a first date, and silences don’t have to be awkward! So pause, and give yourself time to consider your answer before you start.

That’s much better than giving a sub-standard answer that you can’t take back. The interviewer will expect you to need a moment to gather your thoughts, so don’t stress.

2. Hack: The McKinsey case study

Now, you’re bound to go off and do plenty more research on case study interviews, wanting to find out everything you can. So let us give you this secret hack: check out materials for McKinsey case interviews .

“But I want to work at Facebook/Google/Amazon!” we hear you say. “Why would I prep for McKinsey?”

McKinsey is one of the most difficult interviewers out there. Reviews by some previous interviewees makes it seem like the process was designed to help choose the next ruler of Westeros. Their standards are incredibly high, and their case interviews are something that people prep weeks, even months in advance for.

This has a double result for you. One, there are swathes of resources out there specifically to prep for this behemoth of a case interview. Two, if you can give a McKinsey-standard answer to a case interview, you’ll outshine the competition easily!

3. Practice ahead of time

While you can’t be totally sure what you’ll be asked in a case interview, you can still prepare.

The smart thing to do is to practice case interview questions ahead of time. The way to do this is to pick apart the job posting you’re interviewing for, and identify what the main responsibilities are.

Case interview preparation is absolutely essential for acing product manager interviews, as you’re bound to be asked a hypothetical question sooner or later in the interview process.

4. Don’t feel pressured to give a perfect answer

Companies know how much time, research, and information goes into making informed product decisions. So if they’ve asked you to propose a new feature for their product as part of your interview, they’re not looking for something they can actually implement from you. They just want to see how you think, and what your analytical and problem-solving skills are. It’s also a test of your communication skills, seeing how you present yourself and your ideas.

So don’t pressure yourself into giving an answer that’s on par with the work their existing product managers do. That’s like beating yourself up for not running as fast a Usain Bolt when you do your first ever 5K.

Prepping for product manager interviews?

We’ve got you covered! Check out these great resources:

Master The Product Manager Interview Playlist : We’ve collected together our best talks on acing the Product Management interview, from a look behind the scenes of recruitment, to how to break into the industry. Check out the entire playlist here , or enjoy this sample from Google’s Product Manager…

The Ultimate List of Product Manager Interview Questions: Prepare yourself for every kind of question you could ever hope to be asked in a product manager interview!

Product School resources: If you really want to deep-dive into the best interview techniques, and become the master of any interview you walk into, you should check out the resources we have in our community. We’ve got cheat sheets, templates, and more!

Hired — How to Get a Great Product Job: Tailored guide-to-go for product manager positions in top tech companies. As this book will show you,  some of the most successful product transitions originated from people in music production or finance, with full-time jobs or with no prior experience. The collection of stories of Product Management transition will show you how it’s done.

Updated: January 24, 2024

Subscribe to The Product Blog

Discover Where Product is Heading Next

Share this post

By sharing your email, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service

design case study interview

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

  • Discounts and promotions
  • Delivery and payment

Cart is empty!

Case study definition

design case study interview

Case study, a term which some of you may know from the "Case Study of Vanitas" anime and manga, is a thorough examination of a particular subject, such as a person, group, location, occasion, establishment, phenomena, etc. They are most frequently utilized in research of business, medicine, education and social behaviour. There are a different types of case studies that researchers might use:

• Collective case studies

• Descriptive case studies

• Explanatory case studies

• Exploratory case studies

• Instrumental case studies

• Intrinsic case studies

Case studies are usually much more sophisticated and professional than regular essays and courseworks, as they require a lot of verified data, are research-oriented and not necessarily designed to be read by the general public.

How to write a case study?

It very much depends on the topic of your case study, as a medical case study and a coffee business case study have completely different sources, outlines, target demographics, etc. But just for this example, let's outline a coffee roaster case study. Firstly, it's likely going to be a problem-solving case study, like most in the business and economics field are. Here are some tips for these types of case studies:

• Your case scenario should be precisely defined in terms of your unique assessment criteria.

• Determine the primary issues by analyzing the scenario. Think about how they connect to the main ideas and theories in your piece.

• Find and investigate any theories or methods that might be relevant to your case.

• Keep your audience in mind. Exactly who are your stakeholder(s)? If writing a case study on coffee roasters, it's probably gonna be suppliers, landlords, investors, customers, etc.

• Indicate the best solution(s) and how they should be implemented. Make sure your suggestions are grounded in pertinent theories and useful resources, as well as being realistic, practical, and attainable.

• Carefully proofread your case study. Keep in mind these four principles when editing: clarity, honesty, reality and relevance.

Are there any online services that could write a case study for me?

Luckily, there are!

We completely understand and have been ourselves in a position, where we couldn't wrap our head around how to write an effective and useful case study, but don't fear - our service is here.

We are a group that specializes in writing all kinds of case studies and other projects for academic customers and business clients who require assistance with its creation. We require our writers to have a degree in your topic and carefully interview them before they can join our team, as we try to ensure quality above all. We cover a great range of topics, offer perfect quality work, always deliver on time and aim to leave our customers completely satisfied with what they ordered.

The ordering process is fully online, and it goes as follows:

• Select the topic and the deadline of your case study.

• Provide us with any details, requirements, statements that should be emphasized or particular parts of the writing process you struggle with.

• Leave the email address, where your completed order will be sent to.

• Select your payment type, sit back and relax!

With lots of experience on the market, professionally degreed writers, online 24/7 customer support and incredibly low prices, you won't find a service offering a better deal than ours.

11 most-asked system design interview questions (+ answers)

System design interview guide

Below is a list of 59 confirmed system design interview questions that were asked  at Google, Amazon, Facebook, or Microsoft.

We identified these questions by analyzing a dataset of over 300  Glassdoor interview reports  that were posted by software engineers, engineering managers, and technical program managers.

And the first thing you'll want to know is which of these questions are the most common. Let’s get started.

  • 11 most common system design questions
  • More system design questions (by company)

How to prepare for system design interviews

Click here to practice system design interviews 1-on-1 with an ex-faang interviewer, system design interview questions.

The 11 questions below were the most common out of over 350 system design interview questions that we collected, and they're listed roughly in order of frequency below (note: we've just made minor edits to the phrasing).

  • How would you design a social media app?
  • How would you design X game?
  • How would you design a parking lot?
  • How would you design a URL-shortening service?
  • How would you design a web cache?
  • How would you design autocomplete for a search engine?
  • How would you design an API?
  • How would you design a messaging app?
  • How would you design an online file-sharing system
  • How would you design an e-commerce store
  • How would you design a ride-hailing / delivery app

Let's dig into these:

1. How would you design a social media app?

For this question you'll typically be asked to design a specific app, such as Twitter, Instagram, etc. For this example, we’ll assume the interviewer asked you to design Twitter. Here are some considerations for answering this question: 

Ask clarifying questions

  • Is the interviewer looking for a design of the core features, or a high-level overview of the whole service?
  • What are the constraints of the system?
  • What are your assumptions? (traffic distribution, number of active users and tweets, read vs write-heavy)

Design high-level

  • Back-of-the-envelope calculations: average KBs per tweet, size of new tweet content per month, read requests and tweets per second, etc.
  • High-level components: write, read, and search APIs; types of databases; SQL vs NoSQL; etc

Drill down on your design

  • Potential bottlenecks: adding a load balancer with multiple web servers, scalability issues, fanout service slowing down tweets and @replies, etc.
  • Components that you could dive into: how a user views the home timeline or posts a tweet, the intricacies of the database design, etc.

Bring it all together

  • Consider: does the final design address the bottlenecks you’ve identified? Does it meet the goals you discussed at the beginning of the interview? Do you have any questions for the interviewer?

For a full answer to this question, take a look at the video guide below  from Success In Tech or this text guide from donnemartin on GitHub. 

2. How would you design X game?

Another topic that comes up frequently is designing a classic game. The exact game you’ll be asked about varies, but here are some of the most common ones we’ve seen:

  • Tic-tac-toe
  • Minesweeper
  • Cards/poker

Let’s walk through an example of how you could approach the problem if you were asked to design a chess game. 

  • What are the rules of the game? 
  • How many players are there? Are there spectators?
  • Do we need a timer? Are any other special functions required?
  • Possible classes for the game:  board, piece, spot, etc.
  • Methods that will be required for things like moving pieces
  • Identify important attributes for each class, such as the grid coordinates and color of each spot
  • Define how the game will prevent illegal moves and recognize a victory
  • Sense check your design, and confirm whether it has met all of the requirements you identified at the beginning of the interview

Some of the above considerations were inspired by this in-depth solution to the question, so feel free to check out that resource.

3. How would you design a parking lot?

For questions like these, interviewers are testing your skills in object-oriented design, to see whether you can apply technical thinking to physical objects. 

  • Is this a multiple floor parking garage or a single level parking lot?
  • How many entry and exit points will be needed, and for what types of vehicles?
  • Are there monetary goals for this parking lot?
  • Possible use cases: customers parking and paying for their spot, admin managing the system, parking attendants maintaining the lot and helping customers, etc.
  • Possible classes of the system: ParkingLot, ParkingFloor, Account, ParkingTicket, Vehicle, etc.
  • How will you diagram specific activities? (e.g. customers paying for parking tickets, display panels showing available spots, etc.)
  • What are the required enums, data types, and constants of the eventual code for the parking lot system?
  • Will this system meet the requirements you’ve laid out with the interviewer in the beginning of the session?

For a full answer to this question, take a look at this text guide from Educative.io.  You may also find this video walk-through from Think Software useful: 

4. How would you design a URL-shortening service?

URL shortening services like TinyURL, Bitly, etc. provide short link aliases that redirect to longer URLs. Here are some points of consideration to help you work out how to build this kind of system. 

  • Will users be able to customize the URL?
  • How long do the URLs last before they expire?
  • What are the availability and latency requirements for this system?
  • Back-of-the-envelope calculations: estimate the traffic and storage needs per month, as well as bandwidth and memory requirements
  • Define the APIs (SOAP, REST, etc) as well as a general database schema (URL mappings and user data)
  • Consider tradeoffs: encoding actual URLs may turn out the same shortened URL for two different users who enter the same URL. System may not work for URLs with URL-encoding. Concurrency may cause problems, etc.
  • Where will you place load balancers, and how will you cache URLs?
  • Is the system you’ve designed highly available, so that URLs will not break if the servers go down? Does it meet any potential business objectives laid out at the start of the interview?

For a full answer to this question, take a look at this text guide from Educative.io.

Are you getting invited to enough system design interviews? If not, you might want to use our free tech resume guide (with examples) to improve your resume.

5. How would you design a web cache?

A distributed web cache is key to many systems, so that the RAM of multiple machines can be accessed in a single in-memory store quickly and reliably. Let’s look at some general points that should help you build out a design.

  • Consider the functional and non-functional requirements: put (storing objects under a unique key), get (retrieving objects), scalability, availability, performance, etc.
  • Specify your assumptions: can we assume that put and get are strings?
  • Possible data structures for storing data: hash table, queues, doubly linked list
  • Consider different options to distribute the cache, as well as the benefits of each (e.g. dedicated cache clusters vs co-located caches) 
  • Identify the tradeoffs of your choices: Maximum hash table size will prevent from adding more elements, shards may become “hot” (aka process more requests than others), etc.
  • Data replication could help with “hot” shard bottleneck
  • Is the system you’ve designed fast, highly scalable, and available?

For a full answer to this question, take a look at the video guide below  from System Design Interview.

6. How would you design autocomplete for a search engine?

If you’ve ever started typing something into a search engine, then you will have seen the suggested “autocomplete” options that are provided. This is also an interesting, and common, system design interview topic. Here are some points you could consider here:

  • What are the key features? (fast response time, high relevance, number of results, etc.)
  • What are the functional and non-functional requirements?
  • What data structure will you use to find suffixes and word completion, and how will you sort the solutions?
  • How will you store this data structure and connect it with the rest of the system? (Redis cache, database, hash table, API server, load balancer, etc.)
  • How would you modify the frequency of the system without compromising availability or increasing latency?
  • Consider the fault tolerance of the system - How would you store the already built trie data structure so that in case of failure the system can be restored?
  • Is there any more optimization that you could do? Does the system meet the requirements laid out in the beginning of the interview?

For a full answer to this question, take a look at the video guide below from Narendra L.

7. How would you design an API?

APIs are kind of like the bridges that connect the roads of major software products. As a result, they are a central part of the system design of major apps like Instagram, YouTube, Twitter, etc.

Let’s say you were asked, very broadly, to design an API for a website. Here are some examples of how you could go about this:

  • Who/what will be using the API? 
  • What is the purpose of the API? 
  • What kind of information does the API need to pass? 
  • Define how the API will be accessed by users (e.g. through a mobile app, website, etc.)
  • Consider the provider side of the API and the services/databases that will be accessible
  • Should an API gateway be used to improve security?
  • Will there be an authentication process to access the API?
  • Will you use a REST API or something different? 
  • Does your API meet all of the original requirements? Are there any additional considerations, or areas that could use further refinement?

To learn more about API design, check out this mock interview from Exponent, on designing the Twitter API:

8. How would you design a messaging app?

Real-time messaging apps are a common standalone product, or a built-in feature of larger systems. For this question, you might be asked to design a specific app, like WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger. 

  • What is the scale and profile of the user base?
  • What features should be incorporated into the messenger? (e.g. text, video, audio, read receipts, message encryption, etc.)
  • Should we focus on monetizing the system?
  • How many servers will this system need, and how will clients connect to them?
  • How will the senders and receivers of messages connect to the servers and database?
  • Where will the messages be stored, and for how long?
  • How will you scale the system, and where are the bottlenecks?
  • Deep dive into a component: sent, delivered, read notifications; push notifications; media sharing; database design; etc.
  • Have you met the initial goals you and the interviewer laid out for the system? 

To see another example of how to answer this question, watch this ex-Google engineering manager answer "Design Telegram":

9. How would you design a file-sharing system?

If you were interviewing at Google this question would probably be presented as "Design Google Drive" whereas elsewhere it might be "Design Dropbox."

You'll need to design a system that can  scale to millions of users and handle petabytes of data.

  • What is the expected user base and usage patterns? (e.g., individual users, businesses, file sizes, frequency of uploads/downloads)
  • Are there any specific security requirements for file storage and sharing?
  • Should the service support file versioning, collaboration, and synchronization across devices?
  • Determine the overall system architecture, including client-server communication and storage components.
  • Define how users will access the file-sharing service (web interface, desktop applications, mobile apps) and how they will authenticate and authorize access.
  • Determine the storage infrastructure and consider options such as cloud storage, distributed file systems, or a combination based on performance, scalability, and data redundancy requirements.
  • Define the data model and storage system for storing files and metadata. Consider techniques like sharding or partitioning to distribute and handle large amounts of data efficiently.
  • Discuss how the file upload and download process will work, including any optimizations for large file transfers, resumable uploads, and efficient streaming.
  • Address synchronization challenges, including conflict resolution, file locking, and ensuring consistency across devices when files are modified or shared.
  • Discuss how the system can scale to handle a growing user base, increased file storage, and concurrent file operations.
  • Consider fault tolerance mechanisms, such as data replication and backup strategies, to ensure data durability and availability.
  • Discuss potential performance optimizations, like caching frequently accessed files or leveraging content delivery networks (CDNs) for faster data delivery.
  • For extra points, address security measures, including encryption at rest and in transit, access controls, and user permissions to protect sensitive data.

For a full answer to this question, take a look at the video guide below by Naren from Tech Dummies.

 10. How would you design an e-commerce store?

This question might take the form of "Design Amazon", "Design eBay", "Design FlipKart", etc.

Your online shopping system will need to store an inventory of products with lots of categories, allowing customers to search through them and make purchases. You'll also need to think about how you handle the expanding load on the website and prevent it from crashing on key retail days.

  • Will the store be available globally or limited to specific regions?
  • Do we need any specific features or functionalities desired, such as reviews, recommendations, or personalized experiences?
  • Determine the overall architecture of the e-commerce store, including client-server communication, databases, and external integrations.
  • Define the user interfaces, including web, mobile, and potentially other platforms like voice assistants or smart devices.
  • Identify the core features, such as product catalog, search, shopping cart, payment processing, and order management.
  • Discuss the product catalog and inventory management system, including categories, attributes, pricing, and availability.
  • Address the search functionality, including features like auto-suggestions, filters, and sorting options.
  • Discuss the shopping cart and checkout process, considering guest checkout, saved carts, and various payment options.
  • Time permitting, consider the order management system, including order tracking, notifications, and returns/refunds handling.
  • For extra points discuss security measures, including encryption, secure payment processing, and protection against common vulnerabilities like cross-site scripting (XSS) or SQL injection.
  • How well does your system meet the requirements? Is there anything you can do to refine it?
  • You might want to address internationalization and localization requirements, including multiple languages, currencies, and regional regulations.

To see an expert answer to the question, watch the video below - Gaurav Sen is the candidate and he's always great.

If you'd prefer to take a look at a written solution to the problem, check out this article on Medium.

11. Design a ride-hailing or delivery app

This question frequently appears as "Design Uber", "Design DoorDash", etc., substituting in whichever brand is prominent in the region you're interviewing in.

Let's take a look at an answer outline to "Design Uber".

  • Are we just focusing on Uber's main ride-hailing service?
  • Are there any specific features or requirements, such as real-time tracking, payment options, or driver-partner management?
  • Any existing infrastructure or partnerships to leverage?
  • Determine the overall architecture of the system, including client applications, backend services, databases, and external integrations.
  • Identify the core features, such as ride requests, driver allocation, real-time tracking, payments, and ratings/reviews.
  • Discuss the rider app functionality, including authentication, ride requests, trip history, real-time driver tracking, and fare estimation.
  • Address the driver app functionality, including driver registration, authentication, trip acceptance, navigation, and earnings tracking.
  • Discuss the backend services responsible for matching riders with available drivers, considering factors like proximity, driver ratings, and estimated arrival time.
  • You could also address the real-time tracking system, including location updates, route optimization, and handling unexpected events like traffic or road closures.
  • Or you could discuss the payment processing system, including multiple payment options, fare calculations, and integration with payment gateways.
  • For extra points, consider security measures to protect user data, prevent fraud, and ensure secure communication.
  • Has the system met the requirements laid out?
  • Discuss how the system can handle challenges such as surge pricing during peak demand and incentivize drivers to meet increased rider demand.
  • Or you could touch on address customer support features, such as in-app chat, support tickets, or phone support for issue resolution.
  • You might also want to mention potential integrations with external services, such as mapping/navigation providers, payment gateways, or carpooling solutions.

