Case studies are characterized by their flexible nature and multiple forms of data collection and are mostly informed by qualitative data. In our Horizon 2020-funded project on ‘democracy-as-becoming,’ we analyze 19 cases across four institutional phases of the educational system. The AECED project focuses on arts-based and embodied learning and its implications for power sharing, holistic learning, relational well-being, and transformative dialogue (Woods et al., 2021). Especially for the professional and organizational learning phase, we are interested in contextual embeddings, institutional settings, and cultural conditions. How do you deal with the complexity of 19 cases in a European research and PAR intervention setting? Debates in research discuss comparative strategies, which may refer to thematic comparison, patterns, typological analysis, contrastive or constant comparative analysis, narrative or framework analysis approaches, and more. They reflect whether we refer to a research strategy or a concrete technique (Rihoux 2006). They suggest integrating a standard contrasting and, second, a ‘tracing across’ sites or scales approach. Bartlett and Vavrus (2017) suggest conceptual shifts toward three axes: horizontal, vertical, and transversal comparisons. Especially in the stream of organizational research, papers reflect on the relevance of organizational dimensions in comparative qualitative research (Lee 1999). Other approaches suggest synthesizing methods for qualitative research and contrast epistemological positions (Barnett-Page & Thomas 2009). Alejandro & Zhao (2024) discuss Multi-Method Qualitative Text and Discourse Analysis and offer a methodological framework for combining qualitative text and discourse analysis. The presentation will discuss the potential of an integral approach to cross-case analysis and refer to the professional and organizational learning phase. It will reflect the potential of alternative imaginaries (Castoriadis 1975) and alternative patterns of organizing democracy-as-becoming. What might a Foucaultian dispositive analysis contribute to cross-case analysis (Foucault 1981)? Patterns (Leitner 2015) might then become an interesting approach for research methodologies of data analysis. A methodological triangulation point might be found here, which might relate, suspend, neutralize, and invert the given onto epistemology. This would not only expand the potential of “co-producing and commoning a different episteme” (Collet-Sabé & Ball 2022) for organizational education but might also be helpful as a methodology for cross-case data analysis.

Alejandro, A., & Zhao, L. (2024). Multi-Method Qualitative Text and Discourse Analysis. Qualitative Inquiry, 30(6), 461-473. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004231184421 Alexander, C. et al (1995): A Pattern Language. Wien: Löcker Verlag. Barnett-Page, E., & Thomas, J. (2009). Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research.. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9(59), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-59 Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2017). What is a case study and what is it good for? Comparative Education Review, 61(3), 535–557. https://doi.org/10.1086/693377 Castoriadis, Cornelius (1975). Gesellschaft als imaginäre Institution. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge Collet-Sabé, J. & Ball, S. J. (2022): Beyond School. In: Journal of Education Policy. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02680939.2022.2157890 Foucault, M. (1981): Archäologie des Wissens. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. Göhlich, M.; Novotný, P.: Revsbæk, L.; Schröer, A.; Weber, S. M.; Yi, B. J. (2018): Research Memorandum Organizational Education. In: Studia Paedagogica. 23 (2), pp. 205–215. Leitner, H. (2015): Mit Mustern arbeiten. In: S. Helfrich, D. Bollier & Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (Eds.): Die Welt der Commons. Bielefeld: transcript, 27-35. Lee, T. W. (1999). Using qualitative methods in organizational research. Sage Publications Rihoux, B. (2006) ‘Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Systematic Comparative Methods: Recent Advances and Remaining Challenges for Social Science Research’, International Sociology, 21(5), pp. 679–706. doi: 10.1177/0268580906067836.