The case study as a key research method has often been criticized for generating results that are less generalizable than those of large‐sample, quantitative methods. This paper clearly defines generalization and distinguishes it from other related concepts. Drawing on the literature, the author shows that case study results may be less generalizable than those of quantitative methods only in the case of within‐population generalization. The author argues that case studies have merits over quantitative methods in terms of theoretical generalization, identifying disconfirming cases and providing useful information for assessing the empirical generalizability of results.