See a detailed written answer for "Design Uber back-end" in this Educative blog post.

More system design interview questions

Now that we’ve gone through the most common system design interview questions, let’s get into a longer list of questions that have been asked in real tech interviews, according to data from Glassdoor (note: we've edited to improve the phrasing of some questions).

The questions below are organized by company, to help you find the most relevant ones for your interviews.   

Google system design interview questions

  • Design Google Search
  • Design Spotify
  • Design Telegram
  • Design an online booking system for a  restaurant
  • Design Twitter
  • Design an autocomplete feature with an efficient data structure
  • Design a web cache
  • Design Google Drive
  • Design and implement statistics for a calendar
  • Design Google Maps
  • Design a news front page with source aggregation across newspapers
  • Design Google Photos
  • Design a task scheduling feature
  • Design YouTube search
  • Design a ticketing platform
  • Design an elevator
  • Design a Boggle solver
  • How would you design a system for a robot to learn the layout of a room and traverse it?
  • Design a distributed ID generation system
  • How would you deploy a solution for cloud computing to build in redundancy for the compute cluster?
  • Design the server infrastructure for GMail

Meta system design interview questions

  • How would you design Instagram / Facebook / Twitter?
  • Design a live commenting system for posts
  • Design WhatsApp / Facebook Messenger
  • Design Facebook status search
  • Design an online collaborative editing tool
  • How would you design an autocomplete service for a search engine?
  • Design a travel booking system for Facebook users
  • Design Instagram Stories
  • How would you build Minesweeper?
  • Design a system to prevent ads from foreign actors from interfering in domestic politics
  • Design a distributed botnet
  • Design a video upload and sharing app
  • Design the API layer for Facebook chat
  • How would you use a load balancer for memcache servers?
  • How would you architect the Facebook newsfeed?
  • Implement a typeahead feature

Amazon system design interview questions

  • How would you design Twitter / Instagram / Facebook?
  • Design Snake / Chess / Tic-Tac-Toe / Poker / Boggle
  • Design a parking lot
  • Design a phone billing system
  • Design a TinyURL service
  • Design an API that would take and organize order events from a web store
  • Design a file system
  • Design a product recommendation system based on a user's purchase history
  • How would you design an electronic voting system?
  • Design a deck of cards
  • Design a system to optimally fill a truck
  • Design a warehouse system for Amazon
  • Design an online poker game
  • Design a parking payment system
  • Design a system to interview candidates
  • Design a search engine autocomplete
  • Design an airport
  • Design the Prime Video home page
  • Design a registration system for a restaurant
  • Design a food delivery app at a global scale
  • Design a Dropbox service
  • Design an inventory system
  • Design a news website
  • Design a shopping cart system
  • Design a system to find friends on social media
  • Design a Swiggy delivery system with a focus on optimizing for the shortest route
  • Design a temperature identification system with geographically distributed sensors
  • Design a ticketing system
  • How would you design a system that reads book reviews from other sources and displays them on your online bookstore?
  • Design a promotion mechanism which could give 10% cash back on a particular credit card
  • How would you build software behind an Amazon pick up location with lockers?
  • Design a distributed cache system

Microsoft system design interview questions

  • How does buffer overflow work?
  • How would you design an online portal to sell products?
  • Design a new fitness wearable to measure heart rate
  • Design a shopping cart

As you can see from the complex questions above, there is a lot of ground to cover when it comes to system design interview preparation. So it’s best to take a systematic approach to make the most of your practice time.

Below, you’ll find three preparation steps with links to free resources. You can also refer to our system design interview prep guide  and our list of 19 system design interview tips from ex-interviewers .

Otherwise, let's start with preparation step 1.

1. Learn the concepts

There is a base level of knowledge required to be able to speak intelligently about system design. You don't need to know EVERYTHING about sharding, load balancing, queues, etc. 

However, you will need to understand the high-level function of typical system components. You'll also want to know how these components relate to each other, and any relevant industry standards or major tradeoffs. 

To help you get the foundational knowledge you need, we've put together a series of 9 system design concept guides. Here's the full list:

  • Network protocols and proxies , which make it possible for any networked computers to talk to each other, no matter where they are or what hardware or software they’re running.
  • Databases , integral components of the world’s biggest technology systems.
  • Latency, throughput, and availability , three common metrics for measuring system performance.
  • Load balancing , the process of distributing tasks over a set of computing nodes to improve the performance and reliability of the system.
  • Leader election algorithms , which describe how a cluster of nodes without a leader can communicate with each other to choose exactly one of themselves to become the leader. 
  • Caching , a technique that stores copies of frequently used application data in a layer of smaller, faster memory in order to compute costs and to improve data retrieval times and throughput.
  • Sharding , the horizontal scaling of a database system that is accomplished by breaking the database up into smaller “shards,” which are separate database servers that all contain a subset of the overall dataset.
  • Polling, SSE, and WebSockets , techniques for streaming high volumes of data to or from a server.
  • Queues and pub-sub , mechanisms that allow a system to process messages asynchronously , avoiding bottlenecks and help the system to operate more efficiently.

We’d encourage you to begin by studying these topics, and once you understand the basics, you can begin practicing system design questions.

2. Work through system design interview questions

As you likely noticed in the  common questions section , we recommend using a repeatable answer framework when answering system design interview questions. You can learn more about that framework here , but in the meantime, here is a summary:

First, spend about five minutes checking in with your interviewer about the functional and non-functional requirements of what you’re going to design. Ask about the system’s goals and how they will be measured. Be sure that you fully understand the question before moving forward.

Call out any assumptions you’re making that will influence your design approach. If applicable, ask about non-functional requirements such as availability, consistency, scalability, etc.

Start the high-level design by specifying one to two metrics (e.g. number of users added, products sold before vs after a feature launch, etc.). Then use these metrics to do some simple calculations in order to find the optimal usage pool of the system.

Once you’ve defined your metrics, map out only the most functional components of the system (e.g. front end, web server, database, etc.).

Finally, before getting into the more detailed aspects of your system, make some decisions on how you will design its database. Choose whether it will be a relational or a no-SQL database, as well as its metadata and table structure.

If you haven’t already, start mapping out the system on your whiteboard. Talk through your diagram so that your interviewer is able to follow along and ask questions when necessary.

Consider any bottlenecks that may arise when it comes to the system’s scalability, performance, or flexibility.

To finalize your design, play to your strengths by choosing a component you’re more familiar with and drilling down on it. If you’re not sure which component would be best to explore, ask your interviewer.

Before wrapping up the round, take about five minutes to re-examine what you’ve designed. Does it meet the objectives you laid out with the interviewer at the beginning of the session? It is okay to change some components at this stage if you think it will improve the system, but you must explain to the interviewer what you are doing and why.

Apply this framework to practice questions like those we’ve included in this article. Use it on different types of questions in a variety of subjects, so that you learn how to adapt it to different situations and respond to unpredictable questions on the fly.

3. Practice with mock interviews

The first step is always to practice by yourself, as we touched on above. Once you’ve got the framework down, start interviewing yourself out loud as you practice. Play both the role of the interviewer and the candidate, asking and answering questions. This will help you develop your communication skills and your process for breaking down problems.

Practice with someone else

Once you've done some individual practice, we would also strongly recommend that you practice solving system design questions with someone else interviewing you.

A great place to start is to practice with friends or family if you can. This can help you get some preliminary feedback on your approach, which will be especially helpful if your partner is familiar with system design interviews. 

Practice with ex-interviewers

Finally, you should also try to practice system design mock interviews with expert ex-interviewers, as they’ll be able to give you much more accurate feedback than friends and peers.

If you know someone who has experience running interviews at Google, Meta or another big tech company, then that's fantastic. But for most of us, it's tough to find the right connections to make this happen. 

Here's the good news. We've already made the connections for you. We’ve created a coaching service where you can practice system design interviews 1-on-1 with ex-interviewers from leading tech companies. Learn more about how an interview coach can give you an advantage , or simply click here to start scheduling sessions today .

Keep reading:

  • 47 coding interview examples
  • 11 most-asked behavioral interview questions for engineers

Interview coach and candidate conduct a video call

Qualitative study design: Interviews

  • Qualitative study design
  • Phenomenology
  • Grounded theory
  • Ethnography
  • Narrative inquiry
  • Action research
  • Case Studies
  • Field research
  • Focus groups
  • Observation
  • Surveys & questionnaires
  • Study Designs Home

Interviews are intended to find out the experiences, understandings, opinions, or motivations of participants. The relationship between the interviewer and interviewee is crucial to the success of the research interview; the interviewer builds an environment of trust with the interviewee/s, guiding the interviewee/s through a set of topics or questions to be discussed in depth.

Interviews are the most commonly used qualitative data gathering technique and are used with grounded theory, focus groups, and case studies.

  • Interviews are purposive conversations between the researcher and the interviewee, either alone or as part of a group
  • Interviews can be face to face, via telecommunications (Skype, Facetime, or phone), or via email (internet or email interview)
  • The length of an interview varies. They may be anywhere from thirty minutes to several hours in length, depending on your research approach
  • Structured interviews use a set list of questions which need to be asked in order, increasing the reliability and credibility of the data but decreasing responsiveness to interviewee/s. Structured interviews are like a verbal survey
  • Unstructured interviews are where the interviewer has a set list of topics to address but no predetermined questions. This increases the flexibility of the interview but decreases the reliability of the data. Unstructured interviews may be used in long-term field observation research
  • Semi-structured interviews are the middle ground. Semi-structured interviews require the interviewer to have a list of questions and topics pre-prepared, which can be asked in different ways with different interviewee/s. Semi-structured interviews increase the flexibility and the responsiveness of the interview while keeping the interview on track, increasing the reliability and credibility of the data. Semi-structured interviews are one of the most common interview techniques.
  • Flexible – probing questions can be asked, and the order of questions changed, depending on the participant and how structured or unstructured the interview is
  • Quick way to collect data
  • Familiarity – most interviewees are familiar with the concept of an interview and are comfortable with this research approach

Limitations

  • Not all participants are equally articulate or perceptive
  • Questions must be worded carefully to reduce response bias
  • Transcription of interviews can be time and labour intensive

Example questions

  • What are the experiences of midwives in providing care to high-risk mothers, where there is a history of drug or alcohol use?

Example studies

Sandelin, A., Kalman, S., Gustafsson, B. (2019). Prerequisites for safe intraoperative nursing care and teamwork – operating theatre nurses’ perspectives: a qualitative interview study, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 28, 2635-2643. Doi: 10.1111/jocn.14850  

Babbie, E. (2008). The basics of social research (4th ed). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth

Creswell, J.W. & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (5th ed). Thousand Oaks: SAGE

Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. Journal of basic and clinical pharmacy, 5(4), 87-88. doi:10.4103/0976-0105.141942

Lindlof, T. & Taylor, B. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks: SAGE .

  • << Previous: Surveys & questionnaires
  • Next: Sampling >>
  • Last Updated: Oct 12, 2023 11:29 AM
  • URL: https://deakin.libguides.com/qualitative-study-designs

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • J Basic Clin Pharm
  • v.5(4); September 2014-November 2014

Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation

Shazia jamshed.

Department of Pharmacy Practice, Kulliyyah of Pharmacy, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuantan Campus, Pahang, Malaysia

Buckley and Chiang define research methodology as “a strategy or architectural design by which the researcher maps out an approach to problem-finding or problem-solving.”[ 1 ] According to Crotty, research methodology is a comprehensive strategy ‘that silhouettes our choice and use of specific methods relating them to the anticipated outcomes,[ 2 ] but the choice of research methodology is based upon the type and features of the research problem.[ 3 ] According to Johnson et al . mixed method research is “a class of research where the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, theories and or language into a single study.[ 4 ] In order to have diverse opinions and views, qualitative findings need to be supplemented with quantitative results.[ 5 ] Therefore, these research methodologies are considered to be complementary to each other rather than incompatible to each other.[ 6 ]

Qualitative research methodology is considered to be suitable when the researcher or the investigator either investigates new field of study or intends to ascertain and theorize prominent issues.[ 6 , 7 ] There are many qualitative methods which are developed to have an in depth and extensive understanding of the issues by means of their textual interpretation and the most common types are interviewing and observation.[ 7 ]

Interviewing

This is the most common format of data collection in qualitative research. According to Oakley, qualitative interview is a type of framework in which the practices and standards be not only recorded, but also achieved, challenged and as well as reinforced.[ 8 ] As no research interview lacks structure[ 9 ] most of the qualitative research interviews are either semi-structured, lightly structured or in-depth.[ 9 ] Unstructured interviews are generally suggested in conducting long-term field work and allow respondents to let them express in their own ways and pace, with minimal hold on respondents’ responses.[ 10 ]

Pioneers of ethnography developed the use of unstructured interviews with local key informants that is., by collecting the data through observation and record field notes as well as to involve themselves with study participants. To be precise, unstructured interview resembles a conversation more than an interview and is always thought to be a “controlled conversation,” which is skewed towards the interests of the interviewer.[ 11 ] Non-directive interviews, form of unstructured interviews are aimed to gather in-depth information and usually do not have pre-planned set of questions.[ 11 ] Another type of the unstructured interview is the focused interview in which the interviewer is well aware of the respondent and in times of deviating away from the main issue the interviewer generally refocuses the respondent towards key subject.[ 11 ] Another type of the unstructured interview is an informal, conversational interview, based on unplanned set of questions that are generated instantaneously during the interview.[ 11 ]

In contrast, semi-structured interviews are those in-depth interviews where the respondents have to answer preset open-ended questions and thus are widely employed by different healthcare professionals in their research. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews are utilized extensively as interviewing format possibly with an individual or sometimes even with a group.[ 6 ] These types of interviews are conducted once only, with an individual or with a group and generally cover the duration of 30 min to more than an hour.[ 12 ] Semi-structured interviews are based on semi-structured interview guide, which is a schematic presentation of questions or topics and need to be explored by the interviewer.[ 12 ] To achieve optimum use of interview time, interview guides serve the useful purpose of exploring many respondents more systematically and comprehensively as well as to keep the interview focused on the desired line of action.[ 12 ] The questions in the interview guide comprise of the core question and many associated questions related to the central question, which in turn, improve further through pilot testing of the interview guide.[ 7 ] In order to have the interview data captured more effectively, recording of the interviews is considered an appropriate choice but sometimes a matter of controversy among the researcher and the respondent. Hand written notes during the interview are relatively unreliable, and the researcher might miss some key points. The recording of the interview makes it easier for the researcher to focus on the interview content and the verbal prompts and thus enables the transcriptionist to generate “verbatim transcript” of the interview.

Similarly, in focus groups, invited groups of people are interviewed in a discussion setting in the presence of the session moderator and generally these discussions last for 90 min.[ 7 ] Like every research technique having its own merits and demerits, group discussions have some intrinsic worth of expressing the opinions openly by the participants. On the contrary in these types of discussion settings, limited issues can be focused, and this may lead to the generation of fewer initiatives and suggestions about research topic.

Observation

Observation is a type of qualitative research method which not only included participant's observation, but also covered ethnography and research work in the field. In the observational research design, multiple study sites are involved. Observational data can be integrated as auxiliary or confirmatory research.[ 11 ]

Research can be visualized and perceived as painstaking methodical efforts to examine, investigate as well as restructure the realities, theories and applications. Research methods reflect the approach to tackling the research problem. Depending upon the need, research method could be either an amalgam of both qualitative and quantitative or qualitative or quantitative independently. By adopting qualitative methodology, a prospective researcher is going to fine-tune the pre-conceived notions as well as extrapolate the thought process, analyzing and estimating the issues from an in-depth perspective. This could be carried out by one-to-one interviews or as issue-directed discussions. Observational methods are, sometimes, supplemental means for corroborating research findings.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

  • Knowledge Base

Methodology

  • Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples

Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples

Published on March 10, 2022 by Tegan George . Revised on June 22, 2023.

An interview is a qualitative research method that relies on asking questions in order to collect data . Interviews involve two or more people, one of whom is the interviewer asking the questions.

There are several types of interviews, often differentiated by their level of structure.

  • Structured interviews have predetermined questions asked in a predetermined order.
  • Unstructured interviews are more free-flowing.
  • Semi-structured interviews fall in between.

Interviews are commonly used in market research, social science, and ethnographic research .

Table of contents

What is a structured interview, what is a semi-structured interview, what is an unstructured interview, what is a focus group, examples of interview questions, advantages and disadvantages of interviews, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about types of interviews.

Structured interviews have predetermined questions in a set order. They are often closed-ended, featuring dichotomous (yes/no) or multiple-choice questions. While open-ended structured interviews exist, they are much less common. The types of questions asked make structured interviews a predominantly quantitative tool.

Asking set questions in a set order can help you see patterns among responses, and it allows you to easily compare responses between participants while keeping other factors constant. This can mitigate   research biases and lead to higher reliability and validity. However, structured interviews can be overly formal, as well as limited in scope and flexibility.

  • You feel very comfortable with your topic. This will help you formulate your questions most effectively.
  • You have limited time or resources. Structured interviews are a bit more straightforward to analyze because of their closed-ended nature, and can be a doable undertaking for an individual.
  • Your research question depends on holding environmental conditions between participants constant.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Semi-structured interviews are a blend of structured and unstructured interviews. While the interviewer has a general plan for what they want to ask, the questions do not have to follow a particular phrasing or order.

Semi-structured interviews are often open-ended, allowing for flexibility, but follow a predetermined thematic framework, giving a sense of order. For this reason, they are often considered “the best of both worlds.”

However, if the questions differ substantially between participants, it can be challenging to look for patterns, lessening the generalizability and validity of your results.

  • You have prior interview experience. It’s easier than you think to accidentally ask a leading question when coming up with questions on the fly. Overall, spontaneous questions are much more difficult than they may seem.
  • Your research question is exploratory in nature. The answers you receive can help guide your future research.

An unstructured interview is the most flexible type of interview. The questions and the order in which they are asked are not set. Instead, the interview can proceed more spontaneously, based on the participant’s previous answers.

Unstructured interviews are by definition open-ended. This flexibility can help you gather detailed information on your topic, while still allowing you to observe patterns between participants.

However, so much flexibility means that they can be very challenging to conduct properly. You must be very careful not to ask leading questions, as biased responses can lead to lower reliability or even invalidate your research.

  • You have a solid background in your research topic and have conducted interviews before.
  • Your research question is exploratory in nature, and you are seeking descriptive data that will deepen and contextualize your initial hypotheses.
  • Your research necessitates forming a deeper connection with your participants, encouraging them to feel comfortable revealing their true opinions and emotions.

