Table of Contents

Handbook of Research on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

Handbook of Research on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

Elgar original reference

Edited by Elizabeth Chell and Mine Karataş-Özkan

This insightful Handbook focuses on behaviour, performance and relationships in small and entrepreneurial firms. It introduces a variety of contemporary topics, research methods and theoretical frameworks that will provide cutting edge analysis, stimulate thought, raise further questions and demonstrate the complexity of the rapidly-advancing field of entrepreneurship.

Chapter 7: The Critical Incident Technique: philosophical underpinnings, method and application to a case of small business failure

Elizabeth Chell

Subjects: business and management, entrepreneurship


The Critical Incident Technique (CIT) was first used in a scientific study over half a century ago (Flanagan, 1954). The significance of this time span is that then the assumption of a functionalist or positivist approach to social science investigations was largely unquestioned. It was the dominant paradigm in the social sciences as it was in the natural sciences (Burrell and Morgan, 1979; Pittaway, 2000). In 1998 I began to consider how CIT might be utilised from an interpretivist perspective (Chell, 1998; 2004). This means that there are two main variants of the CIT—positivist and anti-positivist. The CIT is thus a very flexible method which may be used in task analysis in specific occupations to identify those factors that lead to successful or unsuccessful performances; or, more broadly as an exploratory tool to develop a depth of understanding of the context and actions of a subject in the face of what they perceive to be critical incidents that affect outcomes of success or failure. The use and further development of the CIT method has been carried out in small business and entrepreneurship research, management, marketing and the service sector (Gremler, 2004; Chell and Pittaway, 1998). Reviews have focused on the CIT's trustworthiness as a method (Butterfield et al., 2005), its practical value, and its ability to explore issues and build theory from the respondents' perspective (Gremler, 2004).

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information