The notion of research game plan in the Agile Literature Review Approach: a note

This note is on the notion of research game plan in the Agile Literature Review Approach (ALRA). As we know, research strategies (re: the onion model), such as case study research and ethnographic research, comprise a number of research methods, e.g. observation, interview and questionnaire survey, etc.. A specific research project, e.g., one on applied business research for a specific client organization with a specific set of research objectives, involves a tailor-made research strategy as formulated by the researcher. In the Agile Literature Review Approach, such a tailor-made research strategy is called a research game plan. The research game plan is portrayed with two views:

View 1. A research methods mapping view. Diagram 1 is illustrative on this view:

Diagram 1: a research methods mapping view

View 2. A flowchart view. Diagram 2 illustrates this view

Diagram 2: a flowchart view

The relationship between the two research game plan views are shown in Diagram 3 as follows:

Diagram 3: the relationship between the two research game plan views

The two views of a research game plan are to be explained in the chapter on research methods in a dissertation report that involves the ALRA. 

Lastly, it is useful to discuss which part of your research game plan has adopted what kind of principles from which research strategies, e.g., case study research, ethnographic research, grounded theory and action research, etc.., and why. Doing so sheds lights on the underlying nature, research philosophies and aims of your research game plan. This in turn, enables readers to better comprehend the methodological essence of your research game plan.

A pair of diagrams in the Agile Literature Review Approach: an example

A pair of diagrams in the Agile Literature Review Approach: an example on ABC Travel Agency

Diagram 1: A management-concerns diagram

Component 1: Increase in competition from online travel industry giants
Component 2: Customers become more demanding on travel service quality
Component 3: Concern of ABC Travel Agency on operational inefficiency and unreliability
Component 4: Concern on the challenges involved in branding, marketing and operational innovation and improvements at ABC Travel Agency


Diagram 2: A level-0 theoretical framework

Influencing factorsComponent 1: evaluate the competitive landscape as affected by the online travel industry giants
Component 2: evaluate the existing service quality expectations from customers in the travel sector
Core-focus domain
Component 3: evaluate ABC's existing competence on operations management, marketing management and innovation management
Component 5: evaluate planned and other new solutions to address ABC's management concerns, e.g., customer relationship management initiatives, service automation initiatives and digital marketing initiatives.
Outcome and proposal evaluation
Component 4: evaluate how the existing organizational competence of ABC affects its business performance
Component 5: evaluate planned and other new solutions to address ABC's management concerns, e.g., customer relationship management initiatives, service automation initiatives and digital marketing initiatives.


{Note that Component 5 belongs to both the "core-focus" domain and the "outcome and proposal evaluation" domain.}

Research methods mapping in the Agile Literature Review Approach: a note

This note is on research methods mapping in the Agile Literature Review Approach  (ALRA). To do research methods mapping, you need a level 1 theoretical framework. Here I distinguish 2 types of level-1 theoretical framework, see Diagram 1:

Type 1 [level 1a]: Each theoretical framework component is populated with academic ideas (whose referencing can be traced in the study notes)
Type 2 [level 1b]: Each theoretical framework component is populated with research tasks (e.g., an evaluation task, a research question or a hypothesis to be tested) that incorporate the academic ideas from type 1 theoretical framework [level-1a]


Diagram 1

The construction of a level-1b theoretical framework involves making the academic ideas directly relevant to conduct queries, resulting in generating findings valuable to the theoretical framework components [which are essentially theory-driven evaluation endeavors to address a set of related management-concerns]. 

Once the level 1b theoretical framework is done, you can now map your research methods onto the theoretical framework. This task is called research methods mapping in the Agile Literature Review Approach, see Diagram 2


Diagram 2

Diagram 2 should be included in the dissertation report chapter on Research Methods.

Achieving project alignment and coherence with the Agile Literature Review Approach

Achieving project alignment and coherence with the Agile Literature Review Approach (ALRA) requires a number of conversion tasks on 7 topics (which are often specific ALRA deliverables). This is depicted in the following diagram:

The 7 topics [shown as components in black colour in the diagram] are:

Topic 1: The problem-context

Topic 2: A set of related management concerns (in the form of a management-concerns diagram)

Topic 3: A level-0 theoretical framework

Topic 4: A level-1 theoretical framework

Topic 5: An overall research gameplan (including a theoretical framework (level 1) with mapped-on research methods)

Topic 6: An organized and valid analysis and findings

Topic 7: A set of concrete and helpful recommendations

{For MBA students doing applied business research projects, when you have largely clarified your thinking on topic 3 and are starting to work on topics 4 and 5, you are in a good position to write up your synopsis form; when you have largely clarified your thinking on topics 4 and 5, you are in a good position to write up your dissertation proposal.}

The conversion tasks (CT) [shown in red colour in the diagram] are: 

CT1: a meaningful extraction [of key issues and concerns out of the problem-context]

CT2: An appropriate intellectual response [to the set of management concerns with a level-0 theoretical framework]

CT3: A sufficiently enriched theoretical framework [level-1] with literature review

CT4: An appropriate research methods mapping performed

CT5: A skillful research methods application as informed by academic ideas from the level-1 theoretical framework

CT6: A clear justification of recommendations with a logical chain of evidence (as presented in various parts of your dissertation report).

