The Characteristics and Success Factors of Effective Undergraduate Teaching: Cross-case Analysis of 5 Korean Universities

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-259
Author(s):  
Ki yong BYUN ◽  
Suk Yeol LEE ◽  
Sang Hoon BAE
Keyword(s):  
Success Factors ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Undergraduate Teaching ◽  
Cross Case Analysis ◽  
Korean Universities

Success factors for hackathons: German banks collaborate to tame the economic crisis

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Feldmann ◽  
Frank Teuteberg
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Banking Sector ◽  
Banking Industry ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Cross Case Analysis

Purpose This paper aims to focus on the banking industry and its hackathon formats, which have been created by various banking groups. Other industries can learn from these findings and adopt best practice solutions. Design/methodology/approach A multi-case study was conducted with three hackathon formats (Collabothon, GENOhackathon and Symbioticon) from the banking sector in which qualitative interviews with members of the organization team were held and used to summarize the differences and similarities of hackathon formats in the banking industry. Findings A model was developed to demonstrate how the different hackathon formats in banking overlap and what differences exist. Originality/value This study used a cross-case analysis to summarize differences and similarities of hackathon formats in the banking industry in Germany.

scholarly journals Integrating community-based participatory research and informatics approaches to improve the engagement and health of underserved populations

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim M Unertl ◽  
Chris L Schaefbauer ◽  
Terrance R Campbell ◽  
Charles Senteio ◽  
Katie A Siek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Participatory Research ◽  
Health Informatics ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Underserved Populations ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Common Element ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Cross Case Analysis

Abstract Objective We compare 5 health informatics research projects that applied community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches with the goal of extending existing CBPR principles to address issues specific to health informatics research. Materials and methods We conducted a cross-case analysis of 5 diverse case studies with 1 common element: integration of CBPR approaches into health informatics research. After reviewing publications and other case-related materials, all coauthors engaged in collaborative discussions focused on CBPR. Researchers mapped each case to an existing CBPR framework, examined each case individually for success factors and barriers, and identified common patterns across cases. Results Benefits of applying CBPR approaches to health informatics research across the cases included the following: developing more relevant research with wider impact, greater engagement with diverse populations, improved internal validity, more rapid translation of research into action, and the development of people. Challenges of applying CBPR to health informatics research included requirements to develop strong, sustainable academic-community partnerships and mismatches related to cultural and temporal factors. Several technology-related challenges, including needs to define ownership of technology outputs and to build technical capacity with community partners, also emerged from our analysis. Finally, we created several principles that extended an existing CBPR framework to specifically address health informatics research requirements. Conclusions Our cross-case analysis yielded valuable insights regarding CBPR implementation in health informatics research and identified valuable lessons useful for future CBPR-based research. The benefits of applying CBPR approaches can be significant, particularly in engaging populations that are typically underserved by health care and in designing patient-facing technology.

A four-country cross-case analysis of academic staff expectations about learning analytics in higher education

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 ◽  
pp. 100788
Author(s):  
Kaire Kollom ◽  
Kairit Tammets ◽  
Maren Scheffel ◽  
Yi-Shan Tsai ◽  
Ioana Jivet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Learning Analytics ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Cross Case Analysis

scholarly journals Cycling Through Cancer: Exploring Childhood Cancer Survivors’ Experiences of Well- and Ill-Being

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaunna M. Burke ◽  
Jennifer Brunet ◽  
Amanda Wurz ◽  
Christina Butler ◽  
Andrea Utley
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Childhood Cancer ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Childhood Cancer Survivors ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Multiple Case ◽  
Multiple Domains ◽  
Physical Changes ◽  
Cross Case Analysis ◽  
The Impact

The benefits of informal physical activity during recovery from childhood cancer have rarely been investigated. This study adopted a multiple case study approach to explore the impact of recreational cycling on childhood cancer survivors’ experiences of well- and ill-being. Three semistructured interviews were conducted over a 3-month period with four survivors to explore their experiences of physical, psychological, and social well- and ill-being. Within-case analysis followed by cross-case analysis identified three themes that captured their well- and ill-being experiences with recreational cycling and cancer: (a) cultivating feelings and emotions, (b) experiencing physical changes, and (c) encountering positive and negative social interactions. The results from this study show that recreational cycling may be a useful adjunct to conventional treatments for the self-management of multiple domains of well- and ill-being during recovery from childhood cancer.

scholarly journals Incremental and radical open service innovation

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Per Myhren ◽  
Lars Witell ◽  
Anders Gustafsson ◽  
Heiko Gebauer
Keyword(s):  
Service Innovation ◽  
Group Development ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Team Development ◽  
Service Development ◽  
New Service Development ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Open Service ◽  
Cross Case Analysis

Purpose Open service innovation is an emergent new service development practice, where knowledge on how to organize development work is scarce. The purpose of the present research is to identify and describe relevant archetypes of open service innovation. The study views an archetype as an organizing template that includes the competence of participants, organizing co-creation among participants and ties between participants. In particular, the study’s interest lies in how open service innovation archetypes are used for incremental and radical service innovation. Design/methodology/approach For the research, a nested case study was performed, in which an industrial firm with nine open service innovation groups was identified. Forty-five interviews were conducted with participants. For each case, first a within-case analysis was performed, and how to perform open service innovation in practice was described. Then, a cross-case analysis identifying similarities and differences between the open service innovation groups was performed. On the basis of the cross-case analysis, three archetypes for open service innovation were identified. Findings The nested case study identified three archetypes for open service innovation: internal group development, satellite team development and rocket team development. This study shows that different archetypes are used for incremental and radical service innovation and that a firm can have multiple open service innovation groups using different archetypes. Practical implications This study provides suggestions on how firms can organize for open service innovation. The identified archetypes can guide managers to set up, develop or be part of open service innovation groups. Originality/value This paper uses open service innovation as a mid-range theory to extend existing research on new service development in networks or service ecosystems. In particular, it shows how open service innovation can be organized to develop both incremental and radical service innovations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document