How Will the Case Method Have to Evolve to Meet Future Needs?
Like any good case discussion, this month’s column generated thoughtful comments centered around several issues concerning whether or not the case method has become outmoded. These included issues of case relevance, appropriate length, ease of use by instructors, and even useability in an age of “fake facts.”
The most negative views came from those experiencing problems arising largely from the way cases were being taught or used. Those utilizing the method in their teaching stressed both pros and cons as well as efforts they have made to provide a proper context for cases. The strongest supporters appeared to be those who experienced the case method several decades ago and have applied it to their work over that period of time. Here is a sample of their exchanges.
Rhil commented: “Never a big fan of the case method. It assumes that some people get it right while others get it wrong and that it is better to imitate those that ‘get it right’ than to try things for yourself, learn from mistakes, and create your own approaches to dealing with issues. It is also discriminatory toward those that are less comfortable speaking up in class.”
But Jan G countered, “With proper facilitation, the learning you mention, of valuing diverse experiences, thought patterns and viewpoints for the corporation, should naturally happen … Which makes all of us realize it is not us and them—it’s all us and we’re all we have.”
Arie Goldshlager suggested a reduction in the use of cases, citing the emphasis in cases on “best practices” and the possibility that they “may not be leading (practices) to begin with, and may not be amenable to transfer to other companies, situations, or times.” Janis Gogan raised the possibility that Goldshlager’s opinion was based on a misunderstanding about the best cases. As she put it, “a great discussion case does not ‘illustrate best practices’—it presents a decision maker facing a complex challenge for which there is no one right answer.”
Srini commented that “the length of the cases has led to a general … dislike of the case method… (in addition) … engineers … find it very difficult to accept that there is not one single solution. Further, with today’s short attention span, having longer dialogues with students on their stand doesn’t work because the others have tuned out.” But Judy stated her experience this way: “I took away the self-confidence to approach complex problems that did not lend themselves to 240 characters worth of analysis or 2 minutes worth of attention. In other words, the types of problems that management faces all the time… And finally, … I learned that there are many solutions to these complex problems, some better… and some worse.”
r_ganesh raised a highly relevant point in concluding that “the case study is off the pedestal of method-worshippers. It is a good thing. And the Twitter age is not to blame. It is part of the broader trend of new forms of learning… The revolution in learning formats, methods, avenues, and venues has barely begun … This will naturally extend to use of case studies as well.”
Does r_ganesh have a point? How will the case method have to evolve to meet future needs? What do you think?
Original Column
Every decade or so, questions arise about the impact of new technologies, new management techniques, and an increasing pace of planning and execution on teaching philosophies for management, such as the participant-centered case method. The rate of change in the past few years suggests that we consider the matter once more.
The rap on the case method hasn’t changed much over the years. It goes something like this: it’s time consuming, costly, educationally inefficient, hard to use effectively, and too often employs cases that are gender-biased and out of date.
Cases take time to prepare, read, analyze, and discuss. A case can take months to research and write. It requires hours of preparation for both student and instructor. Rarely can a complex case be discussed in less than the 80 to 120 minutes typically allowed for such activity.
A case today can easily cost $20,000 or more to research and write. That means that a 30-session course relying largely on cases can cost more than half a million dollars in materials. Of course, cases can be used over and over. But that’s not the rule. In fact, a large proportion of all cases are taught only once, usually by the persons who wrote them. In a typical HBS case course, at least 20 percent of cases are turned over each time the course is taught.
Concepts are “constructed” in a course based on cases through the discussion of several cases that illustrate challenges under a variety of circumstances. The learning is inductive, based on case-based research that is anecdotal (as opposed to analytic, according to critics). Compared to lectures, it takes more class time to get a concept across.
Cases are hard to use effectively. Year after year I attempted unsuccessfully to teach a well-known marketing case on Levi Strauss. Year after year, I would return from class to a group of jubilant colleagues commenting on what a great case it was. I remained silent, trying to figure out why my experience was so much worse. On my tenth attempt to teach the case, this time to a group of executives in Puerto Rico, its lessons finally clicked for me. The experience, as you can see, was unforgettable—I never forgot where I was when it happened. And I was someone who for years coached others at Harvard and elsewhere in case method teaching. Imagine the task of preparing large numbers of budding discussion leaders to succeed in the classroom, particularly at the MBA level, where everyone in the class is calculating what each minute of class time is costing them?
One study found that between 2015 and 2017, only 16 percent of cases used in the Stanford MBA program featured female protagonists. Another criticism is that too many cases are US-centric in an age of global management. In addition, frequently used cases are often dated, reducing interest among today’s young management candidates for whom Silicon Valley is the gold standard. The most heavily used case among those I’ve authored is one I wrote 36 years ago, Shouldice Hospital Ltd. It is still the best seller among all the cases I’ve written and one of the all-time best sellers at HBS. It’s about strategic planning at a hospital that does one thing, fixing inguinal hernias. It illustrates a set of ideas that could be presented in less time by lecture.
In an age of communication by 240 characters, strategic plans that are transient at best, “get big fast” management philosophies, and attention spans of minutes instead of days, will there be a role for the case method? How fast will it give ground to faster, less interactive forms of learning? Who has the time to prepare and discuss a case these days?
Has the age of twitter left the case method behind? What do you think?
Reference:
Seb Murray, “Should Harvard Business School’s Case Method Be Scrapped in MBAs?”, FindMBA, July 15, 2019, find-mba.com, accessed on July 18, 2019.