A focus group brings together a group of participants to answer questions on a topic of interest in a moderated setting. Focus groups are qualitative in nature and often study the group’s dynamic and body language in addition to their answers. Responses can guide future research on consumer products and services, human behavior, or controversial topics.

Focus groups can provide more nuanced and unfiltered feedback than individual interviews and are easier to organize than experiments or large surveys . However, their small size leads to low external validity and the temptation as a researcher to “cherry-pick” responses that fit your hypotheses.

  • Your research focuses on the dynamics of group discussion or real-time responses to your topic.
  • Your questions are complex and rooted in feelings, opinions, and perceptions that cannot be answered with a “yes” or “no.”
  • Your topic is exploratory in nature, and you are seeking information that will help you uncover new questions or future research ideas.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

  • Academic style
  • Vague sentences
  • Style consistency

See an example

design case study interview

Depending on the type of interview you are conducting, your questions will differ in style, phrasing, and intention. Structured interview questions are set and precise, while the other types of interviews allow for more open-endedness and flexibility.

Here are some examples.

  • Semi-structured
  • Unstructured
  • Focus group
  • Do you like dogs? Yes/No
  • Do you associate dogs with feeling: happy; somewhat happy; neutral; somewhat unhappy; unhappy
  • If yes, name one attribute of dogs that you like.
  • If no, name one attribute of dogs that you don’t like.
  • What feelings do dogs bring out in you?
  • When you think more deeply about this, what experiences would you say your feelings are rooted in?

Interviews are a great research tool. They allow you to gather rich information and draw more detailed conclusions than other research methods, taking into consideration nonverbal cues, off-the-cuff reactions, and emotional responses.

However, they can also be time-consuming and deceptively challenging to conduct properly. Smaller sample sizes can cause their validity and reliability to suffer, and there is an inherent risk of interviewer effect arising from accidentally leading questions.

Here are some advantages and disadvantages of each type of interview that can help you decide if you’d like to utilize this research method.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

  • Student’s  t -distribution
  • Normal distribution
  • Null and Alternative Hypotheses
  • Chi square tests
  • Confidence interval
  • Quartiles & Quantiles
  • Cluster sampling
  • Stratified sampling
  • Data cleansing
  • Reproducibility vs Replicability
  • Peer review
  • Prospective cohort study

Research bias

  • Implicit bias
  • Cognitive bias
  • Placebo effect
  • Hawthorne effect
  • Hindsight bias
  • Affect heuristic
  • Social desirability bias

The four most common types of interviews are:

  • Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order. 
  • Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
  • Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.
  • Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.

The interviewer effect is a type of bias that emerges when a characteristic of an interviewer (race, age, gender identity, etc.) influences the responses given by the interviewee.

There is a risk of an interviewer effect in all types of interviews , but it can be mitigated by writing really high-quality interview questions.

Social desirability bias is the tendency for interview participants to give responses that will be viewed favorably by the interviewer or other participants. It occurs in all types of interviews and surveys , but is most common in semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .

Social desirability bias can be mitigated by ensuring participants feel at ease and comfortable sharing their views. Make sure to pay attention to your own body language and any physical or verbal cues, such as nodding or widening your eyes.

This type of bias can also occur in observations if the participants know they’re being observed. They might alter their behavior accordingly.

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest. It is one of 4 types of interviews .

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

George, T. (2023, June 22). Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved February 22, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/interviews-research/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Tegan George

Other students also liked, unstructured interview | definition, guide & examples, structured interview | definition, guide & examples, semi-structured interview | definition, guide & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

  • Open access
  • Published: 14 February 2024

Implementing a tobacco-free workplace program at a substance use treatment center: a case study

  • Anastasia Rogova 1 , 2 ,
  • Isabel Martinez Leal 1 , 2 ,
  • Maggie Britton 1 , 2 ,
  • Tzuan A. Chen 2 ,
  • Lisa M. Lowenstein 1 ,
  • Bryce Kyburz 3 ,
  • Kathleen Casey 3 ,
  • Kim Skeene 3 ,
  • Teresa Williams 3 &
  • Lorraine R. Reitzel 1 , 2  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  201 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

151 Accesses

6 Altmetric

Metrics details

People with substance use disorders smoke cigarettes at much higher rates than the general population in the United States and are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related diseases. Many substance use treatment centers do not provide evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment or maintain comprehensive tobacco-free workplace policies. The goal of the current work is to identify barriers and facilitators to a successful and sustainable implementation of a tobacco-free workplace program, which includes a comprehensive tobacco-free policy and evidence-based cessation treatment services, in a substance use treatment center.

This study is based on an ethnographic approach and uses a qualitative case study design. Data were collected via interviews with staff ( n  = 6) and clients ( n  = 16) at the substance use treatment center and site visits ( n  = 8). Data were analyzed using thematic analysis guided by the extended Normalization Process Theory designed to inform the implementation of innovations in healthcare practice.

Staff at the substance use treatment center supported the implementation of the program and shared a good understanding of the purpose of the intervention and its potential benefits. However, the study identified significant challenges faced by the center during implementation, including widespread tobacco use among clients, contributing to attitudes among staff that tobacco cessation was a low-priority problem due to a perceived lack of interest in quitting and inability to quit among their clients. We identified several factors that contributed to changing this attitude, including provision of tobacco training to staff, active leadership support, low number of staff members who smoked, and access to material resources, including nicotine replacement products. The implementation and active enforcement of a comprehensive tobacco-free workplace program contributed to a gradual change in attitudes and improved the provision of evidence-based tobacco cessation care at the substance use treatment center.

Conclusions

Substance use treatment centers can integrate tobacco cessation practices in their daily operations, despite multiple challenges they face due to the complex behavioral health and socioeconomic needs of their clients. With proper support, substance use treatment centers can provide much needed tobacco cessation care to their clients who are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related health conditions and systemic health inequities.

Peer Review reports

According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 12.5% of the US adults aged ≥ 18 years reported current use of cigarettes in 2020 [ 1 ]. While this figure represents a substantial decrease from over 40% of the adult population smoking in the 1960s, tobacco use is still the leading preventable cause of death in the US [ 2 ] with annual deaths directly attributable to tobacco use estimated to be at least 480,000 [ 3 ]. However, these devastating effects of tobacco use do not equally impact all population groups. The proportion of people who use tobacco products is dramatically elevated among the often intersecting groups of people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage, who are medically underserved, and/or people living with comorbid mental health and non-nicotine substance use disorders [ 4 ]. These health disparity populations have disproportionately high smoking rates; for example, over 65% of adults with substance use disorders (and up to 90% according to some sources) are active smokers [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. As a result, adults with substance use disorders are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related disease compared to the general population [ 7 , 8 ].

There is an overwhelming body of evidence that adults with substance use disorders are interested in and capable of quitting with appropriate support [ 9 , 10 ]. Current clinical guidelines recommend that all clients be provided with evidence-based cessation care, which includes behavioral interventions such as tobacco use assessment, brief cessation advice, individual or group counseling, and pharmacotherapy such as nicotine replacement therapy or non-nicotine medication (bupropion and varenicline) [ 11 , 12 ]. Moreover, the adoption of system-level policies, including comprehensive tobacco-free workplace policies, which prohibit the use of any form of tobacco inside buildings and on the grounds of behavioral health treatment centers, are also shown to be effective in improving quit rates [ 13 ]. Despite their proven effectiveness, however, evidence-based practices and policies remain underutilized, and tobacco use treatment is given a low priority in substance use treatment centers. For example, according to a 2016 nationwide study, only 64.0% of substance use treatment centers reported screening clients for tobacco use, 47.4% offered tobacco cessation counseling, 26.2% offered nicotine replacement therapy, and 34.5% had tobacco-free policies [ 4 ]. Furthermore, although not reported, it is possible that some proportion of these centers had tobacco-free workplace policies that may have been non-comprehensive in product coverage (e.g., not extending to e-cigarettes/vaping) or workplace area coverage (e.g., allowing smoking areas), which are known to be less effective than their comprehensive policy counterparts [ 14 , 15 , 16 ]. Consequently, there is a missed opportunity for substance use treatment centers to comply with clinical care guidelines [ 11 , 12 ] and to intervene to reduce tobacco use and related health disparities among their clients.

There are several previously identified barriers to providing tobacco cessation treatment at substance use treatment centers, including limited training, limited resources, time restraints, and cultural norms [ 9 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Additionally, available treatment opportunities that take little time or training, such as referral to a state tobacco cessation quitline, are often unknown by staff at substance use treatment centers [ 23 ]. Our use of “staff” here refers to both clinical employees, those providing direct services to clients, and nonclinical employees. Moreover, despite evidence to the contrary, staff may believe that treating tobacco use and substance use disorders simultaneously will jeopardize substance use treatment and recovery [ 25 ]. Together, these barriers and others may contribute to the known translational lag whereby any type of evidence-based practice takes a long time (e.g., up to 17 years) to be implemented into practice to reach the intended population and ensure the improvement of clients’ health [ 26 , 27 ]. While this translational lag is detrimental for all clients and communities, the negative consequences of these delays are even worse for populations who experience health disparities, such as individuals living with substance use disorders.

Together, the previously described evidence-based tobacco cessation practices and policies, such as tobacco use assessment, brief cessation advice, individual or group counseling, pharmacotherapy, tobacco-free policies, form the core components of a comprehensive tobacco-free workplace program [ 28 , 29 ]. Academic-community partnerships can assist substance use treatment centers in implementing comprehensive tobacco-free programs and reducing the translational gap that affects health disparities among their clients [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 ]. This study describes the implementation of a tobacco-free workplace program at a substance use treatment center in Houston, Texas, which included a comprehensive tobacco-free workplace policy implementation, education and specialized training support, and the provision of resources to support tobacco cessation care. The goal of the study was to identify barriers and facilitators to successful integration of tobacco-free workplace policy and cessation practices into a substance use treatment center. The current study was based on an ethnographic approach and uses a case study design, which is considered an efficient way to present qualitative ethnographic findings [ 33 , 34 ]. Case study design has been found to be particularly useful in implementation research, as it allows for an in-depth analysis of complex interventions in combination with a participatory approach in a real-life context [ 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ]. Prior research has shown the importance of studying interventions in close connection with the context of dynamic environments that can have an extensive influence on the implementation process [ 37 ]. In the case of complex interventions, such as comprehensive tobacco-free programs, this is particularly relevant, given their dependence on contextual elements for their effectiveness [ 39 ]. Intervention and context cannot be easily separated in this situation, and there is an urgent need to better understand the relationship between these two core elements of implementation to ensure that research evidence can meaningfully impact policy and healthcare organizational culture [ 38 ]. By applying a case study design, this work contributes to the existing research on implementing tobacco-free workplace programs at substance use treatment centers [ 32 ] by providing an in-depth qualitative description of program implementation in the setting of a nonprofit outpatient substance use treatment center serving diverse clients, most of whom belong to socioeconomically disadvantaged and medically underserved groups. Additionally, this study represents both staff, clinical and nonclinical alike, including leadership, and clients’ perspectives on this program, the latter of which were not included in prior work [ 32 ]. The findings presented in this study can be used by other substance use treatment centers that serve similar populations and seek to implement a comprehensive tobacco-free program in the most sustainable way.

Case description

This initiative was undertaken as a part of the Taking Texas Tobacco Free (TTTF) program, which is a multicomponent, evidence-based comprehensive tobacco-free workplace program that was designed to address tobacco dependence within healthcare treatment settings, including substance use treatment settings [ 30 , 32 ]. TTTF includes (1) tobacco-free policy development and implementation and/or refreshment for comprehensiveness or quality assurance; (2) education and specialized training for staff on tobacco use and cessation, screening practices, and treatment provision; and (3) resource provision, including free nicotine replacement therapy, signage, and passive dissemination materials. Throughout the implementation process, TTTF team members, comprising an academic-community collaboration, provide ongoing technical assistance and support (for more information on the TTTF program, see previously published studies [ 28 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ]).

To ensure the privacy of the research participants, we refer to the field research location as the “Center” herein. The Center is located in a Houston, Texas, zip code that is among the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-designated low-income and health professional shortage areas. It is a small Center that employs 7 staff (including clinical and nonclinical staff) and serves approximately 1,000 unique clients each year. One of these staff members was designated the TTTF program champion to serve as the main point of contact for all aspects of the tobacco-free workplace program implementation process. This staff member was not financially compensated for accepting this role, but they received additional week-long full-time training to become a Tobacco Treatment Specialist. The financial compensation for this role was not a part of the current program, and the expectation was that the Center’s leadership incorporates this role in the regular scope of work for their staff to ensure the sustainability of the program.

The Center serves a diverse group of clients, with 90% of their clients having histories of incarceration or another form of engagement in the criminal justice system, many of whom come from low socioeconomic backgrounds and/or have been diagnosed with comorbid behavioral health (i.e., mental health or substance use disorders) and physical health conditions. The Center estimated that approximately 80% of their clients smoked conventional cigarettes and 30% used other tobacco products, including e-cigarettes (there is an overlap, as some clients might be dual or multiple product users). Most clients participate in the Center’s substance use treatment program for 90 days. The Center introduced a tobacco-free policy in 2000, which prohibited the use of tobacco products of any type both indoors and outdoors; however, they had not provided any tobacco cessation services to their clients beyond the requirement not to use tobacco on their property prior to their enrollment in the TTTF program. The tobacco-free workplace program implementation components and the Center’s timeline are presented in Table  1 .

This project was approved by the Internal Review Board of the University of Houston and the Quality Improvement Assessment Board at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Oral informed consent was received from all participants prior to participation in qualitative study procedures. The aims of the project and interviews were discussed with participants who were given an opportunity to ask any questions about the interview process and the nature of the study. Additionally, all participants gave oral permission to audio-record the interview; they were given the option to remain anonymous and not use their names or other identifying information in any written summary of the collected data. Participants were informed that their participation was voluntary, that they could decline to answer any questions and stop participating in the interview at any time.

Data collection instruments

Data for this qualitative case study were collected via group and individual interviews with staff and clients at the Center, as well as site visits and participant observations. Data include interview transcripts and fieldnotes. We conducted one pre- and one post-implementation focus group with clients ( n  = 16), two pre-implementation semi-structured interviews with staff ( n  = 2), two individual interviews with staff during the implementation process ( n  = 2), and one post-implementation group interview with staff ( n  = 2). Interview guides were used for interviews and focus groups, which lasted 60–90 min (see Additional file 1 : Interview Guides). Pre-implementation interview questions for staff focused on any Center-specific needs for the program rollout, populations they served, their personal experience with tobacco use, their knowledge of and attitudes toward tobacco use and cessation among their clients, and implementation barriers and facilitators they anticipated. Staff post-implementation interview questions addressed experiences with implementing the program, interventions that were successful and less successful, changes in their practices addressing tobacco dependence, and any challenges they experienced. Focus groups with clients addressed their experiences with tobacco use and cessation, their knowledge of the tobacco-free program at the Center, their attitudes toward and interest in this program, and their experiences with and results of receiving any tobacco cessation support at the Center. In addition, we undertook several site visits ( n  = 8), when A.R. (the 1st author) and I.M.L. (the 2nd author), both cultural anthropologists who worked as qualitative research specialists on the project, conducted observations and made fieldnotes using a free-form approach. The site visits (1 to 2 h long) incorporated both direct and indirect observations. The collected observational data were not subjected to standalone analysis but served to inform the interview questions, gain a more nuanced understanding of how the Center was implementing various parts of the program, and provide further details about the study’s context and setting.

Two authors (A.R. and I.M.L.) moderated the focus groups and completed the interviews. Audio-recordings of focus groups and interviews were transcribed verbatim by a professional transcription service and analyzed using thematic analysis to initially inductively code and identify themes within the dataset. Data analysis was conducted iteratively using constant comparison, and themes were drawn directly from the data. The process of constant comparison provided analytic rigor and ensured accurate accounting of all the data, identifying appropriate selection of categories and themes [ 45 ]. At the next stage of the analysis, the concepts of the extended Normalization Process Theory (discussed in detail below) were applied to these themes to more effectively analyze and evaluate the implementation process.

Approach: extended normalization process theory

When exploring the implementation process, the application of a theoretical framework enhances understanding of the process and highlights barriers to and facilitators of the implementation. Implementation scientists have developed several major frameworks and theories to describe and evaluate the implementation process [ 26 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 ]. For this analysis, we followed the extended Normalization Process Theory (eNPT) [ 46 , 47 ], which is a sociological theory that informs the implementation of innovations in healthcare practice, focusing on bridging the translational gap between evidence-based practices and their implementation [ 50 ]. This theory approaches the implementation process as a series of interactions between people’s actions (their ‘agency’) and the context within which the intervention is implemented [ 46 , 50 ].

The eNPT identifies and explains key elements that contribute to or impede normalization of complex interventions within a social system, including four core constructs, two of which are focused on context (potential and capacity) and two of which address agency (capability and contribution, see Fig.  1 for details) [ 46 ]. The identification of these major constructs helps researchers guide and understand the implementation process and provide a systematic description [ 46 ]. The eNPT has been effectively utilized at all stages of research projects, both during the planning stages and the post-implementation analysis, as in this case, where this theory helps to frame emergent themes and consider their implications for further research and implementation practice [ 51 ]. The application of the eNPT as a theoretical framework enhances stakeholders’ ability to improve design for more successful implementation in the future and to enhance the application and normalization of interventions within organizations by community adopters and researchers [ 50 ].

figure 1

Concepts and Constructs of the Extended Normalization Process Theory (eNPT, adapted from May 2013 [ 46 ])

The two constructs of the eNPT that characterize the context of implementation are potential and capacity . Participants’ potential is expressed through individual intentions and collective commitment to participate in the intervention [ 52 ]. Capacity, which is another crucial element of context, is defined as the availability of material and cognitive resources, as well as existing social norms and social roles. Attention to these contextual elements ensures a better understanding of the implementation process and its outcomes, as they shape agents’ ability to effectively cooperate with each other to bring about change [ 46 ]. Capability and contribution are two constructs that characterize the agency of the participants involved in the implementation process. Capability refers to how workable the complex intervention is, as well as to the possibility of integrating it in everyday practice. Contribution refers to the actions of the agents who are involved in the implementation process [ 46 ]. This construct focuses on how the agents, including individuals and groups, enact potential and capacity by undertaking actions to make things happen and ensure that new processes and practices become “the way we do things here.” [ 46 ] Each of these constructs is further divided into categories used to understand and evaluate the implementation process (see Table  2 ).

