I don't know to what extent Creswell draws boundaries around those three approaches, but you could certainly do a case study from either a grounded theory or phenomenological perspective. To my way of thinking, case studies are primarily a way of organizing the data, which leaves you a number of different options about to collect and analyze the data.

Blending GT and phenom would be a different matter, since each of those approaches involves paying attention to different kinds of data and handling that data in different ways.

I agree with David's explanation. I have not seen a study that blends grounded theory and phenomenology together as the aim, data collection, data analysis, and researcher's position in terms of reflexivity will be different in each methodology. Therefore it is best to stick to one methodology, depending on what you are trying to find out. 

Dear Denis,

Perhaps such option would be possible while the team based research ? I mean researchers would expand  this way the dimension of triangulation?

While looking for the possibility of combining various qualitative research approaches , we should remember there are philosophical differences that are difficult to reconcile.  For example Phenomenology is a general methodology of knowledge acquisition, while Grounded Theory is a a theory,

Maintain that triangulation of methods can add strength to a study but  challenge is always to be able to account for any epistemological or ontological incongruencies between the approaches. 

If you decide to use combination of approaches,methods or techniques(like coding n all), you have to be very sure of the purpose and the significance in doing so. 

But hey, we say there could be difficulties to reconcile between the approaches, but NOT impossible.. no harm in trying, please do let us know  what you decide finally...

regards

Rathish

Discovery is the essence of doing science and so it will be interesting to see how the three approaches are woven together. That will be a real bricolage, to say the least. However, it seems to me that the purpose of the research will dictate which approach to use. I like to know how a blend of the three approaches in one study turns out.

you can adapt methodology triangulation by using 3 three approaches case study, phenomenology and ground theory. At the end of your study you can draw a conclusion and look at the similar pattern. It also help you to evaluate your finding effectively. bare in mind as far as qualitative study is concern, you need to ensure is this methodology triangulation  will help you to explore in depth about the issue that you intend to study. 

Triangulation is the direct comparison of two different sources of data (such as qualitative and quantitative data). That does not include two or more different analyses of the same data.

I certainly think you might develop something like a "phenomenologically informed grounded theory" - and Dr Inyang's use of the word 'bricolage' hints at how this might work. On bricolage, check out Denzin & Lincoln's Landscape of Qual Research 3e, pp.5ff. But you should do this attentively - it will be a challenge to be true to the tenets of phenomenology while at the same time arriving at an answer to your research question that forms a substantive theory. I suspect not impossible though - and may even be a productive and valuable exercise. 

A milder form of bricolage would be to use grounded theory methodology as a toolbox from which you utilise a few techniques - gradual, iterative (i.e. theoretical) sampling is a technique that can really lend itself to projects with a longer lifespan for instance. 

Possible epistemological hurdles might include trying too hard to incorporate the constructivist approach of Charmaz etc (or the discursive mapping techniques of Adele Clarke even moreso) where your research goals are explicitly phenomenological.

I am yet to find a scholar who rules out possibilities in qualitative studies outright, however combining the three doesn't seem to be probable due to ontological issues. Having said that, In general “a phenomenological research is well suited for studying affective, emotional, and often intense human experiences” while a case study can be defined as case study defined as a "research strategy, an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon within its real-life context". The method for data collection is not the same for both these methodologies.

Having said that, it shouldn't stop anyone from trying to look at the possibilities; perhaps there is indeed a way out there.

Hi! Actually you can if you can provide a scholarly explanation to demonstrate your expert application of each. I recently completed a proposal for a epistemological, phenomenological study, applied at different stages of the research. A great article to read is by Collier and Elman (2008). Where Creswell describes mixed-methods as the combining of both QUAL and QUAN method, Collier and Elman provide insights to two additional types of  mixed methods.

"To summarize, the idea of multi-method can be understood as encompassing three different meanings: the heterogeneity of qualitative methods, the interconnections between qualitative and quantitative research procedures, and the relationship with interpretative and constructivist methods."

Hi Denis

If you are going to use Grounded Theory you cannot use any other methodology ... Grounded Theory is a general methodology that can use either quantitative or qualitative data .. it does however have very distinct methodological procedures.

Deciding to use Grounded Theory also has to include the decision about which form of Grounded Theory you are going to use: Classic Grounded Theory in-line with Glaser or Grounded Theory methodology as proposed by Strauss and Corbin.

This is quite complicated as Glaser and Strauss were the originators of Grounded Theory in the 1960's but since then parted company in their interpretation of the procedures for conducting Grounded Theory research.

You will not get this understanding from Creswell. I strongly suggest you read the books produced by Glaser and Strauss and articles published in the Grounded Theory Review Journal (which follows Classic Grounded Theory according to Glaser) to acquaint yourself with this research methodology ... it is complex and needs full understanding of the method in order to undertake it.

Because Grounded Theory (regardless of whether it is Classic Grounded Theory or Grounded Theory as proposed by Strauss and Corbin) is quite unique as a research methodology it cannot be undertaken with Case Study methodology which has it's own processes that are not compatible with Grounded Theory. 

In regards to 'phenomenological study' this is not a research method as such ... it is a philosophical 'discipline' or approach based on a particular ontological and epistemology paradigm ... in the case of phenomenology this approach sits within a post-modernist rather than modernist philosophical paradigm and is specific to adopting qualitative research methodology not quantitative research methodology.

Deciding the philosophical paradigm (ontological and epistemological position) you are working within is the starting point for Doctoral/PhD research .. deciding what research methodology is appropriate for your thesis, comes after and flows from this decision.

Therefore I strongly suggest you read as much as you can on philosophical paradigms to decide which philosophical approach is appropriate for your research ... from this will come your decisions about which research methodology will be appropriate.

Henry, Casserly, Coady and Marshall, 2008 partially answer. They combine phenomenology and case study: http://www.stangelas.nuigalway.ie/Downloads/Departments/Education/SEN/Phenomenological%20Case%20Study.pdf

I am sharing my response based on my experience doing a qualitative study and teaching research methodology course and qualitative research methodology course. I employed an Ethnographic Case Study research design for my PhD thesis and analysed my data via grounded theory data analysis. On that note, I agree with Eli that you'd have to read the books by Glaser & Straus and Straus & Corbin. Yes, we must discuss the epistemological and ontological perspective in justifying the design/decisions we make in doing a research. Each methodology has its own strength & purpose and these must suit the purpose of us doing our research - the depth, context, aim etc. Most importantly, the reason and purpose for doing our research must be very clear as it will determine the research design that suits the purpose. Combining is possible (although not all or any combination) but which to combine and how to combine will all be determined by out research purpose.

Its my question too. I think we can use phenomenological and case study together if our research paradigm is constructionist-interpretative. For instance, if we conduct research on  political philosophy concepts held by people and the practical implications of this concept to individual’s life

Case study provides an in-depth and detailed investigation of the  development of rigorous philosophical concepts over a period  of time, whereas phenomenology is a study that is designed to understand  the subjective, lived experiences and perspectives of individuals affected.