Chapter One: Finding out what’s involved

1. Chapter One: Finding out what’s involved • Dissertations and theses come in all shapes and sizes • Different departments / different programmes of study have different rules: • e.g. will topics be given or must students find them • postgraduate research is all about respecting these rules • If it is not immediately obvious what’s expected, student MUST find out as early as possible

2. Finding out what’s involved • Timeframe and specific deadlines • Penalties for being late • Marking scheme: • is marking exclusively based on thesis? • What else will be graded? • How important are the other elements of the course work? • Specific requirements for the empirical / theoretical work • e.g. number of interviews, sites or questionnaires

3. Finding out what’s involved • This attention to what is expected should be sustained throughout the process • Discussions with thesis adviser / supervisor must deal specifically with what must be done / is left to be done • It is not a silly question to ask whether your work is achieving the requirements for First Class etc… • The closer you get to the end of the process, the more specific the feedback should be

4. Chapter Two: Selecting a research topic • What is a topic? • How does one go about finding one? • What are the stages in getting a research topic accepted? • What happens after?

5. What is a topic? • Some kind of statement describing what the research is about • more or less detailed - more or less work remains to be done • reference to previous work? • how to carry out the research? • a “good enough” starting point • must respect a number of characteristics

6. (1) Enjoyable research topic! To my way of thinking, there are four reasons for choosing one group over another: the group should be fun, accessible, convenient and suitable. Lest these criteria be dismissed as frivolous, let me explain. Fieldwork is exhausting, difficult, psychologically demanding and time consuming. The more fun and interesting the group, the greater the likelihood that your interest and commitment will be sustained. A fun group can be just as important as a dull group, and a lot easier to study (Browne, 1976; p.56).

7. Why enjoyable: • Personal project • keep attention / motivation to a maximum degree • MBS thesis is hard, maybe impossible without sustained commitment • trade-off between a topic given to you by someone else and a personal topic that takes time to come together • want to be able / happy to talk about it afterwards

8. (2) Researchable Topic • Fits available resources and time constraints • does not require impossible access to information sources - interview with Head of NY stock exchange • respondents / informants can be found who are willing to talk - Kennedy’s assassination • reliable information can be found - Beef Tribunal

9. (3) Suitable Area and Safe Topic • Can a supervisor be found? • safe topic where previous research is available • operate under the umbrella of well-charted theory • some proven methods can be used • clear trade-off between originality and easiness

10. Safe Topic (Bis) • Can I see the wood for the trees? • how easily can research questions be derived? • if totally uncharted, there might be too many ways to attack the problem • some students never find out what their research was about!! It really helps if you do...

11. Judging trade-offs • Students should not rely on their judgement • Supervisors are there to help them • a topic should not be discarded just because… • fine-tuning can make all the difference • experienced researchers have a feel for such things

12. How important is a good Research Topic? The most critical step in the research process is the definition of the research topic. This step must produce a clear and unambiguous statement of the objectives of the study. An unambiguously stated objective is essential in guiding the decisions and tradeoffs that are required in the next and subsequent steps (Jenkins, 1985; p.103). • Nevertheless, students should not overemphasise the importance of the choices made at the outset as many changes can and will intervene during the course of their project (Good Enough)

13. At the end of the day • The research topic must be reasonably clear and well-defined • But not all problems can be solved at that stage • certain types of projects begin in the Fog … hopefully, they come out of it • a good supervisor will be satisfied with a positive statement of intent • And, research projects NEVER stick to their original topics!

14. Process • A research topic is presented and refined using a document called Research Proposal • few guidelines can meaningfully be put forward to describe what such a document should look like • they come in all shapes and sizes and that’s the way it should be! • Read, read, read and read… then start writing a short document

15. Proposals • 5 to 10 pages of explanations • 10 to 20 solid references • a clear statement of the What of the research • a clear statement of Why this research is of interest • maybe some indications of how similar studies have been carried out • maybe maybe some notions of who to talk to (or a potential case study)

16. Example 1: a safe topic • the investigation of the Application of Business Process Re-engineering in a Multi-national Organisation using a case study and identifying the actual company that is going to be studied. The key informant has already been identified and a standard literature review is presented in summarised form.

17. Example 2: a topic that could be good?! • research proposal that argues that the circulation of information between the top managers of an organisation is crucial to the performance of that organisation. It presents a number of references reporting on relevant research in the area and concludes that more research is required to better understand how the communication amongst the top managers of an organisation can be improved. It suggests that focusing on a group of managers in one or several sites and interviewing a number of them is a good vehicle to investigate the topic.

