Professor Ghassan Aouad Dean of Faculty of Business, Law & the Built Environment

1. “How to succeed in doing a PhD: personal experiences” A PhD is a journey of discovery & fun Professor Ghassan Aouad Dean of Faculty of Business, Law & the Built Environment www.fblbe.salford.ac.uk g.aouad@salford.ac.uk

2. Confidence!!! • Completed PhD in 1991 • External Examiner to 37 PhDs and 4 MPhils • Internal Examiner to 9 PhDs • Successfully supervised17 PhDs, 2 MPhils & 1 Mres over the last 14 years

3. (Amanda and Ghassan) Reflections Good PhDs • Robust Methodology • Clear aim, objectives, hypothesis, research Q? • Good data collection and analysis methods • Comprehensive literature review • Critical Analysis • Well presented • Interesting findings • Strong Validation • Good reflections • Good use of appendices • Good performance at viva • Confidence • Other researchers will use as a reference • Work already published • Original findings • Appropriate structure of chapters (flow) • Writing style (exciting) • Evidence based • Well scoped (focus) • Intellectuality and creativity are evident • Strong theoretical underpinnings • Researching a phenomena • Refereed journal papers as references • Contribution to knowledge clearly described Weak PhDs • Weak methodology • Ambiguity in defining the aim, objectives, etc • Weak data collection and analysis methods • Superficial literature review • Superficial analysis • Badly presented (spelling) • Findings are not clearly reported • No validation • No reflections • Bad use of appendices • Bad Performance at viva • Arrogance and ignorance • Other researchers will not use as a reference • No publications before viva • Expected findings • No structure (flow) • No excitement in the writing style • Opinion based (unsupported statements) • No scope, all over the place • No intellectuality or creativity • Weak theoretical underpinnings • Reporting on a piece of software • Conference papers and reports • Contribution to knowledge is not sufficiently addressed

4. The 2nd 6 months Some Stability The first 6 months The 2nd year Some Confusion Good Productivity The final year Looking Back Some Impatience Some Anxiety Some Satisfaction My Own Experience

5. Useful References

6. Useful References

7. Research Approach • An email with three questions was sent to around 50staff/RFs (mainly PhD holders) • Response rate of 56% • Content Analysis (see next slide) • Three things we should do as part of the PhD process • Three things we shouldn’t do as part of the PhD process

8. Get published Never give up Get organised Focus Keep Reading Mentoring Networking Good Methodology Directions Relationship with supervisor Dealing with problems Rigour Defending Your PhD Ownership Encouragement Think out of the box

9. Good Methodology

10. We all bring (often implicit?!) assumptions and path dependencies to our research! What knowledge is – ontology How we know it – epistemology What values go into it – axiology How we write about it – rhetoric The process of studying it – methodology (Sexton 2002)

11. Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it all together!(Sexton, 2002) Ontology Axiology (Aesthetics, ethics, justice) Epistemology

12. Realism A commonly experienced external reality with predetermined nature and structure Idealism An unknowable reality perceived in different ways by individuals Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it all together!(Sexton, 2002) Ontology Axiology (Aesthetics, ethics, justice) Epistemology

13. Realism A commonly experienced external reality with predetermined nature and structure Idealism An unknowable reality perceived in different ways by individuals Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it all together!(Sexton, 2002) Positivism A search for general laws and cause-effect relationships by rational means Ontology Axiology (Aesthetics, ethics, justice) Interpretivism A search for explanations of human action by understanding the way in which the world is understood by individuals Epistemology

14. Realism A commonly experienced external reality with predetermined nature and structure Idealism An unknowable reality perceived in different ways by individuals Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it all together!(Sexton, 2002) Positivism A search for general laws and cause-effect relationships by rational means Ontology Value neutral Research is value free and objective Axiology (Aesthetics, ethics, justice) Interpretivism A search for explanations of human action by understanding the way in which the world is understood by individuals Epistemology Value-biased Research is value- laden and subjective

15. Realism A commonly experienced external reality with predetermined nature and structure Idealism An unknowable reality perceived in different ways by individuals Locating some common methods Positivism A search for general laws and cause-effect relationships by rational means Ontology Objectivist approaches Experiment Interpretivism A search for explanations of human action by understanding the way in which the world is understood by individuals Epistemology Case study Action research Ethnography Subjectivist approaches

16. The baby and the bathwater: research methods in construction management Authors: Wing C.K.; Raftery J.; Walker A. Source:Construction Management and Economics, Volume 16, Number 1, 1 January 1998, pp. 99-104(6) Abstract: This note is written in response to Seymour, D., Crook, D. and Rooke, J. (1997) Construction Management and Economics, 15 (1), 117-19. We argue against their narrow focus on the interpretative approach. Also, Seymour et al. are incorrect in implying that the 'rationalist approach' is necessarily quantitative. Our contention is that the choice of research approach in construction management depends on the nature of the problem. However, whatever choice of approach is adopted, it is important that the problem and associated key concepts are defined clearly and that the methods used, underlying assumptions and limitations are transparent and defensible. It is difficult to argue in favour of any single approach based purely on epistemological grounds as what constitutes knowledge is still an unsolved philosophical issue. Since construction management is a practical subject, we suggest that the choice of approach should be a pragmatic one: the approach that is likely to generate practical solutions should be adopted. Seymour et al.'s suggestion serves only to limit our choice of research tools. Furthermore, a lot of the research issues in construction management are practical problems which involve generalization of experience and formulation of hypothesis that can generate empirically testable implications. For problems of this nature, testability of hypothesis and reproducibility of results are important, and the naturalist approach (which is labelled 'rationalist paradigm' in Seymour et al.) of discovering causal relationship is more likely to produce general practical solutions. However, this does not deny the value of the interpretative approach, as it may be more suitable for certain types of problem. Moreover, in practice, an understanding of human behaviour 'from within' often provides useful insights for formulation of empirically testable hypotheses, despite the philosophical incompatibility of the interpretative and naturalist approaches. Keywords:EPISTEMOLOGY; INTERPRETATIVE; APPROACH; RESEARCH; METHODS Be Critical