After conducting the initial coding, the emerged themes were systematized and organized in relation to the major concepts and constructs of the eNPT theory. Table  2 shows the identified themes from the case study data and how they are related to the eNPT constructs and dimensions. In the section below, we present our results in relation to these theoretical constructs.

Context: potential

The Center’s CEO initiated the Center’s participation in the tobacco-free workplace program and continuously expressed their personal support and commitment to implement and maintain the program. The Center’s staff were also enthusiastic about the tobacco-free program and expressed commitment to its implementation. Most participants welcomed this forthcoming change and expansion of tobacco cessation services and agreed that it was necessary and beneficial for the Center’s working environment and for their clients’ needs and well-being. This collective commitment was supported and reinforced during the preparation phase of the implementation process, when all staff received training provided by the TTTF program:

I think one of the biggest things in preparation for implementing the program was when we had our staff retreat. Bryce [B.K.] actually flew in, and he participated in the retreat and helped train our staff prior to us actually implementing the program. So, he did a workshop with us, and that gave us an opportunity to ask him questions […] So, everybody was ready. Everybody was pumped and ready because we knew what to do. We knew what the problem was about . (Staff post-implementation interview)

The number of staff who used tobacco products themselves was very low at the Center. The only staff member who said that she smoked cigarettes participated in the program herself and, at the time of the interview, reported a successful quit attempt and being tobacco-free. In the pre- and post-implementation interviews, staff members shared their negative attitudes towards smoking related to health concerns and their readiness to facilitate tobacco cessation efforts at their center:

I grew up as an athlete, and so smoking is something that was not encouraged in my field. I didn’t partake when I was around people that did such as my mom who later on in life actually stopped smoking. (Staff pre-implementation interview)

Context: capacity

One of the major barriers to the implementation of the tobacco-free workplace program at the Center was associated with the widespread practice of tobacco use among the Center’s clients and within their immediate environment. There are two closely interrelated aspects of this problem: clients’ lived experiences with tobacco being an innate part of their everyday life and staff attitudes and expectations of their clients’ interest in and ability to quit tobacco, both of which are discussed below.

Most of the Center’s clients grew up in an environment where smoking had been normalized for years. They shared their experiences of having parents, older siblings, grandparents, neighbors, and friends who had smoked on a regular basis for most of their lives:

Kind of like I think started smoking from– because I would light cigarettes for my daddy or whatever, so he was smoking. (Client focus group, pre-implementation) Me growing up around my grandfather and stuff, he smokes. […] Mine started just with social. Got out of high school, my own place. All my friends, they bring over rum […] and cigarettes and everything. (Client focus group, pre-implementation)

Some of the clients reported a lack of interest in quitting or their perceived inability to quit:

So officially, once I turned 18 or the age to buy a pack of cigarettes, I bought a pack of cigarettes and since then it’s been– I never had the urge to quit, never tried to quit. Just always adapted to it. (Client focus group, pre-implementation) They [clients] point-blank told me that they feel that if they stop smoking, that they’ll latch back onto something else that is not as legal. (Staff post-implementation interview)

However, these experiences do not mean that none of the clients problematized tobacco use practices and were interested in quitting tobacco. Some clients reported varied attitudes toward quitting. For example, one of the clients who participated in a focus group shared her motivation to quit smoking:

I didn’t want him [her son] to - when he’s picking up pieces of paper towel and putting it to his mouth like a cigarette, it bothers me. I don’t want him to […] also, my baby’s father wasn’t a smoker. It’s a shame thing. I was ashamed. (Client focus group, post-implementation)

In the interviews with the Center’s staff members, they generally revealed that tobacco cessation treatment was a low-priority problem, related partly to a perceived lack of interest in quitting among their clients. Staff shared expectations that clients must be proactive in expressing their interest in quitting and seeking support. Staff at the Center repeatedly expressed the idea that if their clients were interested in quitting tobacco use, they had to ask for help to proactively demonstrate that they were interested in and committed to quitting. As the Center’s program champion said during a conversation with one of the researchers:

I see some of the guys who signed up for the program, but they go out and smoke with other guys outside. I walk by, I see him, but I am not going to say anything to him. It must be his decision, he is an adult, and he must take responsibility. I cannot do it for them. (fieldnotes, conversation with program champion, May 2022)

In a similar way, one of the clinicians at the Center shared during the interview:

I guess if they ask me, if they would like the patches, if they want to participate, I guess that’s when I’ll bring it up […] I think it’s ultimately really up to the client if they really want to make that change. That’s what I love. Some of the clients really want to commit strongly about making the change to stop smoking. (Staff post-implementation interview)

Tobacco education trainings were offered to all Center staff at the beginning of implementation, which were designed to mitigate these barriers (e.g., by providing information about how to proactively address tobacco use with clients) and enhance the implementation capacity by ensuring that they had the knowledge and skills required to implement the program. One of the staff evaluated this training as being very important to help them to be able to deliver tobacco cessation services:

Teaching us about pharmacology, motivational interviewing […]. That thing that was really helpful for us to learn and to be able to explain it to the clients if questions were to come up. (Staff post-implementation interview)

The capacity to implement the program also depends on the availability of material resources. One of most important and expensive resources, nicotine replacement therapy products, were provided to the Center free of charge as a part of the active implementation process. The availability of the nicotine replacement products was widely discussed by the Center’s staff and evaluated as one of the central elements of the program implementation at the Center:

We actually not only have “No Smoking” sign posted up, but we’re able to say, “Here, we have products, nicotine replacement products, that we could give you to help you stop smoking.” (Staff post-implementation interview).

Agency: capability

The Center’s capability to implement the program was evaluated by assessing the implementation’s workability and integration with the everyday workflow and preexisting work processes, following the eNPT framework concepts.

The Center already had a standard tobacco-free policy in place prior to the involvement in the project, and while the TTTF presented them with a much more comprehensive program, the initial buy-in was facilitated by the level of familiarity with the intervention by both staff and clients:

We weren’t really implementing anything. It [tobacco-free policy] was there. It was understood, but this gave us a fuller picture of a way to implement, how to introduce it, a guideline to follow . (Staff post-implementation interview)

One element of the program that contributed to the increased workability was the introduction of the program champion role into the program:

I think the best thing is to have a point person. Because we have a point person, that point person stays on top of all the policy procedures, regulation, inventory, whatever we have going on. (Staff pre-implementation interview)

The Center’s CEO and staff also emphasized that the support they received from the TTTF program increased the workability of the intervention. In addition to regular practical and informational support, they were able to contact program staff with any ongoing questions and requests for assistance. They shared that the focus groups that were conducted with clients also contributed to the program implementation success by increasing clients’ interest in the program:

You guys come in here and working with those guys, because you legitimize the process as a third-party source, and the guys come in to see and you do the surveys [focus group] with them. I think that’s very helpful. (Staff post-implementation interview)

New aspects of the program were reported to be well integrated into the everyday workflow, and while their implementation needed certain changes in practices and attitudes among staff and clients, these changes were not particularly disruptive or time consuming, according to staff who participated in post-implementation interviews:

It’s good to have it embedded into the program that you already have, immerse into what you have going and make it a part of the process, not as something separate, but just this is our program. This is included in the program. I think it’s welcomed a little bit more. (Staff post-implementation interview)

Agency: contribution

Most staff members shared a clear understanding of the purpose of the intervention and its potential benefits. They evaluated the program as important, saw the value of this program for their clients, and shared positive experiences of being involved in its implementation:

I love the program because it gives the clients an opportunity to work on solving that problem of addiction in a positive manner. (Staff post-implementation interview) I felt like it was a great idea to come into play here at the facility. (Staff post-implementation interview)

All staff were well aware of the program being implemented and what new practices and routines were introduced at the Center. They reported very little disagreement about a shared understanding of the need to implement this program:

Everybody was clear on what the mission was, how we would present it, and the way it would be implemented . (Staff post-implementation interview)

One example of effective engagement with the program was one of the staff members quitting smoking herself:

When I came in, he was doing a class and I sat in on it and I’m like, “Hey, I want to do this.” […] we talked about it and I signed up to do it. It’s worked very good for me. (Staff post-implementation interview)

In the interviews, staff at the Center discussed how their engagement in the program and enacting it in their everyday practices contributed to their deeper sense of belonging:

I have the feeling like you can’t disrespect the facility [ by smoking ]. This is our facility and we need to respect her. (Staff post-implementation interview)

Staff members shared a commitment to serving their clients and supporting each other, which was further reinforced by their increased capacity to provide tobacco cessation support to their clients:

That sign right there says we are community, and that’s what we promote, that we are a community center, and this community center has many different programs in it that can provide assistance and this is one of the additional programs that we have that can provide assistance. (Staff post-implementation interview)

Various program components were implemented with different degrees of commitment. The tobacco-free policy was the component that staff reported to be implemented most consistently. The tobacco-free policy has been routinely maintained and reinforced by both the Center’s staff and clients themselves:

They are not allowed to smoke within the facility area. So, that’s worked pretty good. (Staff post-implementation interview) We were always like, “You can’t smoke in here. You got to walk outside.” I think that they just pretty much are just like, “Okay, we got to do the right thing.” […] So yes, they respect it, I think . (Staff post-implementation interview)

However, as A.R. and I.M.L. observed when they visited the Center, clients were often smoking outside. While they were not violating the policy as they were technically outside the property and were smoking while on a public road, they remained physically close to the building, and whoever was leaving or entering the property had to go past a group of clients smoking to enter through the only door to the Center. The Center’s leadership has not found a solution to this problem, as they said they did not have control over the territory and could not prohibit tobacco use beyond their property. This location-specific issue led to a situation in which the tobacco-free policy was technically enforced; however, clients were still able to smoke in the vicinity of the Center, visitors were exposed to secondhand smoke, and this practice was not challenged by leadership or staff, either pre-implementation or after.

Tobacco screenings were reported to be implemented on a regular basis, although there were some discrepancies in the participants’ accounts of screening practices and their regularity. All clients were reportedly screened for all forms of tobacco use during intake, but the follow-up screenings of those clients who reported using tobacco were less consistent. There seemed to be a lack of clear understanding and agreement among staff who was responsible for these screenings, which resulted in a lack of consistency and depended on a specific staff member’s practice rather than established and clearly understood guidelines:

Each time we do an intake on a form, there is an assessment that asks the client if they do smoke, and if they do smoke, do they smoke cigarettes, or do they smoke e-cigarettes? We do offer the NRT [nicotine replacement therapy, and if they want to participate, they would need to say yes or no. Let the counsellor know. […] The individual counsellors, after 30 days in their sessions, ask them again. (Staff post-implementation interview)

However, in individual interviews with staff, at least one of them said that they did not conduct any follow-up screenings unless their clients brought this up and asked about the tobacco cessation program themselves.

As one of the central elements of the program implementation, the program champion provided regular information sessions to inform their clients on the Center’s participation in the program and available support and resources for clients who were interested in quitting tobacco. All clients were expected to attend at least one of these sessions, as these presentations were performed during their mandatory group counseling sessions. Clients were made aware of the resources and support available to them at the Center if they decided to make a quit attempt, as well as given a brief educational presentation on the harms of smoking and the benefits of quitting. These presentations were seen as an effective tool to get clients interested in the program, provide them an opportunity to ask for more information, and engage in conversations about quitting:

People have changed their minds, actually. They initially said no, but then once they heard [the program champion] and people talk about it, they come back and say, well, yes, they would like to. There’s been a couple of guys that have done it, that I know personally, that have done that. (Staff post-implementation interview)

The actual engagement of clients and motivating them to make a quit attempt was the most challenging part of the implementation process for the Center. The overall number of participants who made a quit attempt was 17 clients and two staff members by the end of the implementation period. While the reach of the program is larger than immediate client participation in cessation treatment, there were also some clients’ accounts of inconsistency in support they received during their time at the Center regarding their tobacco use:

Nobody has ever asked me anything [about tobacco use], except you. (Client focus group, post-implementation)

While staff supported the implementation of the program from the beginning, there were some concerns about how well this program might be accepted by their clients. In the post-implementation interview, a counselor shared an observation that their clients were more interested in quitting than they anticipated:

I guess I’m just surprised that I feel like I’m getting some yes’s now instead of a whole bunch of no’s. So, I think that’s actually a good thing because I feel like now that the program has been implemented here, that we’re getting quite a few yes’s. So, that’s definitely something to feel good about, that makes me feel good. (Staff post-implementation interview)

While we observed a variation in the degree to which tobacco cessation intervention services were provided in practice, there was a shared understanding that some of the services needed to be improved:

To be honest, it’s a question [tobacco use and interest in quitting] I feel like I need to ask them more. I haven’t been asking them about it, but I feel like I do need to ask them . […]So, that’s something I could work on. (Staff post-implementation interview)

In the quote above, the counsellor acknowledges that they should ask their clients about their smoking habits and interest in quitting more proactively, which is a positive example of reflexive monitoring of their own actions and practices and could ultimately lead to better outcomes of the intervention.

Staff also demonstrated their involvement by critically evaluating the program delivery and expressing suggestions for improvement:

[We say] “We’re going to have smoking cessation group today and this is going to be the only one for the month.” Well, why can’t we bring it up every meeting? Look, we have three meetings a week, let’s bring it up every time. […] I think there should be a smoking class […] for the whole group at least once a month. (Staff post-implementation interview)

Staff reflected on how this program changed their Center, and they reported a positive change, creating an opportunity to provide more meaningful and involved support and services to their clients:

It’s positively changed or impacted our facility because it gives us some legitimacy behind not only just having a no smoking sign just posted like every public place you see, but actually giving some type of support, nicotine replacement therapy. […] (Staff post-implementation interview).

This case study discusses the implementation of a tobacco-free workplace program at a substance use treatment center serving a diverse group of clients, including many from low socioeconomic backgrounds. This analysis and consideration of the interplay between context and emergent agency, facilitated by the application of the eNPT framework, contribute to the existing knowledge on implementing similar programs in substance use treatment settings that serve marginalized and medically underserved populations facing socioeconomic and health challenges. The findings from this study offer insights that can guide other substance use treatment centers with similar populations in implementing sustainable tobacco-free programs effectively.

A key barrier associated with the context of the implementation, as defined by the eNPT framework, was the widespread tobacco use among clients and within their immediate environment. Prior research has indicated that individuals with substance use disorders are often interested in quitting smoking [ 16 ], but they tend to have lower success rates [ 53 , 54 ]. These contextual barriers to achieving success in tobacco cessation efforts among this population require an exceptionally high level of commitment from the staff working at substance use treatment centers to provide continuous, robust support to their clients [ 55 , 56 ]. As our findings suggest, it is essential to acknowledge and consider the difficulties faced by these individuals when they are trying to quit smoking. While these challenges should not deter clinicians from motivating their clients to quit smoking, it is crucial that they are prepared to approach the situation with sensitivity and awareness of the contextual factors and lived experiences of the clients, which is also emphasized in the principles of trauma-informed care.

Other contextual categories, defined by the eNPT, which we addressed in our study to evaluate the Center’s potential to implement the program, include individual intentions and collective commitment shared by staff and leadership. Most of the staff expressed a strong commitment to participate in the program and provide cessation services to the clients. However, we also encountered attitudes indicating that staff, including clinicians, were doubtful about their clients’ interest in quitting and ability to do so. Given their expertise and supportive roles as addiction treatment specialists, clinicians’ attitudes can greatly affect those of their clients; moreover, clinicians’ beliefs and attitudes are often cited as one of the major barriers to effectively implementing tobacco-free programs within substance use treatment settings [ 4 , 22 , 25 , 57 ]. Training given as a part of the program implementation provided staff with information on evidence-based tobacco cessation practices and addressed some of these attitudes to better prepare staff to provide cessation care to their clients. Such training programs are particularly important for successful implementation and can be further enhanced by placing a stronger emphasis on motivational interviewing techniques, providing practitioners with a better understanding of the nature of ambivalence toward behavior change and the diverse factors influencing clients’ readiness to quit tobacco use.

The capacity to successfully implement and maintain the tobacco-free workplace program is also dependent on access to material resources and, specifically, nicotine replacement therapy products. While two shipments of nicotine replacement products were provided free of charge by the TTTF program, ensuring a continuous supply of these products is anticipated to be challenging for the Center. While individual clients can access free nicotine replacement products through services such as the Texas Tobacco Quitline [ 58 ], the availability of these products on-site and the ability to distribute them immediately and at no cost has been emphasized by the Center’s staff as a crucial component of the program. To address this challenge, the TTTF staff provided informational resources to the Center’s leadership and program champion, highlighting the support available in the community to secure additional funding for the ongoing purchase of nicotine replacement products. However, it remains uncertain at this stage whether the Center will be able to secure the necessary funding to sustain the provision of free nicotine replacement products to their clients and how the availability of these products will impact the long-term sustainability of the tobacco-free program. This is a limitation of this study, as it was conducted during the active phase of implementation and shortly after its completion, lacking data on the program’s long-term maintenance and outcomes. Therefore, further investigation specifically focusing on the long-term sustainability of tobacco-free programs at substance-use treatment centers would be valuable to address this gap and provide insights into ensuring ongoing access to nicotine replacement therapy products for patients. We suggest, however, that it is important to maintain communication with centers after the program implementation is completed, highlighting specific local funding opportunities, as well as sharing examples of successful programs maintained by other centers as a mechanism to support collaboration and pursue additional resources.

Analysis of the themes reflecting the expressions of agency, another major eNPT concept, showed a gradual positive change in tobacco treatment practices at the Center following the implementation of the program, including the enforcement of policies and staff quitting smoking. However, the findings also show that these changes did not immediately affect the provision of smoking cessation care to clients at the Center. Tobacco cessation treatment remained a problem of a lower priority, even for staff who had negative experiences with smoking associated with health concerns, did not use tobacco themselves and were overall very supportive of the program and excited about helping their clients to quit. Rather, this seemed closely related to a persistent perception that their clients were not genuinely interested in or capable of quitting, which was also revealed in the expectations shared by staff that clients had to be proactive in expressing their interest in quitting and seeking support.