18. Which is the best? • At opposite ends of the “safe” spectrum • But, both were successful topics • both took about 12 months to investigate • first one was safe • second one was half crazy • state of preparedness of both proposals is not at all related to the amount of work put in! } Why? (page 12-13)

19. At the end of the day • Research proposals are not an end in themselves • in some programmes, they carry a mark… • but not in this one • proposal is a vehicle for discussion between the various stakeholders • also a vehicle to keep track of the initial work done by students: reading, thinking, understanding • incremented bit by bit until...

20. Misconceptions about the proposal • It should follow a number of set rules • it should follow a certain template • it is written in one stage when the time has come • it is a definitive document • it will guide the project to its very end

21. Validation of Proposals • Proposals are validated in presentations to staff • these sessions are not like going to the slaughter! • opportunity to talk to experienced researchers • opportunity to get good, more up-to-date, more relevant references • important feed back is obtained - do not go in there to hide weaknesses • seek clarifications for anything that is still unclear • problems discovered at that early stage are no problem

22. What is a presentation • Talk time 10 minutes • clear statement of goal • explanation of any difficult terminology • brief review of existing research: (1) What is the extent of current research in the subject area / research topic? Who said so? (2) Is that subject area / research topic worthy of further research? (3) Where does your chosen research project fit into the answers to the first two questions above? • some idea of methods used • not expected to have all the answers

23. What then?? • Once proposal is deemed finished, research process re-starts • proposal is still a good discussion document (potential interviewees etc...) • document may be used as a starting point to write the literature review • slot more and more information and references in the original proposal.

24. Conclusion • Finished product will seem radically different from what was in the proposal • not a problem • not a weakness • just a reflection of the tortuous nature of research work • also convenience for researcher (e.g. data available)

25. Practical session on writing proposals • 6 articles relevant to the study of information for managers • some easier than others • presenting various methodological orientations • 6 groups of 3 students - each group gets one paper • goal of the session: the papers must be used to write a proposal on a topic revolving around the general theme: Managers and Information

26. How do we go about it? • 20 minutes to read the papers individually • 15 minutes to talk about them in groups and prepare a presentation • 6 times 10 minutes to present the papers • a well-deserved 10 minute break in the middle • A quick discussion on potential topics that emerge from the articles presented

27. Then... • Students select a potential topic • students write a 1000 words proposal using all the papers on the model described last week • proposal include research questions that will be pursued • proposals go in the research folder • Freddy reads them • students describe their individual proposals (next week) • open discussion on the proposals that students put forward (next week)

28. Presentations • Presentations should aimed at reporting on: • general objective / theme of paper • key elements in the lit review section (key references) • frameworks that could be useful for us • specific research questions • methods used • key findings that we can use • 5 minutes to present paper using transparencies • 5 minutes for other students to find out as much as they can about the papers • the better the presentations, the better the proposals, or else, make sure you ask many questions

29. The papers are: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - Information as signal and symbol (Feldman and March, 1981) Making Executive Information Systems more effective (McLeod and Jones, 1986) What effective general managers really do (Kotter, 1999) Information Media and Source patterns across managerial levels (Jones, Saunders and McLeod, 1988) The Manager’s job folklore and fact (Mintzberg, 1975) Executive’s perception of their information sources (McLeod, Jones and Poitevent, 1984)

30. Feed Back on Proposals • No more hand-written stuff • Also work on general presentation from now on • Also work on style: • no I, we etc… • punctuation • referencing • don’t overemphasise • Respect authors and their work • Support in required for all statements (cf lit review) We expect evolution throughout the year

31. Also • By and large, proposals did not discriminate enough: no area is being delineated • In real LRs, more support from a broader range of sources / authors will be required • e.g. too much Mintzberg / findings are only results from one study, there might be others • Proposals were also too much like essays => end must be different and include questions • Quite normal not to know what topic to follow at the stage => evolution from here on

32. Research reports in diaries • Folder MUST be done on on-going basis - three at a time reports are useless for students • students must learn the process so they can do it again efficiently in May / June • Zero tolerance on deadlines - too much trouble • Reports are sometimes too close to the lectures • should reveal a more personal experience - what it all means - show message was received • reports might be the forum for evolution of topic

33. Finding and studying existing research • Next step after writing the proposal • proposal does not solve problems…it asks questions • existing research must be sought to guide researcher • benefit of knowing what has come before • contents / findings / methods used / problems encountered / solutions found

34. In the context of an MBS programme • Important aspect of thesis • important part of assessment (NC) • research not necessarily very original or very representative (sample sizes), but well documented • conventional: demonstrate the additional understanding and knowledge gained by students in a particular domain and to show their ability to synthesise and organise the material selected within the context of a well defined research project

35. Functions of the Literature Review (1) to demonstrate the underlying assumptions behind the research topic (e.g. provide a rationale); (2) to show that the researcher is knowledgeable about the related research, and research traditions in the subject area; (3) to help in identifying gaps in the previous research within which the proposed study can be placed; (4) to aid in refining and redefining the research questions towards placing them within the context of the research tradition in the subject area. After Rosmann (1989)