17. How to defend a PhD?

18. Some Hints • Remember that the PhD viva is a formal examination, however in most cases it is operated like a discussion • Never submit a PhD without the approval of your supervisor • Never exceed the number of words specified by the University (Ideal PhD: 200 pages). Read your University regulations. • The introductory and Conclusions chapters are the most important and should be written with great care

19. Some Hints • The Research Methodology chapter should be clearly written and justified • The research findings should be rigorous, statistically proven if possible • The literature review should be comprehensive (Critique and not reporting)

20. Some Hints • Make sure that you had a mock viva before your PhD examination • Read about your examiners’ work • Be confident, not arrogant • Show passion towards your research • Agree with the examiners if you can’t support your argument • Listen to the question you have been asked • Don’t waffle

21. Some hints • Research Methodology • Qualitative or quantitative • Single case study or multiple case studies • Data collection • Statistical analysis • IT related topics • Research Process Map

22. Some hints • Proof reading • Minor typographical errors • Acknowledgements • Clear abstract • Referencing • Numbering

23. Some Hints • Manage expectations • Understand the limitations • Publications • Appendices • Bring a list of corrections to the viva • Mark up your copy of the thesis in order to find your way easily during the viva • Don’t read the PhD the night before the viva, go the PUB, MOVIE, etc

24. Some hints (typical questions) • Relaxing question: tell me about the story of your PhD • What is your main contribution? • Why did you choose the topic? • Why did you choose this research method? • Give me the names of two experts in this area (well known researchers) • How did you validate your work? • Would you do this research the same way again? • Do you have any questions which you would have expected me to ask?

25. Get Published

26. Why refereed Journals? • Not commercial: no fees • Status • More weight • More rigour • Researchers refer to • RAE • Academic Career • Establish a name • Reputation • Support your PhD viva • Knowledge dissemination • Lead to collaboration

27. Some hints • Start with a conference paper • Examine and study carefully a sample of journal papers, this will give you some insights into the expectations and standards for a refereed journal paper • Decide on a journal paper which is relevant to your area of research • Draft an outline of your paper and discuss with supervisor • Produce the first draft • Pass paper to your supervisor for comments • Improve paper • Submit paper

28. How to get a sample Journal? • Visit the web, plenty of information • Visit the library • Ask your colleagues, staff, etc • Join CNBR and other mailing lists • Ask the editor of the journal

29. How to decide on a journal? • Quality: Journal ranking • Speed of publication • Relevance of subject • Ask staff for help • CNBR ranking

30. Draft an outline of your paper • Abstract • Introduction • Literature review • Research methodology • Main findings • Testing and validation • Conclusions • References

31. Produce first draft • Abstract: Concise, to the point, research methodology, main contribution • Introduction: subject matter, introducing the paper • Literature review: comprehensive, refereed papers • Research methodology: very clear, rigorous • Main findings: statistics, etc • Testing and validation: • Conclusions and further work • References: Harvard, etc

32. Submit paper • Follow guidelines strictly • Respond to corrections (include a covering letter that identify the corrections) • Never give up • If rejected, improve and send it somewhere else • Good Luck

33. Hints • Predict the reviewers • Be rigorous • Statistics • Special Issue • Ask somebody to proof read • Format properly • Online journals

34. Dr Bingunath Ingirige’s PhD Experience

35. Important entries in my diary • “A PhD is 80% thinking and 20% doing” (May 2000)

36. Sustaining your activities, spirits, confidence, direction for a very long period is a major challenge

37. What challenges to you ? • being self motivated, positive attitude • setting your own deadlines • being ruthless with yourself • continuous discussions with peers and maintain their interest in your work • get the supervisor interested in your work • Access to companies

38. Manage your expectations YOU ARE SHOWING AN IMPROVEMENT FROM LAST TIME. BUT THERE IS A LOT MORE TO DO!!!!

39. Sometimes I felt …. Doing really well

40. Sometimes I felt …. Doing really well I am going nowhere

41. Level of interest, enthusiasm, motivation

42. Requires a significant shift in your thinking!!! • Get the PhD thinking going!!! Linking and Narrowing Down – The funnel What values do you bring with you ?? • Why ? • Why not ? • How ? • What ? • So What ? focus

43. Achievement of major milestones / major areas Research Problem & research questions Individual / company access to collect data Analysis Research hypothesis / hypotheses Substantial completion of field research Substantial Write up Level of resolution Contribution to knowledge Overall Methodology

44. PhD: Process/Product Where is your PhD ? Don’t worry its kept in a safe place

45. Can’t do it any more. Please give me the doctorate!!! Overheard……. “Sometimes I feel, why I started it in the first place”

46. But, look at the bright side….

47. Generally Speaking • success rate is very high

48. The day finally arrived!! Dr. Bingu Welcome to our club!!! November 2004

49. Concluding remarks • A good problem identification underpinned by a sound methodology will take you through • Read books such as “how to get a PhD”, quite earlier on in your process – gain insights • No ‘silver bullet’ – but commitment and endurance • Several alternative paths available

50. At first you’re Bashful and Dopey. Two years later you’re sick (Sneezy), tired (Sleepy), and irritable (Grumpy). Finally, everyone calls you Doc, and then you’re Happy. Snow White and the Seven Ph.D. Students Dr Richard Haigh’ experience