Very interesting topic.

It depends on the method you intend to use to support your proposition. If you have a purely theoretical aproach, you have the interpretative method. If you use statistics to prove your proposition, change to quantitative method. Start with the steps you are going to use to achieve your goals, and then classify it.

It sounds like you could do a relatively straightforward combination of semi-structured interviewing followed by Thematic Analysis. Can you tell us more about your topic and your potential participants?

I am the new one on this field line research gate but I'll suggest you you should go for growing dependency and find a mediator who can relate with two existing theories through intellectual decency and confirmation

Let me explain with example people's and foods are two theories how can we made next research by connecting them with a food app like swiggy and zomato they are the mediator Jo find the mediator in your research

Thank you so much for all your insights; very helpful, food for thought. Maybe you want to follow my line of reasoning and tell me if I am on the right path or do I need to reconsider my thoughts?

I am considering only conducting interviews (as getting documents is challenging due to privacy reasons or other organization reasons, yet unknown to me); thus, I think that semi-structured interviews followed by a Thematic analysis are the right way to go. (thank you for pointing this out)

So I would collect answers on a. how the knowledge creation process is on a team level and b. how the participants experience the structure of the tender teams.

For a. questions such as: How do you share your own experience in a tender with your colleagues/ what happens to documents, notions, memos, or other written documents of a tender project/ How is the existing knowledge of the business unit combined with the new knowledge/ what do you do when you receive or read new ideas, thoughts or concepts from your colleagues. Etc.

For b. questions such as: How much influence do you have on your tasks in a tender project/ can you change your tasks yourself/ how much dependence do you have on the other people in your team etc.

So then my main questions would be something like:

What influence does the structure of the tender team have on the knowledge creation process within that team at business units A, B, C, and D?

or

What effect does the tender team's structure have on the process of knowledge creation within the team at business units A, B, C, and D?

I guess that with these interview questions, I can answer the main question?

Thank you so much, sir D.L. Morgan. for your insight, exactly what I could not articulate/pinpoint. I guess that by using two different theories about a. knowledge creation and b. structures on team level I would use a deductive approach in a multiple-embedded case study? So my themes are already somewhat known, yet how it is placed in practice will differ(probably), and thereby, the conclusion will/can add to the scientific debate on both topics.

Akash Patwal I think your proposed questions do a good job of taking the participants' viewpoints into account. In particular, starting an interview by asking people questions about the things they do is often useful, because it asks them to recount specific actions, rather than try to address more abstract issues.

Among the qualitative methods that could enhance your data exploration apart from interviews and document analysis within this case study site are member-check, expert verification of your coding & identified emerging themes and focus group interviews. All data sets must be well triangulated to see their connections and within-case and cross-case analysis could be done if you are examining a number of significant groups. The theory or concept that you choose to underpin or be the umbrella for these research tasks must be well justified.