36. Practically... • The lit review constitutes the theoretical foundation of the research project • outlines the boundaries of the research domain considered • presents research results that justify the focus on the research topic and those that are going to be used in designing the study • in a coherent chapter (or series of two or three chapters) • conclusions: a concise statement of the research objective and an outline of the research questions that are being pursued

37. Sourcing Material • Abundance rather than drought • Library, CD-ROM search, Internet, supervisors, other staff • Traditional sources are totally overloaded • Also, access is far easier for very new stuff (e.g. indexes databases start in 1990) • Regrettable because: We still enjoy reading the book from time to time and are surprised more often by the things that we knew then, but have forgotten, than by the things that we know now, but did not know then (p.1). March and Simon (1993)

38. Examples: • Managers’ work: Fayol (1916), Carlson (1951), Steward (1967), Mintzberg (1973, 1975, 1976) • Organisational behaviour: Simon (1957,1977), Galbraith (1974, 1977) • Psychology: Maslow (1943, 1954, 1970), Festinger (1957), Milgram (1974) • Social Psychology: Asch (1951), Bavelas (1948), Lewin (1951)

39. What does a LR look like • Students may be unsure / puzzled initially • Hard to provide strict guidelines - contingency approach • Iterative process somewhat like proposal writing • careful examination of papers / books • also, reading examples of previous research projects (MBS / MSc) • unstructured process

40. As a result • LRs grow rapidly and may go out of control: • The structure may be lacking in clarity and purpose • The balance between the different sections may be wrong • There might still be a number of gaps in the analysis presented • The emphasis may be wrong • Consequence of the process followed • OK once corrected at some point

41. Proper LR writing • Style must be proper • I, we, us, our … are all forbidden • avoid making general statements such as it is obvious that • common sense is not sufficient for including an argument or an idea in a literature review • argumentation must be clear and purposeful • stringing together paragraphs presenting the results of different studies without “doing anything” with them is not enough • analysis must be done!! • A mere catalogue does not any value

42. Proper LR writing (2) • A synthesis of the material must be presented - i.e. show how it all fits together • diagrams are a good vehicle for that:

43. Finally... • Clear unambiguous statement of research objectives • also an outline of the questions (i.e. directions of research) • Maybe a nice framework that can be validated or augmented in the rest of the research • the How can be left to the next chapter (research methodology)

44. Additional guidelines for LR: • As soon as LR has reached a few pages in volumes, it must be accompanied by • a bibliography • a table of content • an abstract - specifying what is done / remains to be done in relation to the content

45. What is a bibliography? • alphabetical listing of books, journal articles, web pages and any other sources used • presented at the end of the thesis • increment as you go along (not to lose any refs.) • specific format to be used:

46. Table of contents: • Better to automate (saves time) • Use MS word styles and Insert Table/Index menu • Headings One, Two and Three • Then:

47. Referencing work • Two types: direct quote or just argument support • Direct quote is used when the author illustrated your point + said it so well you can’t paraphrase: • Argument support: author argued a similar point => integrate his/her name in the sentence or add it in brackets at the end. “Re-engineering, like democracy, religion and marriage, is theoretically a sensible concept. But like every good idea promoted as a solution to all ills that ail, it has the potential to serve the opposite purpose” (Strassmann, 1994; p. 119) The important question is not how scientific the research design is, but how it serves to generate the level of proof wanted in the research and to reflect the state of existing knowledge in the research area (Miller, 1991).

48. Also • Obviously, if more than one author supports your view, you can add several names in brackets • Try to always document your page numbers • Try to be consistent in your use of referencing style • Document your sources as you go along - a lost reference at the end may mean you have to remove it from the text.

49. Using the Web as a source of material • See handout • but remember Web is a complement, not the whole thing • also remember it is not always a time saver • referencing must be done consistently as well • WEB addresses are relatively lengthy => use an abreviated form in the text (eg: • Then in biblio: w-UCC1: http://www.ucc.ie/acad/afis.html The Department of AFIS has 19 full-time staff, with research interests in managerial accounting, corporate finance and information systems (w-UCC1)

50. Ethics!!! • Important point for MBS students • Plagiarism is a deadly sin…punished as one • Always attribute arguments / phrases • Never type Verbatim unless it’s a quote • Only reference material YOU have read • If cross-referencing, state that you are doing it: • By and large, you won’t get away with it “Field method is not an exclusive method in the same sense that experimentation is. Field method is more like an umbrella of activity beneath which any technique may be used” (Schatzman & Strauss, 1973; p.14, cited in Burgess, 1982).