We suggest that the expectation of clients proactively seeking support shared by the Center’s staff is associated, at least partially, with their understanding of the existing standards of client-clinician communication, which emphasizes the importance of “sharing power” equally with clients and involving them in the decision-making process [ 59 ]. The concept of patient-centered care, designed to improve healthcare provision and outcomes, is often regarded as a matter of ethical and moral healthcare practice, and it assumes patients’ involvement in their care [ 60 , 61 ]. It is important to consider, however, that these expectations might not work as planned with vulnerable populations, including clients who experience socioeconomic disadvantage, limited access to healthcare services, lower literacy levels and/or limited English proficiency [ 62 ]. These individuals’ ability to take a proactive stance and advocate for their health and well-being may be further hindered by systemic inequalities and structural racism disproportionately experienced by minoritized and underserved groups, and these factors have to be considered to improve the delivery of patient-centered care to these clients and ensure that the care they receive is tailored to their specific needs. Taking Texas Tobacco Free program has developed multiple training videos on smoking cessation support to special population groups [ 63 ], which can be used to provide continuing education on working with diverse groups to ensure that healthcare professionals are equipped with knowledge and skills needed to provide such care.

It is important to acknowledge that concerns about promoting smoking cessation are not entirely unfounded, as clinicians’ advice can have various consequences beyond the client simply following or not following it [ 64 ], and prior research has shown that avoidance of hearing specific recommendations to change behavior, including smoking, is reported as one of the reasons why people avoid seeking medical care [ 65 ]. However, these findings should not discourage health care providers from asking their clients about tobacco use, as this practice is associated with increased quit attempts and is recommended by The US Public Health Service Clinical Practice Guideline [ 66 ]. The potential risk of inadvertently stigmatizing clients who may already feel shame and guilt regarding their tobacco use and inability to quit might be avoided if clinicians use non-stigmatizing approaches identified in prior research [ 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 ]. It is particularly important to address these concerns in tobacco cessation trainings and educate staff on non-stigmatizing approaches. It is important to incorporate motivational interviewing in these trainings as this approach highlights the importance of displaying unconditional positive regard toward clients, which may increase client resilience in the face of behavioral change advice offered and minimize perceived stigma. It is crucial to find a balance between being sensitive to clients’ choices and priorities and providing the healthcare necessary to alleviate the consequences of systemic health inequities among minoritized and medically underserved groups.

One of the limitation of the study is the limited data on clients’ quit attempts and their outcomes. While the Center attempted to collect these data, they had difficulties following up with their clients after they left the program (most of the clients attended a 90-day program), which created difficulties in evaluating outcomes of those clients who initiated a quit attempt while being treated at the Center. While a more detailed analysis of client outcomes would enhance the evaluation of the intervention, the focus of this study has been on the implementation outcomes, including changes in provider behavior regarding assessing and treating tobacco dependence rather than assessing its direct impact on clients’ tobacco use and cessation [ 72 ]. Future research is needed to delve into evaluating the effects of the intervention on clients’ outcomes, which would provide valuable insights for further refining and optimizing the program.

While the Center’s staff exhibited strong potential and capacity to implement the program, our findings indicate that the actual change in practice has been less successful than anticipated based on the overall support of the program, high potential, and capability. Tobacco cessation treatment had not yet become a routine practice for all staff members by the end of the implementation process. However, despite encountering significant barriers, there is evidence that the program has led to a change in attitudes, including a better understanding of the need and improved ability to provide evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment to their patients. The staff at the Center have started to integrate tobacco treatment into their routine practices, informing clients about the available support, including nicotine replacement therapy products, providing personalized assistance, and assessing patients who may not be ready to quit. Although there are areas for improvement, the program has effectively initiated change in practices, normalizing tobacco cessation treatment and incorporating it as a routine practice at the Center.

The results of this study suggest that substance use treatment centers can maintain tobacco-free workplace policies and integrate evidence-based tobacco cessation practices in their daily operations, but they face extreme challenges due to the complex behavioral health needs and socioeconomic needs of their clients. Understanding the complex interplay between social norms, social roles, and limited resources within such settings is paramount for the success of tobacco cessation efforts. These organizations need extensive support, including a longer implementation period, as well as additional material resources, informational and educational support, and assistance in preparing and maintaining local policies. Regular training of staff, including implementing a train-the-trainer program, would allow to promote and sustain local expertise on evidence-based tobacco cessation interventions for minoritized and medically underserved populations. With proper support, substance use treatment settings have the potential to play a crucial role in addressing tobacco use and provide much needed cessation services to their clients who are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related health conditions and systemic health inequities.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Cornelius ME. Tobacco Product Use Among Adults — United States, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 13];71. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7111a1.htm .

Redfield RR, Hahn SM, Sharpless NE. Redoubling efforts to help americans quit smoking — federal initiatives to Tackle the Country’s Longest-running epidemic. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(17):1606–9.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Rosen LJ, Galili T, Kott J, Rees V. Beyond safe and effective: the urgent need for high-impact smoking cessation medications. Prev Med. 2021;150:106567.

Marynak K, Substance Abuse Treatment Facilities — United States. Tobacco Cessation Interventions and Smoke-Free Policies in Mental Health and, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2021 Sep 29];67. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6718a3.htm .

Goodwin RD, Davidson L. Prevalence of cigarette smoking among US adults with Major Depression or Substance Use disorders. JAMA. 2022;328(6):585.

Guydish J, Passalacqua E, Pagano A, Martínez C, Le T, Chun J, et al. An international systematic review of smoking prevalence in addiction treatment. Addict Abingdon Engl. 2016;111(2):220–30.

Article   Google Scholar  

Han B, Volkow ND, Blanco C, Tipperman D, Einstein EB, Compton WM. Trends in prevalence of cigarette smoking among US adults with Major Depression or Substance Use disorders, 2006–2019. JAMA. 2022;327(16):1566–76.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Bandiera FC, Anteneh B, Le T, Delucchi K, Guydish J. Tobacco-related mortality among persons with Mental Health and Substance abuse problems. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(3):e0120581.

Knudsen HK. Implementation of smoking cessation treatment in substance use disorder treatment settings: a review. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2017;43(2):215–25.

McKelvey K, Thrul J, Ramo D. Impact of quitting smoking and smoking cessation treatment on substance use outcomes: an updated and narrative review. Addict Behav. 2017;65:161–70.

Stead LF, Koilpillai P, Fanshawe TR, Lancaster T. Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2021 Aug 18];(3). Available from: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002 /14651858.CD008286.pub3/full.

US Preventive Services Task Force. Interventions for Tobacco Smoking Cessation in adults, including pregnant persons: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2021;325(3):265–79.

Frazer K, McHugh J, Callinan JE, Kelleher C. Impact of institutional smoking bans on reducing harms and secondhand smoke exposure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(5):CD011856.

Fichtenberg CM, Glantz SA. Effect of smoke-free workplaces on smoking behaviour: systematic review. BMJ. 2002;325(7357):188.

Seidel SE, Metzger K, Guerra A, Patton-Levine J, Singh S, Wilson WT, et al. Effects of a Tobacco-Free Work Site Policy on Employee Tobacco attitudes and behaviors, Travis County, Texas, 2010–2012. Prev Chronic Dis. 2017;14:E133.

Cookson C, Strang J, Ratschen E, Sutherland G, Finch E, McNeill A. Smoking and its treatment in addiction services: clients’ and staff behaviour and attitudes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14(1):304.

Guydish J, Le T, Hosakote S, Straus E, Wong J, MartĂ­nez C, et al. Tobacco use among substance use disorder (SUD) treatment staff is associated with tobacco-related services received by clients. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2022;132:108496.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hunt JJ, Gajewski BJ, Jiang Y, Cupertino AP, Richter KP. Capacity of US drug treatment facilities to provide evidence-based tobacco treatment. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(10):1799–801.

Knudsen HK, Studts JL, Boyd S, Roman PM. Structural and cultural barriers to the Adoption of Smoking Cessation Services in Addiction Treatment Organizations. J Addict Dis. 2010;29(3):294–305.

LoParco CR, Chen TA, Martinez Leal I, Britton M, Carter BJ, Correa-Fernández V, et al. Organization-Level Factors Associated with changes in the delivery of the Five A’s for Smoking Cessation following the implementation of a Comprehensive Tobacco-Free Workplace Program within Substance Use Treatment centers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(19):11850.

Richter KP, Hunt JJ, Cupertino AP, Garrett S, Friedmann PD. Understanding the drug treatment community’s ambivalence towards tobacco use and treatment. Int J Drug Policy. 2012;23(3):220–8.

Siddiqi AD, Britton M, Chen TA, Carter BJ, Wang C, Martinez Leal I, et al. Tobacco Screening Practices and Perceived Barriers To Offering Tobacco Cessation Services among Texas Health Care Centers Providing Behavioral Health Treatment. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(15):9647.

Jafry MZ, Reuven SM, Britton M, Chen TA, Martinez Leal I, Rogova A, et al. Providers’ non-cigarette Tobacco Use intervention practices in relation to beliefs about patients, prioritization of and Skills for Intervention, and Referral Knowledge in Texas Healthcare Centers Providing Care to persons with behavioral Health needs. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(21):14269.

Jafry MZ, Martinez J, Chen TA, Britton M, Martinez Leal I, Rogova A et al. Behavioral Health Care Provider’s beliefs, confidence, and knowledge in treating cigarette smoking in relation to their use of the 5A’s intervention. Addict Behav Rep. 2023;100493-.

Britton M, Martinez Leal I, Jafry MZ, Chen TA, Rogova A, Kyburz B, et al. Influence of provider and leader perspectives about Concurrent Tobacco-Use Care during Substance-Use treatment on their Tobacco intervention provision with clients: a mixed-methods study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(7):5260.

Fernandez ME, Ten Hoor GA, van Lieshout S, Rodriguez SA, Beidas RS, Parcel G, et al. Implementation mapping: using intervention mapping to develop implementation strategies. Front Public Health. 2019;7:158.

Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):510–20.

Correa-Fernández V, Wilson WT, Shedrick DA, Kyburz B, Samaha HL, Stacey T, et al. Implementation of a tobacco-free workplace program at a local mental health authority. Transl Behav Med. 2017;7(2):204–11.

Leal IM, Chen TA, Correa-Fernández V, Le K, O’Connor DP, Kyburz B, et al. Adapting and evaluating implementation of a Tobacco-Free Workplace Program in behavioral Health centers. Am J Health Behav. 2020;44(6):820–39.

Correa-Fernández V, Wilson WT, Kyburz B, O’Connor DP, Stacey T, Williams T, et al. Evaluation of the Taking Texas Tobacco Free Workplace Program within behavioral health centers. Transl Behav Med. 2019;9(2):319–27.

Martinez Leal I, Taing M, Correa-FernĂĄndez V, Obasi EM, Kyburz B, Le K, et al. Addressing Smoking Cessation among women in Substance Use treatment: a qualitative Approach to Guiding tailored interventions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(11):5764.

Le K, Correa-Fernández V, Leal IM, Kyburz B, Chen TA, Barrientos D, et al. Tobacco-free Workplace Program at a Substance Use Treatment Center. Am J Health Behav. 2020;44(5):652–65.

McCullough MB, Chou AF, Solomon JL, Petrakis BA, Kim B, Park AM, et al. The interplay of contextual elements in implementation: an ethnographic case study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15(1):62.

Van Tiem JM, Schacht Reisinger H, Friberg JE, Wilson JR, Fitzwater L, Panos RJ, et al. The STS case study: an analysis method for longitudinal qualitative research for implementation science. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21(1):27.

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):100.

Harrison H, Birks M, Franklin R, Mills J. Case study research: Foundations and methodological orientations. In: Forum qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: qualitative social research. 2017. p. 1–17.

Hudon C, Chouinard MC, Bisson M, Danish A, Karam M, Girard A, et al. Case Study with a Participatory Approach: rethinking pragmatics of Stakeholder Engagement for implementation research. Ann Fam Med. 2021;19(6):540–6.

Paparini S, Green J, Papoutsi C, Murdoch J, Petticrew M, Greenhalgh T, et al. Case study research for better evaluations of complex interventions: rationale and challenges. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):301.

Wells M, Williams B, Treweek S, Coyle J, Taylor J. Intervention description is not enough: evidence from an in-depth multiple case study on the untold role and impact of context in randomised controlled trials of seven complex interventions. Trials. 2012;13(1):95.

Martinez Leal I, Chen TA, Correa-Fernández V, Le K, O’Connor DP, Kyburz B, et al. Adapting and evaluating implementation of a Tobacco-Free Workplace Program in behavioral Health centers. Am J Health Behav. 2020;44(6):820–39.

Taing M, Nitturi V, Chen TA, Kyburz B, Martinez Leal I, Correa-FernĂĄndez V, et al. Implementation and outcomes of a Comprehensive Tobacco Free Workplace Program in Opioid Treatment centers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;19(1):239.

Nitturi V, Chen TA, Kyburz B, Martinez Leal I, Correa-Fernandez V, O’Connor DP, et al. Organizational characteristics and readiness for Tobacco-Free Workplace Program implementation moderates changes in Clinician’s delivery of smoking interventions within behavioral Health treatment clinics. Nicotine Tob Res. 2021;23(2):310–9.

Taing M, Kyburz B, MartinezLeal I, Le K, Chen TA, Correa-Fernandez V, et al. Clinician training in the adaptation of a Comprehensive Tobacco-Free Workplace Program in agencies serving the homeless and vulnerably housed. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(17):6154.

Le K, Chen TA, Martinez Leal I, Correa-FernĂĄndez V, Obasi EM, Kyburz B, et al. Organizational-level moderators impacting Tobacco-related knowledge change after Tobacco Education Training in Substance Use Treatment centers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(14):7597.

Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893–907.

May C. Towards a general theory of implementation. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):18.

Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C, MacFarlane A, Ballini L, Dowrick C, et al. Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Med. 2010;8:63.

Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):53.

Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):1–15.

McEvoy R, Ballini L, Maltoni S, O’Donnell CA, Mair FS, MacFarlane A. A qualitative systematic review of studies using the normalization process theory to research implementation processes. Implement Sci. 2014;9(1):2.

McNaughton RJ, Steven A, Shucksmith J. Using normalization process theory as a practical Tool across the Life Course of a qualitative Research Project. Qual Health Res. 2020;30(2):217–27.

van Zelm R, Coeckelberghs E, Sermeus W, Wolthuis A, Bruyneel L, Panella M, et al. A mixed methods multiple case study to evaluate the implementation of a care pathway for colorectal cancer surgery using extended normalization process theory. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):11.

Bryant J, Bonevski B, Paul C, Hull P, O’Brien J. Implementing a smoking cessation program in social and community service organisations: a feasibility and acceptability trial. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2012;31(5):678–84.

Giskes K, van Lenthe FJ, Turrell G, Brug J, Mackenbach JP. Smokers living in deprived areas are less likely to quit: a longitudinal follow-up. Tob Control. 2006;15(6):485–8.

Petroulia I, Kyriakos CN, Papadakis S, Tzavara C, Filippidis FT, Girvalaki C, et al. Patterns of tobacco use, quit attempts, readiness to quit and self-efficacy among smokers with anxiety or depression: findings among six countries of the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys. Tob Induc Dis. 2018;16:A9.

Annamalai A, Singh N, O’Malley SS. Smoking Use and Cessation among people with Serious Mental illness. Yale J Biol Med. 2015;88(3):271–7.

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Rojewski AM, Bailey SR, Bernstein SL, Cooperman NA, Gritz ER, Karam-Hage MA, et al. Considering systemic barriers to treating Tobacco Use in Clinical settings in the United States. Nicotine Tob Res. 2019;21(11):1453–61.

Britton M, Rogova A, Chen TA, Martinez Leal I, Kyburz B, Williams T, et al. Texas tobacco quitline knowledge, attitudes, and practices within healthcare agencies serving individuals with behavioral health needs: a multimethod study. Prev Med Rep. 2023;35:102256.

Nimmon L, Stenfors-Hayes T. The handling of power in the physician-patient encounter: perceptions from experienced physicians. BMC Med Educ. 2016;16(1):114.

Shim JK, Chang JS, Dubbin LA. Cultural Health Capital: A Sociological Intervention into Patient-Centered Care and the Affordable Care Act. In: Understanding Health Inequalities and Justice Edited by Mara Buchbinder, Michele Rivkin-Fish, Rebecca L Walker [Internet]. The University of North Caroline Press; 2016 [cited 2023 Jul 24]. (Studies in Social Medicine). Available from: https://flexpub.com/preview/understanding-health-inequalities-and-justice .

Elwyn G, Tilburt J, Montori V. The ethical imperative for shared decision-making. Eur J Pers Centered Healthc. 2013;1(1):129–31.

Castaneda-Guarderas A, Glassberg J, Grudzen CR, Ngai KM, Samuels-Kalow ME, Shelton E, et al. Shared decision making with vulnerable populations in the Emergency Department. Acad Emerg Med off J Soc Acad Emerg Med. 2016;23(12):1410–6.

Taking Texas Tobacco Free [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jan 2]. Supplemental Training Material. Available from: https://www.takingtexastobaccofree.com/training-material .

Keyworth C, Epton T, Goldthorpe J, Calam R, Armitage CJ. It’s difficult, I think it’s complicated’: Health care professionals’ barriers and enablers to providing opportunistic behaviour change interventions during routine medical consultations. Br J Health Psychol. 2019;24(3):571–92.

Taber JM, Leyva B, Persoskie A. Why do people avoid Medical Care? A qualitative study using National Data. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(3):290–7.

Fiore MC, Jaen CR, Baker TB. Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update. Clinical practice Guideline. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service; 2008.

Google Scholar  

Evans-Polce RJ, Castaldelli-Maia JM, Schomerus G, Evans-Lacko SE. The downside of tobacco control? Smoking and self-stigma: a systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2015;145:26–34.

Farrimond HR, Joffe H. Pollution, peril and poverty: a British study of the stigmatization of smokers. J Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2006;16(6):481–91.

Voigt K. Smoking and Social Justice. Public Health Ethics. 2010;3(2):91–106.

Zhuang J, Guidry A. Does Storytelling reduce Stigma? A Meta-Analytic View of Narrative Persuasion on Stigma Reduction. Basic Appl Soc Psychol. 2022;44(1):25–37.

