EvalCompassEvalCompass
Evaluation frameworksTraining transferSuccess casesIn-depth case researchBrinkerhoff

Success Case Method

Success Case Method
Also known as: SCM、Success case method

Investigate cases with strong and limited outcomes in depth to identify enabling conditions and barriers. Its purpose differs from estimating representative average effects. [1]

Success case method worksheet — openReferences and checked sections
Difficulty
Intermediate
Cost
Low
Duration
Illustrative estimate (adjust for scale and staffing): 2–6 weeks overall; 1 week for the survey, 1–2 weeks for interviews and 1–2 weeks for analysis and reporting
Content updated: 2026-10-07Source checked: 2026-09-13 (includes AI cross-checking)No documented human reviewIncludes fictional examples

How it works at a glance

The success case method defines expected success, uses surveys or other means to identify cases with high and low success, then examines them through interviews and evidence. It describes concretely how outcomes occurred. [1]

Because exceptional cases are deliberately selected, their results cannot be treated as the average for all participants. Organize verified outcomes and enabling and inhibiting conditions to inform improvement. [1]

  1. Set the evaluation focus
  2. Identify success and failure through a survey
  3. Select interviewees
  4. Conduct in-depth interviews
  5. Develop success and failure stories
  6. Prepare recommendations and dissemination plans
Sequence of implementation steps. See “Implementation steps” for details of each stage.

When to use it and when it is unsuitable

When to use it

  • Quickly examining workplace transfer after training (Behavior, Level 3) at low cost
  • Diagnosing why well-received training is not used at work
  • Obtaining concrete barriers and success factors for redesigning training quickly
  • Exploratory research to generate hypotheses before a large evaluation study

When it is unsuitable

  • When statistically demonstrating average training effects is the objective; a few in-depth cases are not representative
  • Small training programs expecting uniform outcomes without successful or unsuccessful cases

Participants, roles, and deliverables

Participants and roles

Evaluation officers, participants with contrasting outcomes or use, and supervisors or others able to verify circumstances as needed. Determine numbers by case diversity and depth of examination.

Main deliverables

  • Participant survey findings for case identification
  • Success stories (number determined by the subject)
  • Failure stories (number determined by the subject)
  • Analysis and recommendations on enabling and inhibiting transfer factors

Implementation steps

  1. Set the evaluation focus
    Agree with training officers on expected work behavior changes and their organizational value. Define success clearly in advance.
  2. Identify success and failure through a survey
    Use a short survey or similar approach to identify cases where expected behavior or results did and did not occur. Set question numbers based on selection needs and response burden.
  3. Select interviewees
    Purposively select cases with high and low outcomes. Rather than fixing numbers or percentiles, choose cases illuminating success and non-use conditions and explain selection reasons.
  4. Conduct in-depth interviews
    Ask about outcome situations and conditions enabling or preventing use. Adapt duration to interviewees and check corroborating records and third-party information.
  5. Develop success and failure stories
    Use interviews to describe success and failure stories. Protect identifying information while concretely communicating circumstances, actions, outcomes and factors.
  6. Prepare recommendations and dissemination plans
    Analyze success factors and recommend which to strengthen to increase overall transfer rates. Also plan to disseminate success stories within the organization.

Strengths and limitations

Strengths

  • Offers unparalleled practicality as a low-cost, rapid method for evaluating training transfer
  • Contrasting success and failure clearly identifies improvement directions
  • Concrete stories communicate well to senior managers and can demonstrate training investment value

Limitations

  • Focusing on extremes prevents understanding the overall distribution of effects
  • Small case numbers provide no statistical basis for representativeness
  • Survey and interview design and implementation require appropriate skills

Common pitfalls

  • Too many questions aimed at detailed effect measurement reduce response rates; SCM surveys are for identifying cases
  • Collecting successes alone and omitting failures; interviews on failure contain the most important improvement information
  • Interviewers try to attribute success to training and overlook workplace or managerial factors

Conditions of use and evidence

  • Examines the most successful and unsuccessful cases; selection is not intended to represent average outcomes. [1]
Fictional example; not actual results

Cases that did and did not use training plans in meetings

The following fictional example selects 2 people with contrasting conditions for use from 12 evaluation planning trainees.

Participant ID (anonymous)Success / failure groupSelection rationale (survey response features)Interview date and time
A01Success groupUsed it in a meeting and decided items and responsibilitiesOctober 15, 2026 (fictional)
A02Failure group (non-use)Prepared a draft but had no meeting opportunityOctober 16, 2026 (fictional)

Common errors in judgment

Common mistake

Selecting only successful cases for publicity

How to revise

Examine non-use cases and explain conditions and barriers

ReasonThis identifies support needed to reproduce success.

Common mistake

Presenting the proportion of selected successes as the overall effect

How to revise

Explain selection methods and examine overall proportions separately

ReasonExtreme cases have been selected.

Organize your thinking by writing

Success case method worksheet

A practical template is available to fill in and print on A4 paper.

Open worksheet

Related methods

Kirkpatrick Four-Level Training Evaluation ModelCase StudyInterviewUtilization-Focused EvaluationLogic Model

References and checked sections

  1. Success case method
    BetterEvaluation
    Section consulted
    Main text; five key steps; Advice
    How it relates to the text
    Examines the most successful and unsuccessful cases; selection is not intended to represent average outcomes.
    Source checked: (includes AI cross-checking)

Editorial and checking information

Content updated: Source checked: (includes AI cross-checking)No documented human reviewIncludes fictional examplesEditorial policy and scope of checkingCite this pageReport a correction

How to cite this page

EvalCompass Editorial Team. “Success Case Method”. EvalCompass, updated 2026-10-07. https://evalcompass.jun-nakatani.com/en/methods/success-case-method/
Add the date you accessed the page. Text created by this site is available under CC BY 4.0. Quotations, external materials, and bundled fonts have their own terms of use. When reusing content, credit the source, link to the license, and indicate any changes.

Suggest a correction or improvement to this page

Change history
  • — Corrected statements and procedures identified during content checks (U03). Preserved the order, number and labels of input fields and the section structure.
  • — Updated explanations to correspond to the sources and added method-specific fictional completed examples, judgment examples and a change log.