Heley K, Kennedy-Hendricks A, Niederdeppe J, Barry CL. Reducing Health-Related Stigma through narrative messages. Health Commun. 2020;35(7):849–60.

van Zelm R, Coeckelberghs E, Sermeus W, Aeyels D, Panella M, Vanhaecht K. Protocol for process evaluation of evidence-based care pathways: the case of colorectal cancer surgery. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2018;16(3):145–53.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

This project was supported by funding from the Cancer Prevention & Research Institute of Texas (grant #PP210003 to L.R.R.). A.R.’s time and effort for manuscript drafting was supported in part by MD Anderson’s Tobacco Settlement Funds and by Halliburton Employees Fellowship in Cancer Prevention Fund from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Publication was supported by start-up funds provided by MD Anderson to L.R.R. The funders had no role in the design of the study, the collection, analyses or interpretation of the data, the writing of the manuscript or the decision to publish the results.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, 77230-1402, Houston, TX, Unit 1444, P.O. Box 301402, United States of America

Anastasia Rogova, Isabel Martinez Leal, Maggie Britton, Lisa M. Lowenstein & Lorraine R. Reitzel

University of Houston, 3657 Cullen Blvd, Stephen Power Farish Hall, 77204, Houston, TX, United States of America

Anastasia Rogova, Isabel Martinez Leal, Maggie Britton, Tzuan A. Chen & Lorraine R. Reitzel

Integral Care, 1430 Collier St, 78704, Austin, TX, United States of America

Bryce Kyburz, Kathleen Casey, Kim Skeene & Teresa Williams

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

AR, LRR, IML conceptualized the research question and design of the case study; AR and IML completed the collection, analysis, and interpretation of qualitative data; TC completed the analysis of survey data; AR drafted the manuscript text; IML, LRR, MB, LML substantively revised it; MB, BK, KS, KC, TW administered the project and contributed to data collection. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anastasia Rogova .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This project was approved by the Internal Review Board of the University of Houston (STUDY00002885, initial approval 4/20/2021) and the Quality Improvement Assessment Board at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (initial approval 11/21/2022). All parts of the study were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations as outlined in the approved research protocol. Oral informed consent was received from all participants prior to participation in qualitative study procedures. The aims of the project and interviews were discussed with participants who were given an opportunity to ask any questions about the interview process and the nature of the study. Additionally, all participants gave oral permission to audio-record the interview. Participants were informed that their participation was voluntary and that they could decline to answer any questions and stop participating in the interview at any time. Clients who participated in the interviews each received a $25.00 Amazon e-gift card as compensation for their time. Staff members did not receive remuneration.

Consent for publication

Consent for publication is not applicable as the manuscript does not include identifying images or other personal or clinical details of participants.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Rogova, A., Leal, I.M., Britton, M. et al. Implementing a tobacco-free workplace program at a substance use treatment center: a case study. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 201 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10629-5

Download citation

Received : 05 October 2023

Accepted : 23 January 2024

Published : 14 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10629-5

Share this article

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

  • Tobacco cessation
  • Tobacco-free policy
  • Health disparities

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

design case study interview

  • Open access
  • Published: 22 February 2024

Understanding implementation of findings from trial method research: a mixed methods study applying implementation frameworks and behaviour change models

  • Taylor Coffey   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6921-8230 1 ,
  • Paula R. Williamson 2 &
  • Katie Gillies 1

on behalf of the Trials Methodology Research Partnership Working Groups

Trials volume  25 , Article number:  139 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Trial method research produces recommendations on how to best conduct trials. However, findings are not routinely implemented into practice. To better understand why, we conducted a mixed method study on the challenges of implementing trial method research findings into UK-based clinical trial units.

Three stages of research were conducted. Firstly, case studies of completed projects that provided methodological recommendations were identified within trial design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. These case studies were used as survey examples to query obstacles and facilitators to implementing method research. Survey participants were experienced trial staff, identified via email invitations to UK clinical trial units. This survey assessed the case studies’ rates of implementation, and demographic characteristics of trial units through the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Further, interviews were conducted with senior members of trial units to explore obstacles and facilitators in more detail. Participants were sampled from trial units that indicated their willingness to participate in interviews following the survey. Interviews, and analysis, were structured via the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Model of Behaviour. Finally, potential strategies to leverage lessons learned were generated via the Behaviour Change Wheel.

A total of 27 UK trial units responded to the survey. The rates of implementation across the case studies varied, with most trial units implementing recommendations in trial conduct and only few implementing recommendations in reporting. However, most reported implementing recommendations was important but that they lacked the resources to do so. A total of 16 senior members of trial units were interviewed. Several themes were generated from interviews and fell broadly into categories related to the methods recommendations themselves, the trial units, or external factors affecting implementation. Belief statements within themes indicated resources issues and awareness of recommendations as frequent implementation obstacles. Participation in trial networks and recommendations packaged with relevant resources were cited frequently as implementation facilitators. These obstacles and facilitators mirrored results from the survey. Results were mapped, via the Behaviour Change Wheel, to intervention functions likely to change behaviours of obstacles and facilitators identified. These intervention functions were developed into potential solutions to reduce obstacles and enhance facilitators to implementation.

Conclusions

Several key areas affecting implementation of trial method recommendations were identified. Potential methods to enhance facilitators and reduce obstacles are suggested. Future research is needed to refine these methods and assess their feasibility and acceptability.

Peer Review reports

Clinical trials provide evidence to support decisions about practice in many aspects of healthcare. As well as generating evidence to inform decision making, trials need to, themselves, be informed by evidence in how they are designed, conducted, analysed, and reported to ensure they produce the highest quality outputs [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. This is essential to guarantee not only that trials contribute to evidence-based practice, but that all phases of the trial ‘lifecycle’ also support efforts to minimise research waste by building on best practice for how to design, conduct, analyse, and report trials [ 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 ].

Research into how best to design, conduct, analyse, and report clinical trials, known as trial method research [ 1 , 3 ], has expanded in recent years. For example, a widely studied aspect of trial conduct is recruitment. One project, the Online Resource for Research in Clinical triAls (ORRCA), is an ongoing effort to scope methodological work in recruitment. In their initial publication, the ORRCA team identified 2804 articles, published up to 2015, regarding recruitment [ 6 ]. Their most recent update in February 2023 found 4813 eligible papers, an increase of 70% in less than 5 years from the initial publication [ 6 , 7 ]. As this is just one area of trial methodology, it represents only a fraction of the work being done in this space. With such a large volume of research being generated, coordinated efforts are needed to ensure that learning is shared across research groups to prevent duplication of effort and promote collaboration. There is recognition across the trial method research community that there is significant variability in terms of whether and how the findings from this methodological research influence ‘practice’ with regard to trial design, conduct, analysis, or reporting [ 3 , 8 , 9 ]. Similar to clinical practice, where evidence can fail to be implemented [ 10 , 11 ], it is critical that the challenges and opportunities to implementing trial method research findings into practice are understood. This understanding will then maximise the potential for this research to improve health by improving the trials themselves.

Barriers to implementation are known to be complex and involve multifactorial influences [ 12 , 13 , 14 ]. Whilst this is established for clinical evidence [ 15 ], it is also likely to be the case for methodological evidence—yet the specific challenges may be different. Implementation science (and in particular the use of behavioural approaches which are theory-informed) provides a rigorous method for identifying, diagnosing, and developing solutions to target factors with the potential to enhance or impede behaviour change and subsequent integration of those changes [ 2 , 10 , 14 , 16 ]. Data generated using these theoretical approaches are likely more reproducible and generalisable than alternatives [ 2 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. The potential for lessons from behavioural science to investigate who needs to do what differently, to whom, when, and where, within the context of clinical trials is receiving attention across various stages of the trial lifecycle [ 2 ]. The overall aim of this study was to generate evidence for the challenges and opportunities trialists experience with regard to implementing the results from trial method projects that target the design, conduct, analysis, or reporting of trials.

Overall study description

We designed a sequential exploratory mixed methods study with three linked components:

Case studies : which identified existing examples of trial method research projects with actionable outputs that were believed to influence trial design, conduct, analysis, or reporting practice. “Actionable outputs” were defined broadly as any resource, generated from these projects, that has led to an actual or potential change in the design, conduct, analysis, or reporting of trials.

Survey : which identified the broad range, and frequency, of challenges and opportunities to the implementation of trial method research. Participants were trialists from across the UK, specifically the Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) Network of Registered Clinical Trials Units (CTUs). The UKCRC was established to “help improve the quality and quantity of available expertise to carry out UK clinical trials.” ( https://www.ukcrc.org/research-infrastructure/clinical-trials-units/registered-clinical-trials-units/ ).

Interviews : which explored in depth the challenges and opportunities for implementing trial method research from case study examples and general experience in CTU management.

Theoretical considerations and rationale

It is important when selecting theoretical frameworks, and even more so when combining them within one study, to provide an explicit rationale for the choice of framework(s) [ 14 ]. This study utilised a combined theoretical approach, with the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) [ 13 ] guiding the survey development, and the Capability, Motivation, and Opportunity Model of Behaviour (COM-B) [ 18 ] guiding the interview guide and analysis. CFIR was designed to synthesise the key elements that underpin implementation efforts [ 13 ]. It was selected in this study to guide the survey design because it provided a systematic framework to structure our inquiry. The CFIR is comprehensive in its descriptions of constructs and how they affect implementation across different organisational levels [ 13 ]. As the survey was intended to focus more explicitly on the organisational structure of the CTUs, the CFIR possessed the context-specific language and concepts to describe and prioritise our initial findings. The COM-B, in contrast, is broader in its scope as a general theory of behaviour and behaviour change. As implementation efforts largely rely on the adoption and maintenance of new behaviours, or changes to existing ones, behaviour change theory is useful to describe the determinants of behaviour and how they relate to one another [ 18 ]. This latter point is particularly relevant for implementation efforts as they are likely to consist of multiple changed behaviours, across different contexts, within an organisation to deliver the ultimate objective of research findings [ 19 ]. The COM-B’s capacity to accommodate such complexity outside the prescribed constructs of the CFIR ensured that all relevant factors to implementation are considered [ 14 ]. The approaches are further complementary in their conception of the socio-ecological layers within CTUs in which implementation takes place. Again, the CFIR provides the context-specific labels to, and ability to prioritise, these layers, with the COM-B acting as a methodological “safety net” to further describe or categorise findings. And finally, the COM-B is linked to a method of intervention development (and policy functions), known as the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW). Through the BCW, nine potential categories of interventions are linked to the behavioural domains of the COM-B [ 18 ]. This link allows potential solutions to be identified based on the domains found to be most relevant or targetable for the behaviour intended to change.

Case studies

Participants.

Members of the Trials Methodology Research Partnership (TMRP) Working Groups ( https://www.methodologyhubs.mrc.ac.uk/about/tmrp/ ) were invited to contribute. Members of these working groups specialise in one or more areas of clinic trial methodology, and all have academic and/or professional interests in improving the quality of trials.

Data collection

An email was sent directly to members of the TMRP Working Group co-leads to solicit case studies of trial method implementation projects with actionable outputs. The email included a brief description of the project and aims of the case study selection, followed by two questions. The first question asked for any examples of trial method research that respondents were aware of. Question 2 asked respondents to provide what they believed were the “actionable outputs” (i.e. the resources generated that lead to implementation of findings) of those methods research projects. Examples of potential actionable outputs could include published papers, guidelines or checklists, template documents, or software packages.

Data analysis

Responses were collated and reviewed by the research team (TC, PW, KG) for their relevance to the four aspects of design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of trials. These responses were compared with a list of published outputs collected by the HTMR ( Network Hubs:: Guidance pack (mrc.ac.uk) ) to ensure a wide-reaching range of available trial method research. One case study was chosen for each domain of trial method research through team consensus, resulting in four case studies incorporated into the survey.

Directors (or individuals nominated by Directors) of the 52 UKCRC-registered CTUs were invited to participate via email from a central list server independent to the research team.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Participants were included if they had been involved in any aspect of trial design, delivery, analysis, or reporting within the network of UKCRC-registered CTUs. Any individuals identifying as not reading, writing, or speaking English sufficiently well to participate, or those unable to consent, were excluded.

The survey was designed, and data collected, via the online survey platform Snap (Version 11). A weblink was distributed to the 52 UK CRC-registered CTUs, along with a description of the study, and a Word document version of the survey (available in Additional file 1 : Appendix 1). CTU staff were instructed to distribute this Word version of the survey to members of staff and collate their responses. Collated responses were then entered into the survey at the provided weblink. The survey was designed utilising the Inner Domains of the CFIR [ 13 ] to broadly capture participant views on how trial method research informed the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of trials run through their CTU. It assessed the perceived organizational structure of the CTU and how those demographics influence the adoption of trial method research. It also asked specific questions about each of the case studies selected from the previous phase. Responses consisted of a mixture of single-choice, Likert scales from 1 to 9 (1 being negative valence and 9 being positive valence), and free-text.

Examples of trial method research projects suggested by respondents (or research area, e.g., recruitment, if no specific project name was given) were collated and frequency counts for each generated. Frequency counts for the types of actionable outputs from these projects were also calculated. Likert scale responses (ranging from 1 to 9) were analysed through descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) to compare responses within and between CTUs, the unit of analysis. Some CFIR domains were assessed by more than one question, and so responses to those questions were averaged to give an overall score for the domain. Scores across all domains for a given site were averaged to give a “general implementation” score. The individual scores on measures of these constructs are presented below using a coloured heatmap to highlight areas of high (green) to low (red) activity and provide easy comparison across and within sites. Additional free-text data were analysed using a directed content analysis approach [ 20 ]. Terms and phrases that occurred frequently within this data were collated and then themes summarising barriers and opportunities were generated.

Survey responders indicated their willingness to be contacted for participation in an interview. Emails were sent directly to those who indicated interest in participating.

Recruitment and data collection

Interviews were conducted by a trained qualitative researcher (TC) and structured using a theory-informed topic guide. This topic guide (Additional file 2 : Appendix 2) was developed using the COM-B Model of Behaviour [ 18 ]. Questions prompted interview participants to consider the behavioural influences relevant to implementing findings from trial method research generally and from the selected case studies. Interviews were conducted and recorded through Microsoft Teams. Verbal consent to participate in interviews was obtained and recorded prior to interviews beginning. Recordings were transcribed verbatim by a third party (approved by the University of Aberdeen), de-identified, and checked for accuracy.

Data from interviews were imported into NVivo (V12, release 1.6.1) and analysed initially using a theory-based (COM-B) content analysis [ 20 ], which allowed data to be coded deductively informed by the domains of the COM-B. This involved highlighting utterances within the transcripts and assigning them to one of the six behavioural sub-domains: “psychological capability”, “physical capability”, “social opportunity”, “physical opportunity”, “reflective motivation”, or “automatic motivation”. The next phase of analysis was inductive, allowing identification of additional themes that may have been outside the COM-B domains but were still deemed relevant to the research question. One author (TC) completed coding independently for all interviews. A second author (KG) reviewed a 10% sample of interviews and coded them independently. Coding was then compared for agreement and any discrepancies resolved. Data were compared and coded through a process of constant comparison to provide a summary of key points that interview participants considered to be important. Interview data were specifically explored for any difficulties reported by trialists with regard to the challenges, opportunities, and potential strategies to facilitate the implementation of findings. These data were collected under “belief statements”, which collected similar statements made across participants under a descriptive heading informed by the statements’ COM-B domain. For instance, similar statements on the availability of resources could be collected under a belief statement, “We do not have enough resources”, representing a barrier within the COM-B domain of “physical opportunity”. Belief statements were then analysed for themes across COM-B domains. These themes were developed as narrative summaries of recurrent experiences, barriers, and facilitators to implementation of methods findings. Themes are presented below with their component COM-B domains indicated within the theme’s title. This thematic framework was reviewed, refined, and agreed by consensus of the research team.

Identifying potential solutions

Relevant COM-B domains identified during the interviews and agreed by group consensus were mapped to behavioural intervention functions. Mapping of intervention functions was based on instructions within a behavioural intervention guideline known as the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) [ 18 ]. The BCW describes the intervention functions that are believed to influence the individual domains of the COM-B. For example, a lack of psychological capability could be targeted with the intervention function “Education”, which is defined as “increasing knowledge or understanding” [ 18 ]. More than one intervention function is available for each COM-B domain and domains often share one or more intervention functions in common. Utilising the definitions and examples of intervention functions applied to interventions, the research team generated potential solutions based on the available intervention functions targeting the relevant COM-B domains. These solutions were additionally based on the research team’s impressions of targetable belief statements within relevant COM-B domains. For example, if a lack of knowledge was identified (and thus psychological capability) a blanket educational intervention would not necessarily be fit for purpose if only a particular group within an organisation lacked that knowledge whilst others did not. The potential solutions were refined through application of the Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects and safety, Equity (APEASE) criteria. Application of these criteria to the selection of intervention functions is recommended by the BCW so that research teams can reflect on factors that may limit the relevance and suitability of potential solutions to stakeholders [ 18 ].

Six of 16 Working Group co-leads responded with potential case studies for inclusion. Participants identified a number of trial method research projects, and the project’s outputs, via free-text response to the email prompts. A total of 13 distinct projects were reported by the respondents, primarily in the areas of trial design and analysis, with a particular emphasis on statistical and data collection methods. As a result, case studies for methods research targeting the other two areas of a trial lifecycle, conduct, and reporting, were selected from the list collated by the research team. The four case studies [ 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ] were selected to consider the variability of project focus across the four areas of trial method research. The selected case studies are described below in Table  1 .

Site demographics

A total of 27 UK CTUs (Table  2 ) responded to the survey, just over half of all UK CRC-registered CTUs ( N  = 52). CTUs were primarily in operation from 10 to 20 years (55%) or more than 20 years (30%). The size of CTUs, by staff number, were divided fairly equally between the small (< 50), medium (50–100), and large (100 +) categories. Most sites characterised themselves as moderately ( n  = 12) to highly stable ( n  = 12) in regard to staff turnover.

Inner domains of the CFIR: culture, implementation climate, networks, and communication

Alongside the structural demographic characteristics described above, we assessed other constructs within the CFIR’s Inner domains. The individual scores on our measures of these constructs are presented in Table  3 below using a coloured heatmap to highlight areas of high to low activity and provide easy comparison across and within sites. Most sites ( n  = 24) achieved general implementation scores between 5 and 7. Typically, scores were reduced due to low ratings for available resources (i.e. money, training, time) within the CTU. Time possessed the lowest individual score, with an average of 3.2 (SD = 1.9). The individual item with the highest average score, 8.2 (SD = 1.3), asked whether relevant findings were believed to be important for the CTU to implement. Finally, available training/education resources were the item with the highest variability across sites, with a standard deviation of 2.2.

Implementation of example case studies

The two case studies that were the most widely implemented were the DAMOCLES charter and the guidelines for statistical analysis plans. Both case studies were implemented fully by a majority of sites ( n  = 21) with a further minority implementing them at least partially ( n  = 5). The recommendations for internal pilots was fully implemented in some sites ( n  = 8), partially in others ( n  = 9), but was not implemented at all in still others ( n  = 10). The RECAP guidance was not implemented at all in 20 sites, partially in five, and fully in two.

Survey participants reported several key obstacles and facilitators to implementation of the case studies. These factors are summarised, along with the degree of implementation of each case study across the CTUs, in Table  4 below. Two of the most frequently cited factors to enhance or hinder implementation related to the dissemination of findings. The first concerned how findings were packaged for dissemination, with survey respondents noting the utility of templates and write-ups of examples. The second related to the communication of new findings. Respondents mentioned professional networks and conferences as useful in keeping CTU staff up to date on relevant methods research. Workshops, presentations, and other events within those networks also provided these same opportunities with the additional benefit of being tailored to translating findings into practice. A frequently mentioned barrier described potentially inadequate dissemination efforts, as participants cited a lack of capacity to “ horizon scan ” for new findings. Time and funding constraints were described as leading to this lack of capacity. Finally within communication, participants reported that if a member of their CTU had been involved in methods research, it was more likely to be implemented.

Participant characteristics

Sixteen individuals (Table  5 ) participated in interviews, representing CTUs from across the UK. Participants were primarily directors or other senior members of their respective CTUs. Half of respondents ( n  = 8) had been in these roles for less than 5 years, with a further seven being in their roles from 5 to 10 years. Most ( n  = 11) had been working in trials generally for 20–29 years.

Interview findings

Interviews were conducted remotely and typically lasted 30–45 min. Belief statements were generated under the domains of the COM-B. Those domains were psychological capability, reflective motivation, automatic motivation, physical opportunity, and social opportunity. Cross-domain themes were generated from related belief statements to summarise overall content. Seven themes were identified: “The influence of funders”, “The visibility of findings”, “The relevance and feasibility of findings”, “Perceived value of implementation research”, “Interpersonal communication”, “Existing work commitments”, and “Cultural drivers of implementation”. Themes are presented in detail below with the relevant COM-B domains to which they are linked presented in parentheses. The themes are further organised into the socio-ecological levels for which they are most relevant, i.e. at the level of the CTU (Internal), outside the CTU (External), or to do with the findings themselves (Findings).

External factors

Theme 1—The influence of funders (social/physical opportunity and reflective motivation).

Interview participants spoke of the influence of funders as important to what trial method research findings are implemented. These influences were comprised of both the resource implication of funding allocation (physical opportunity) as well as the cultural influence that funders possess (social opportunity). With regard to resource implications, there were restrictions on what implementation-related activities trial staff could perform based on the lack of protected time within their roles that could be allocated to implementation (physical opportunity). Secondly, limitations on time were superseded by requirements set out by funders on which trial method research findings needed to be implemented within their trials. If particular findings were deemed necessary by bodies like the NIHR, CTU staff had no choice but to find time to implement them (reflective motivation). Related to these beliefs was the idea that clear efforts at implementing relevant trial method research findings could signal to funders that the CTU team possessed the skills required to conduct trials, thereby increasing the opportunities for funding through a sort of “competitive edge” (reflective motivation).

“I think the progression criteria, as I said, I think is being driven more by the funders expectations rather than anything else, and then other people go, “Well, if the funder expects to see it, I just have to do it,” so then... they might grumble, basically, but if you’re going to put your grant application in, and you want it to be competitive, this is what we have to do.” – Site 7, director

Theme 2—The visibility of findings (social/physical opportunity and psychological capability).

One of the main barriers cited by interviewees was simply knowing about trial method research findings. Participants described the limits on their own time and capacity in “horizon scanning” for new publications and resources, which was often compounded by the sheer volume of outputs (psychological capability).

“I mean probably the greatest competing demand is being up to speed on what’s coming out that’s new. That’s probably where I would feel that… yes, trying to… I know everyone feels like they don’t have enough time to just read and be aware of the stuff coming out, so that’s… I’m more anxious, and I know others are, that there’s stuff being done that we don’t even know about to try and implement, so in some ways we might almost be repeating the wheel of trying to improve best practice in a topic area, and actually someone’s done loads of work on it.” – Site 3, director.

However, interviewees highlighted several resources as means to close this knowledge gap. Dedicated channels for dissemination of important trial method research findings were one means to stay on top of emerging literature. These could be newsletters, websites, or meetings where part, or all, of the agenda was set aside for updates on findings (physical opportunity). Other resources mentioned included more social opportunities to hear about the latest research, at conferences like the International Clinical Trials Methodology Conference (ICTMC) or network events like training and workshops. These events were also cited as important venues to share lessons learned in implementing trial method research findings or to air general frustrations on the complexities of trial conduct and management (social opportunity). Finally, these networking opportunities were identified by interviewees as potent incubators for collaborations, inspiring new trial method projects or establishing links to assess existing ones. Interviewees reported that the opportunity to be involved in these methods projects worked to also raise awareness of their outputs as well as increasing the perceived relevance of these outputs to CTU staff (psychological capability).

“Again, I think I was very aware of [statistical analysis plans] in my previous role as well, so I’d been along to some of the stats group meetings that the CTU networks have run where this had been discussed before it was published. I think they certainly involved a lot of the CTUs in developing that as well and in canvassing comments that went into the paper. I think potentially that would have been easier for people to implement because we’d had some involvement in the developmental bit as well as it went along.” – Site 22, academic

Internal factors

Theme 3—Interpersonal communication (psychological capability, social/physical opportunity, and automatic motivation).

As our participants were senior members of their respective CTUs, they often described aspects of their role and how their efforts mesh with the overall culture of the CTU. A recurrent feature reported by interviewees relating to their role was to be the central figure in communicating the importance of implementation convincingly to their staff and trial sites. This meant they had to advocate for the relevance of trial method research findings to their CTU staff and motivate staff on changing their processes to align with the findings (reflective motivation). This aspect of communication could be more challenging with chief investigators if they were not convinced of the utility of implementation within their own trials, particularly if they anticipated opportunity or resource cost to hosting the research itself or the process changes of implementing findings (social/physical opportunity). Regardless of where it originated, such resistance to change could be frustrating and draining to senior members that were attempting to spearhead implementation efforts (automatic motivation).

“R – Was it ever stressful or frustrating to implement certain things? P – Yes, I would say it can definitely be. I would be lying if I said no. Because change is always.. there’s always a resistance to change in every institution, so it’s not easy to change things. Yes, it can be frustrating, and it can be painful. Things that help are probably when it’s a requirement and when it’s... whatever you do it goes into your SOPs, and then you say, ‘This is how I have to do it, so this is how we will do it.’ But getting to the step of the institution to recognise it, and the people you’re working with, it can be frustrating because there could be arguments like are hard to argue back like, ‘We don’t have the resources, we don’t have the time. Now is not the moment, we’re...’ so there’s all of these things, but also there’s the effort that it takes to convince people that it’s worthwhile doing the change. It’s definitely... it can be frustrating and disappointing, and it takes a lot of energy.” – Site 21, group lead

However, some broader cultural aspects of the CTU appeared to reduce such frustrations. Participants described that their CTU members were often open to new ideas and that such receptivity facilitated implementation (social opportunity). This openness to change was leveraged through the communication skills of senior staff that were previously mentioned and their ability to solicit opinions and feedback from their staff (psychological capability). Such discussions often took place at internal trainings or meetings that incorporated some focus on implementation efforts for the CTU staff (physical opportunity). These opportunities not only afforded discourse on the practicalities of implementation but also helped to raise general awareness of trial method research findings as well as potential adaptations of findings to better suit the individual requirements of the CTU.

“Yes, I mean at our Trials Unit, I run our monthly trial methodology meetings, so these are predominantly attended by statisticians, so we do focus more on trial methodology that’s more statistical in flavour, but we do always cover the new updates and any key publications we’ve seen. I find that’s a great format for getting people interested and excited in these new methods and distilling them down. Generally, across the unit, we have wider… they’re like two forums, just where everyone gets together, and we tend to have bitesize sessions there where we can distil something. Actually, they’re quite useful because internally, we can distil something new to people but in a bitesize chunk so that people are aware and then can take it further and develop specific… if it’s something quite big, then we can develop working groups to look into it and come to a more solid plan of how we can actually implement it if it seems useful.” – Site 25, academic

Theme 4—Existing work commitments (physical opportunity).

Whilst openness to implementation at the CTU, driven by leadership advocating for its importance, was often present in the interviews, resource restrictions were still an ever-present factor impacting the opportunities for CTU staff to improve practice. Interviewees reported that because any change to be implemented required time and effort to action, mentions of these opportunity costs were reflected universally across our sample. The CTU staff, according to their directive, must prioritise the design of new trials and the delivery of ongoing trials.

“But you know, it’s real, it’s a real challenge and intention to be able to keep your eye on the ball and the many different competing priorities that there are. It does sound like a bit of a weak excuse when you say it out loud. So, our focus is on doing the trials, but of course we should always be trying to have an eye on what is the evidence that it’s underpinning what we do in those trials. We should. But with the best will in the world, it’s writing applications, responding to board comments, getting contracts done once things are funded, getting trials underway. The focus is just constantly on that work of trying to win funding and delivering on what you said you were going to deliver, in amongst all the other business of running a CTU or recruiting staff, managing funding contracts, dealing with our institutions, our universities, our local trusts. All the efforts that go into getting trials underway in terms of writing documents and approvals and recruiting sites, you know?” – Site 10, director

Mitigating these resource restrictions often meant looking to other strategies (mentioned in the next theme) that might allow CTU staff to carve out some capacity towards implementation.

Theme 5—Cultural drivers of implementation (psychological capability, physical opportunity, reflective motivation).

As senior members of their respective CTUs, our participants displayed clear motivations to implement trial method research. They expressed that they would like to see the staff in the CTU improve both the uptake of trial method research findings, as well as generating their own method research. This was part of a larger desire to create a culture within their CTUs that encourages and supports research (reflective motivation).

“I hope that within the Trials Unit, I also create an environment where I’m trying to encourage people to not always work to capacity, so they do have the headroom to go away and explore things and to try things and to develop their own research ideas, so that we can say to people okay. Whether it’s looking at different patient information sheets, whether it’s looking at different recruitment strategies, whether it’s looking at different ways of doing data cleaning across sites, looking at different ways of delivering training to people for data entry because we’ve lots of different ways of delivering training and we still get a very high error rate. I’m sure there are other Trials Units that are doing the same thing, so we should be publishing and sharing that with Trials Units. I’m trying to create that environment.” – Site 1, director

Some potential avenues to promote that development were offered by participants. Firstly, participants were confident in their team’s expertise and ability to either generate or implement trial method research findings. This was evidenced through ongoing work being done within their CTU or discussions with their staff on areas they would like to dedicate time to (psychological capability). An important role for the senior members of staff is then to set out expectations for their teams around how they can leverage their expertise within implementing or generating trial method research findings and for senior members to offer the necessary support for that to happen. One option put forward to facilitate this leveraging of expertise was to provide career development opportunities centred on implementation. This could simply be allocating staff’s time to focus on implementation projects, protecting their time from usual work commitments. A further development opportunity would be appointing so-called “ champions ” within the CTU whose explicit role is to identify trial method research findings and coordinate their implementation (physical opportunity).

“Because sometimes what I think is [...] you need a champion, you need every CTU to implement these things and because every trial or every trials unit is composed of different people, so I would probably champion the SAPs part because I’m the statistician, and I make sure that that goes ahead, but someone else needs to champion the one on the patients, probably. Not necessarily. I would champion for all of these things, but because... I think it's finding these people that are the ones that see the value and then be the drivers of the unit. I think that will probably help. […] But I honestly think the best way is just reaching a champion for each of these areas and reaching out to them and saying, ‘Can you... what do you think of this, and what would you do to implement it in your own unit?’” – Site 21, group lead

Factors related to findings

Theme 6—Relevance and feasibility of findings (physical opportunity, reflective motivation, and psychological capability).

Not all findings from trial method research are applicable to all trials and there to all CTUs. For instance, some of our participants mentioned that the progression criteria recommendations were not widely implemented by their CTU staff because they did not often include internal pilots in their trials. So, once the challenges of knowing about trial method research findings are overcome, CTU staff then need to make decisions on what is most relevant to their trial portfolio and what they would like to prioritise implementing (reflective motivation). This prioritisation was dependent on two factors, the CTU staff’s ability to adapt findings to their needs and the implementation resources that findings are packaged with. These factors appeared to be interconnected as sufficient resources to aid implementation, such as training workshops, could reduce the burden of adaptation (physical opportunity). Conversely, staff that perceived their CTU as capable of adaptation could do so even when implementation resources were lacking, such as when trial method research findings are only shared via publication (psychological capability).

“I think that resources that are guidance types widely available, well-advertised, are probably the most... the easiest way. Everything that makes it easier for a person that has this little win of saying, ‘Oh, yes, we’ve probably considered doing things differently,’ anything that minimises that burden in a system I do. For example, with the SAPs, it’s not just the paper and the guidance, but it’s the templates and the little things that you say, ‘Oh, I can start from here, and then if I just use this and this, then the work is so much less […]’ It’s just that thinking of resources that at least create an easy start point for a person that is the right person. I think that would be the best strategy for me, and make them widely available and well-advertised and probably, I don’t know, distribute them, contact the CTUs and say, ‘By the way, here’s a nice resource that you can use if you want to improve this and that.’ I think anything like that could probably be the way I would go around improving the implementation and the uptake because I feel that the goodwill is there.” – Site 21, group lead

Theme 7—Perceived value of implementation (reflective motivation).

Following on from the idea that there is the “ goodwill ” to implement trial method research findings, it was unsurprising that our participants reported believing that implementation research is important. Many believed that uptake of findings had clear benefits to improving the practice of their CTU. Even for those findings of trial method research that were less enthusiastically received, this appeared to be because the CTU staff were already operating at a high standard and that trial method research findings served to simply reassure them of the quality of their practices.

“I guess yes, I would say so, they help enhance them. Thinking about the first one on progression criteria, we didn’t really have any standard in house guidance on that, so actually reaching out and using that was great because we needed something to base it on. Whereas I’d say for the others, with the Damocles ones and the one on SAP guidance, we did already have in house guidelines for SAPs and DMC charters, but these bits of work have helped to inform them. In a way, they help clarify that most of what you are doing is good practice and then some additional things that could be added in.” – Site 25, academic

Alongside the efficiency and quality benefits to the CTU and its practices, participants also described a desire to implement findings from trial method research because of their promise to improve the quality of trials, and the evidence they generate, more broadly. For example, this could be improved efficiency leading to cost-effective trials to free up funding for other research. It could also be participant-centred improvements that have both ethical implications as well as bolstering the public’s trust in the research process. And, most importantly it seemed, improvements across trials would lead to better evidence to base healthcare decisions on. Finally, implementation of findings from trial method research helps to signal that the CTU is dedicated to best practice and is innovative in pursuing those ideals. There was a perception that it can lead to increased reputation amongst peers and the public as well as making the applications from the CTU attractive to funders.

“I think they maybe come under some of the reasons that you said already, but they are incentives to do [implementing trials methods research findings] because we’re all in the business of trying to produce evidence for interventions that are going to make a difference usually in the NHS, not always, but depending what it is that we’re trialling. But ultimately, you know, we’re all in the business of trying to produce evidence that’s going to get used and make a difference to the patients, and if that can happen more quickly, cheaply, more efficiently, trials that are run better with an evidence base underpinning what happens in the trials, then yeah, that’s why we should be doing it. That’s all incentives to do it.” – Site 10, director

As stated above in “Interview findings”, the COM-B domains identified were psychological capability, reflective motivation, automatic motivation, physical opportunity, and social opportunity. These five domains map to all nine intervention functions within the BCW. Two, “Restriction” and “Coercion”, were eliminated due to limited practicability and acceptability. Potential solutions were generated that targeted specific aspects of beliefs within our themes. The primary factors identified across themes were distilled into three intervention targets. Those targets were as follows: awareness of trial method research findings, the effort required to implement findings, and the culture around implementing findings. Eight potential interventions were generated which are listed in Table  6 .

Awareness of trial method research findings

The first proposed intervention is the incorporation of sessions specific to sharing research findings into the agendas of clinical and methodology conferences. These sessions would serve as a dedicated conduit for trialists to share and receive new methods research findings, giving dedicated time and space to do so. The social elements of these sessions would also benefit implementation through less formal opportunities to share feedback and other comments on recommendations that can then be addressed by the associated researchers present.

Effort required to implement findings

The second proposed intervention would target the effort required to implement findings. As time is at a premium within CTUs, any pre-emptive efforts on the part of the methods research teams to ensure their recommendations are accessible, translatable, and clearly relevant to CTU staff will assist in those recommendations being implemented. This could include template documents, case studies of implementation, software packages, etc. Any resource beyond the publication of results would seem desirable to CTU staff to assist in their efforts at implementation.

Changes to culture

The third potential solution identified would target the cultural changes needed to re-prioritise the directions of CTUs towards implementation of findings. This would proceed mainly through a change in funder attitudes towards the importance of trial method research. Funders would need to provide dedicated funding/time within CTU’s contracts and/or trial grants to allow for the proper conduct and/or implementation of trial method research.

Other potential solutions

As many of our reported barriers are interconnected, so too do several of our proposed solutions target multiple barriers/opportunities to improve implementation. Many of these rely primarily on cultural shifts within the CTUs themselves, where existing structures are modified to accommodate implementation efforts. For example, ensuring that CTU meeting agendas incorporate dedicated time towards discussing implementation efforts or for roles to be established/re-structured that focus on championing these efforts.

This paper presents findings from our mixed methods study on the challenges and opportunities to implementing trial method research findings. Exploration of notable trial method research findings generated four cases studies that were used to solicit implementation experiences from trial staff through survey and interviews. The survey data allowed us to identify trends in the adoption of the case studies in a sample of half of the registered CTUs within the UK. Demographic data from participating CTUs demonstrated some similarities in implementation factors that are consistent across sites, such as a lack of resources. More positive similarities were identified as well, such as the shared belief that implementation research is important. Participants volunteered a number of motivators, such as adhering to best practice, or barriers, such as time/resource limitations, that affected their CTU’s implementation of these case studies and trial method research findings more generally. Our interviews with senior CTU staff further explored these motivators and barriers to implementation through a behavioural lens. A range of relevant themes across three socio-ecological levels (Findings, Internal, and External) were identified from our behavioural analysis.

Findings-level factors that affected implementation related to the quality and accessibility of the research and its outputs, and its perceived relevance to the trials undertaken in the CTUs. Trial method research findings that were ‘well-packaged’ (e.g., included templates or easy to follow guidance) were believed to assist in implementation. Findings that had clear benefits to the work done at a CTU, such as streamlining processes, or the outcomes of the trials themselves, such as improving their quality, were more readily implemented. Factors internal to the CTUs included the interpersonal communication of the staff, their existing workloads, and the culture surrounding implementation. Open communication between members of the CTU, spearheaded by senior staff, seemed to increase buy-in from staff on the relevance of trial method research findings. This buy-in would appear essential to motivate staff that are already stretched thin by their commitments to design and deliver trials. Efforts to improve cultural expectations around implementation were seen as a mechanism to create further opportunities for staff to dedicate to adopting findings. These efforts could be restructuring current staff roles or establishing new ones with a greater focus on implementation rather than strictly trial delivery. External factors affecting implementation of trial method research findings were primarily those linked with the expectations of funders and the availability of findings. Funders were said to drive both cultural expectations related to best practice, as well as creating capacity (or not) for CTU staff through provision of funds that could allow dedicated time for implementation efforts. The availability of findings had to do largely with the channels available for dissemination of findings. The more opportunities trialists had to be exposed to findings, the more likely they were to adopt those findings in their respective CTUs.

Strengths and limitations

Our project has several key strengths. The mixed methods nature of its design allowed for a more complete investigation of implementation factors than either quantitative or qualitative measures alone. The project utilised a combined theoretical approach, taking advantage of the CFIR in survey design and the COM-B in interview design and analysis. The combination of these approaches ensured that our project had the investigative potential to explore the specific implementation factors and general behavioural factors undermining the successful implementation of trial method research. Others have taken a similar epistemological approach in combining the CFIR and COM-B (and the related Theoretical Domains Framework) to investigate challenges in other contexts [ 14 , 25 , 26 , 27 ].

Our project solicited input from a variety of stakeholders in CTUs across the UK to ensure a diverse perspective on implementation challenges. However, our sample was primarily those with a statistics background, along with the number of responses to identify case studies being relatively low. We attempted to correct for this low response rate and homogeneity of response by agreeing as a team which case studies to include outside those offered by our respondents. However, we cannot say how selection of other case studies may have affected our responses to the surveys and interviews. It may be that particular projects had inherently different challenges to implementation that are not represented here. However, by including general organisational-level factors that may influence implementation, we have identified factors that are likely to be generalisable to a range of implementation efforts. A further bias is one of self-selection. It is possible that the CTUs and members that responded to our invitations are more active in implementing trial method research findings and would thus be more interested in participating in the project. It may also be that those CTUs that face the most challenges did not have the capacity or motivation to respond to our invitation due to the time it would take away from trial delivery. This may help to explain our response rate of about half of the 52 registered CTUs. Responses could have also been limited in our surveys as we asked CTUs to collate their answers. This may have led to unintended desirability effects, with some staff feeling unable to offer honest opinions on their CTU.

Recommendations for future

This project has identified a number of areas for future efforts in improving the implementation of trial method research findings. The themes described here can provide a starting point for trial method researchers to consider when implementing and/or disseminate findings from method research. This could include creating plans for how the findings will reach the appropriate CTU teams, how to articulate the importance of findings to those teams, or how to best package those findings to make them more readily accessible, and thus implementable, for the CTU teams. Further, it could prompt methods researchers to consider who should be involved in their research and when, potentially incorporating members from different institutions and organisations who would be required to implement any findings and doing so earlier in the process.

Where these obstacles still exist, future research on the implementation of findings can bridge the gap between research and practice. Our approach describes obstacles and facilitators in a standardised language common to behavioural and implementation science. Along with this clearer articulation of what works, for whom, how, why, and when, links to behavioural theory provides a process to design interventions [ 18 , 28 ]. Although we have identified some preliminary intervention options, future work could produce potential options not accounted for here, but utilising lessons learned from our findings. Further development of these strategies through selection of BCTs targeting one or more of the identified areas for improvement, refined through co-production with stakeholders, would be the next stage of the intervention design process [ 18 , 29 ]. Finally, assessment of the effectiveness of these interventions in improving the implementation of trial method research findings would be warranted. Additionally, as our project was sampled from UK CTUs, further work could explore the generalisability of these findings to settings outside the UK, particularly where trial units are noticeably different in their organisation.

We have presented findings exploring the obstacles and facilitators to the implementation of trial method research findings. Challenges facing CTUs at multiple levels, including demands on time and resources, internal organisational structure, and quality of findings, greatly affect their staff’s ability to incorporate findings into their workflow. We have suggested several potential areas to target with further intervention development based on behavioural theory to maximise the potential for change. These strategies, and others, would need to face refinement and the scrutiny of stakeholders, as well as evaluation of their effectiveness. Ultimately, our project highlights the motivation of trial staff to deliver quality trials underpinned by the latest evidence. However, this motivation is hindered by the realities of ongoing trial logistics and the difficulties faced in identifying this evidence. Trial methodologists will need to work closely with CTU staff, funders, and regulatory bodies to set priorities on what needs to be implemented and how to make that more achievable in light of the challenges faced.

Availability of data and materials

The dataset supporting the conclusions of this article is included within the article (and its additional files). Additional data is available upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects and safety, Equity

Behaviour change technique

Behaviour change wheel

Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research

Capability, Motivation, and Opportunity Model of Behaviour

Clinical trial unit

DAta MOnitoring Committees: Lessons, Ethics, Statistics

Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research

Hubs for Trial Methodology Research

International Clinical Trials Methodology Conference

Medical Research Council

National Institute for Health and care Research

Online Resource for Research in Clinical triAls

REporting Clinical trial results Appropriately to Participants

Statistical analysis plans

Trials Methodology Research Partnership

UK Clinical Research Collaboration

Welcome to ORRCA. https://www.orrca.org.uk/ . 2023

Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ. 1994;308:283–4. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.308.6924.283 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Michie S, Atkins L, West R. The Behaviour Change Wheel. A Guide to Designing Interventions: Silverback Publishing, Sutton; 2014.

Google Scholar  

Meeker-O’ Connell A, Glessner C, Behm M, et al. Enhancing clinical evidence by proactively building quality into clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2016;13:439–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774516643491 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three Approaches to Qualitative Content. Analysis. 2005;15:1277–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Gamble C, Krishan A, Stocken D, et al. Guidelines for the Content of Statistical Analysis Plans in Clinical Trials. JAMA. 2017;318:2337–43. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.18556 .

Rangachari P, Rissing P, Rethemeyer K. Awareness of evidence-based practices alone does not translate to implementation: insights from implementation research. Qual Manag Health Care. 2013;22:117–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/QMH.0b013e31828bc21d .

Pirosca S, Shiely F, Clarke M, Treweek S. Tolerating bad health research: the continuing scandal. Trials. 2022;23:458. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06415-5 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Birken SA, Powell BJ, Presseau J, et al. Combined use of the consolidated framework for implementation research CFIR and the Theoretical Domains Framework TDF a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2017;12:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0534-z .

Glanz K. BISHOP DB The Role of Behavioral Science Theory in Development and Implementation of Public Health Interventions. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:399–418. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103604 .

Smyth RMD, Jacoby A, Altman DG, et al. The natural history of conducting and reporting clinical trials: interviews with trialists. Trials. 2015;16:16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-014-0536-6 .

Lau R, Stevenson F, Ong BN, et al. Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap systematic reviews of reviews. Implement Sci. 2016;11:40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0396-4 .

Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet. 2003;362:1225–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1 .

Damschroder LJ. Clarity out of chaos: Use of theory in implementation research. Psychiatry Res. 2020;283:112461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.06.036 .

Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, et al. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 .

Guyatt S, Ferguson M, Beckmann M, Wilkinson SA. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to design and implement a perinatal education program in a large maternity hospital. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:1–1077. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07024-9 .

Paul G, Douglas AG, Patrick B, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet. 2014;383:267–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62228-X .

Kearney A, Harman NL, Rosala-Hallas A, et al. Development of an online resource for recruitment research in clinical trials to organise and map current literature. Clin Trials. 2018;15:533–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774518796156 .

Willmott T, Rundle-Thiele S. Are we speaking the same language? Call for action to improve theory application and reporting in behaviour change research. BMC Public Health. 2021;21:479. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10541-1 .

Damschroder LJ, Reardon CM, Widerquist MAO, Lowery J. The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback. Implement Sci. 2022;17:1–75. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01245-0 .

Atkins L, Francis J, Islam R, et al. A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems. Implement Sci. 2017;12:77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9 .

John IPA, Sander G, Mark HA, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet. 2014;383:166–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62227-8 .

Grant A, Altman D, Babiker A, Campbell M. A proposed charter for clinical trial data monitoring committees helping them to do their job well. Lancet. 2005;365:711–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)17965-3 .

Grimshaw J, Shirran L, Thomas R, et al. Changing Provider Behavior An Overview of Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Med Care. 2001;39:II2–45.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Gillies K, Brehaut J, Coffey T, et al. How can behavioural science help us design better trials? Trails. 2021;22:882. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05853-x .

Khan S, Tessier L. Implementation Blueprint for Community Based Pilots for Supporting Decision Making. 2021. Available from: https://irisinstitute.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/09/Supporting-DM-Implementation-Blueprint.pdf . ISBN: 978-1-897292-38-9. ISBN: 978-1-897292-38-9

Hall J, Morton S, Hall J, et al. A co-production approach guided by the behaviour change wheel to develop an intervention for reducing sedentary behaviour after stroke. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2020;6:115. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-00667-1 .

Raza MZ, Bruhn H, Gillies K. Dissemination of trial results to participants in phase III pragmatic clinical trials: an audit of trial investigators intentions. BMJ Open. 2020;10:e035730. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035730 .

Avery KNL, Williamson PR, Gamble C, et al. Informing efficient randomised controlled trials exploration of challenges in developing progression criteria for internal pilot studies. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e013537. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013537 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the members of the TMRP working groups that participated in the case study exercise. We would also like to thank all the participants within the survey and interviews.

This project was supported by the MRC – NIHR funded Trials Methodology Research Partnership (MR/S014357/1).

The Health Services Research Unit, Institute of Applied Health Sciences (University of Aberdeen), is core-funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates. They were not involved in the design of the study or the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Health Services Research Unit, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK

Taylor Coffey & Katie Gillies

Department of Health Data Science, MRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, England

Paula R. Williamson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

TC contributed to the conceptualisation of the study and was responsible for the design and conduct of the case study selection, surveys, and interviews. TC also analysed all data and was the primary author of the manuscript. KG contributed to the conceptualisation of the study, data quality and analysis checks, along with contributing to drafting of the manuscript, providing edits and final approval. PW contributed to the conceptualisation of the study, edits and final approval of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Taylor Coffey .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was approved by the University of Aberdeen College Ethics Review Board (CERB) (Application No. SERB/2022/4/2340). Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: appendix 1..

Survey with PIL. Word document version of the survey circulated to CTUs, which includes a PIL section.

Additional file 2: Appendix 2.

COM-B topic guide. Topic guide used during interviews.

Additional file 3:

Domain 1. Research team and reflexivity.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Coffey, T., Williamson, P.R., Gillies, K. et al. Understanding implementation of findings from trial method research: a mixed methods study applying implementation frameworks and behaviour change models. Trials 25 , 139 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-024-07968-3

Download citation

Received : 09 June 2023

Accepted : 05 February 2024

Published : 22 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-024-07968-3

Share this article

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

  • Trial method research
  • Implementation science

ISSN: 1745-6215

  • Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
  • General enquiries: [email protected]

design case study interview

IMAGES

  1. A Guide for Case Study Interview Presentations for Beginners

    design case study interview

  2. Case Interview Frameworks: The Ultimate Guide (2024)

    design case study interview

  3. Interview Case Study

    design case study interview

  4. A Guide for Case Study Interview Presentations for Beginners

    design case study interview

  5. How to Conclude a Case Study Interview

    design case study interview

  6. How to Succeed in a Case Study Interview

    design case study interview

VIDEO

  1. Consulting Case Interview Tips

  2. How to Upload your Design Case-study on Behance [2023 Tutorial]

  3. CASE STUDY INTERVIEW

  4. CASE STUDY INTERVIEW

  5. Case study interview

  6. My first Ux Case Study Presentation

COMMENTS

  1. Mastering the Art of Presenting a UX Case Study in Job Interviews

    Learn how to present a UX case study in job interviews with practical tips and insights. From understanding the purpose of the case study to showing your passion for UX design. ... There, you'll find a few insightful videos that explore the ins and outs of the UX design job interview process. It's packed with valuable tips, real-life examples ...

  2. How to create a successful UX case study in 2023 to ace your first

    However, when she came to me for interview prep, she was very stressed. She wanted to know if we could use one of her past "industrial design" case studies in the interview. She told me many other UX designers told her using an industrial case study for a UX interview is not allowed, which I told her was not exactly true. Take a look below.

  3. 47 case interview examples (from McKinsey, BCG, Bain, etc.)

    1. McKinsey case interview examples Beautify case interview (McKinsey website) Diconsa case interview (McKinsey website) Electro-light case interview (McKinsey website) GlobaPharm case interview (McKinsey website) National Education case interview (McKinsey website) Talbot Trucks case interview (McKinsey website)

  4. The Ultimate Product Design Case Study Template

    A product design case study is an in-depth analysis of a product or project, aimed at showcasing your design process, challenges, and outcomes. Case studies provide a comprehensive understanding of the product design process, from the initial ideation to the final launch, highlighting the key factors that led to its success or failure.

  5. Tips on presenting your UX case study

    It is common for an interview to take between 30 and 60 minutes. However, your UX case study presentation can be shorter than that. Those 30 or 60 minutes include the introduction, asking questions, and discussing the next steps as well. That leaves between 5 to 15 minutes for the actual case study presentation.

  6. How to Conduct a High-Value Case Study Interview (And 4 ...

    Strong case study interviews are an essential part of creating dynamic, engaging content that can actually convince your target audience that you're the right business to purchase from. How to Prepare for Case Study Interviews

  7. 5 tips to ace your Content Design case study interview

    You'll have a whole interview to present it: your case study has to give a glitch of what you're capable of. Share the main axes of your process of thought and showcase your strengths. You'll have a whole interview to accompany your audience through it.

  8. The Most Common Product Manager Case Study Questions

    Here are the four common types of Product Manager case study questions that you should expect in your case study interview, ordered from the most common to least common: Product Design Questions. Product Strategy Questions. Estimation and Analysis Questions. Scheduling/Operational Questions.

  9. How to Write Great Case Studies for Your UX Design Portfolio

    Well, the answer is really simple: write your UX case studies like stories. You see, when you present your case study as a story, you'll find it far easier to give it a satisfying structure and captivate your reader. What's more, you'll make it easy for recruiters to imagine what it's like to work with you, as they get to understand how you work.

  10. My first UX design case study walkthrough + interview ...

    Walking through my first UX design case study that got me my first UX design job 👀 Watch to learn how to make your case study stand out and portfolio presen...

  11. Case Interview: all you need to know (and how to prepare)

    In short, a case interview simulates real consulting work by having you solve a business case study in conversation with your interviewer. This case study will be a business problem where you have to advise a client - that is, an imaginary business or similar organisation in need of guidance.

  12. What Are Product Management Case Study Interviews?

    A case study interview, also known as a case interview, is a tool used by many companies to assess a candidate's analytical, creative, and problem-solving skills. Similar to coding interviews for engineers, they allow the interviewers to simulate a situation that allows your skills to be put into practice.

  13. How To Succeed in a Case Study Interview

    1. Research the framework of case study interviews. A case study interview, also known as a "fit interview," is laid out like a brief. You'll be informed about a business scenario. You, in turn, need to review the necessary materials and present a solution to the interviewer.

  14. Ace your product design portfolio review

    A portfolio review typically takes place after the initial interview phase. It serves as an opportunity for employers to gauge how effectively you approach design problems. Unlike your overall portfolio, which showcases case studies at a high level, the portfolio review requires you to delve deep into one specific project, providing a ...

  15. Guide: Designing and Conducting Case Studies

    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 ...

  16. Best Case Study Writing Service

    The ordering process is fully online, and it goes as follows: • Select the topic and the deadline of your case study. • Provide us with any details, requirements, statements that should be emphasized or particular parts of the writing process you struggle with. • Leave the email address, where your completed order will be sent to.

  17. 11 most-asked system design interview questions (+ answers)

    11 most-asked system design interview questions (+ answers) Below is a list of 59 confirmed system design interview questions that were asked at Google, Amazon, Facebook, or Microsoft. We identified these questions by analyzing a dataset of over 300 Glassdoor interview reports that were posted by software engineers, engineering managers, and ...

  18. Interviews

    Qualitative study design Interviews Definition Interviews are intended to find out the experiences, understandings, opinions, or motivations of participants.

  19. What Is a Case Study?

    Step 1: Select a case Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions, you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to: Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories

  20. Case Study Methodology of Qualitative Research: Key Attributes and

    Case Studies are a qualitative design in which the researcher explores in depth a program, event, activity, process, or one or more individuals. The case (s) are bound by time and activity, and researchers collect detailed information using a variety of data collection procedures over a sustained period of time.

  21. Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation

    Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. Buckley and Chiang define research methodology as "a strategy or architectural design by which the researcher maps out an approach to problem-finding or problem-solving.". [ 1] According to Crotty, research methodology is a comprehensive strategy 'that silhouettes our choice and ...

  22. Case Study Interview Examples (With Tips to Answer Them)

    A case interview is a form of an interview in which the hiring manager gives the candidate a business problem and asks them to suggest a solution to deal with it. Hiring managers typically utilise case studies for interviews in investment banking or management consulting.

  23. Planning Qualitative Research: Design and Decision Making for New

    One-on-one Interviews or Focus groups in which participants describe the case: ... Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559. Google Scholar. Converse M. (2012). Philosophy of phenomenology: How understanding aids research. Nurse Researcher, 20(1), 28-32.

  24. Types of Interviews in Research

    An interview is a qualitative research method that relies on asking questions in order to collect data. Interviews involve two or more people, one of whom is the interviewer asking the questions. There are several types of interviews, often differentiated by their level of structure.

  25. Implementing a tobacco-free workplace program at a substance use

    This study is based on an ethnographic approach and uses a qualitative case study design. Data were collected via interviews with staff (n = 6) and clients (n = 16) at the substance use treatment center and site visits (n = 8). Data were analyzed using thematic analysis guided by the extended Normalization Process Theory designed to inform the ...

  26. Understanding implementation of findings from trial method research: a

    Overall study description. We designed a sequential exploratory mixed methods study with three linked components: 1. Case studies: which identified existing examples of trial method research projects with actionable outputs that were believed to influence trial design, conduct, analysis, or reporting practice."Actionable outputs" were defined broadly as any resource, generated from these ...