How to do literature review with a level 0 theoretical framework

I make use of the following theoretical framework [level 0] in the agile literature review approach to suggest how to proceed with literature review:

A theoretical framework [level 0]

The theoretical framework is made up of 7 components:

Influencing factors (Part A)

1. Evaluate how the existing HR strategies affect staff turnover and team leadership

2. Evaluate how the existing business strategies affect staff turnover and team leadership

3. Evaluate how the existing change management strategies affect staff turnover and team leadership

Core-focus domain (Part B)

4. Evaluate how the existing staff turnover status affects business performance

5. Evaluate how the existing team leadership status affects business performance

Business impacts and solution evaluation domain (Part C)

6. Evaluate how the existing staff turnover and team leadership status aggravates the current management concerns (as depicted by the management-concerns diagram)

7. Evaluate the existing and proposed measures to specifically cope with the staff turnover and team leadership issues.

Now, let us consider component 1 "Evaluate how the existing HR strategies affect staff turnover and team leadership". If you type the key words of "HR strategies", "staff turnover" and "team leadership" as a single search in e-library, I am 99.9% sure that you will not get any articles from it. And, even if you are able to obtain 1 or 2 articles, it is very likely that they are not exactly about how HR strategies affect staff turnover and team leadership.

I suggest that, each time you do literature search, you key in one key topic, e.g, "human resource strategy" and then save your resultant articles in a computer folder. Then you try another key topic, e.g., "staff turnover"; and finally, "team leadership".

After that, browse through the collected articles and compile a study note with some useful academic ideas on the three topics of hr strategy, staff turnover and team leadership. The academic ideas may have something to do with definitions, value-full viewpoints, analytical notions, empirical findings (e.g., effectiveness of certain practices and opinion survey results in a particular country) and research issues on the three topics of hr strategy, staff turnover and team leadership. Possibly, you may come across academic ideas that are associated with relationship between the three topics. Again, you may come across academic ideas that are associated with other components of your theoretical framework. It needs to be stressed that literature review is an engaging exploratory and exploitative intellectual learning process that involves snowballing of ideas.

After reviewing your study notes on the three topics, you could make now use of your chosen academic ideas to formulate specific research tasks and questions for your theoretical framework component 1. Examples can be: 

1. To evaluate how variable X (an academic idea, e.g., employee recruitment practice in HR strategy) affects staff turnover/or team leadership outcome

2. To evaluate staff turnover outcome via diverse HR strategy models (an academic idea, e.g., traditional, human relation and human resource HR models)

3. To formulate a hypothesis on the correlation between variable X (an academic idea on HR strategy) and variable Y (an academic idea on staff turnover/or team leadership)

4. To evaluate staff turnover/ team leadership status of the company under review with an analytical HR strategy model (e.g., talent management).

After doing that for all the components of the theoretical framework [level 0], you produce a level 1 theoretical framework.  A level 1 theoretical framework is essentially a level 0 one whose components are populated with academic ideas-incorporated points. You can now use the statements [i.e., academic ideas-incorporated point] that explicitly use academic ideas (with clear referencing) in a component to inform your specific research methods to be used. Specifically, the statements (e.g., examples 1-4 above) on component 1 can be expressed as research questions to be asked in an interview research or in a questionnaire survey research. The task of mapping research methods onto a theoretical framework can be called research methods mapping in the Agile Literature Review Approach. The result is that your research methods are explicitly academic ideas-driven and research objectives-focused.

Subsequently, you could write up your dissertation report chapter on Literature Review with the final version of your level 1 theoretical framework. The theoretical framework [level 1] with research methods mapped is used for writing up the chapter on Research methods.

Two types of applied business research for discussion

There are two types of applied business research; students need to review them and discuss with their project supervisors subsequently. They are:

Type 1 [with a specific set of management concerns from a particular client organization]: Mainly case study research, preferably with the agile literature review approach

Type 2 [without a specific set of management concerns from a particular client organization]: Mainly questionnaire survey research with hypothesis testing

The four questions for students to consider are:

Q1: Which research type is easier to conduct? Why?
Q2: Which research type is more impressive to the examiners? Why?
Q3: What is the research type preference to which supervisor? Why?
Q4: What is the research type preference to you? Why?

Types of diagramming for agile literature review approach study

Types of diagramming for agile literature review approach (ALRA) study includes:

A, Foundational diagramming types
a.1. Rich picture building: it highlights the structural and processual factors as well as the concerns and conflicts of a problem-situation.
a.2. Cognitive mapping: it captures a set of perceived variables in a systemic and somewhat dynamic way.
a.3. Mind mapping. it portrays in a multidimensional way with radiant thinking on a topic in focus.

B. Diagramming for direct ALRA usage
b.1. Management-concerns diagrams and theoretical frameworks: the ALRA pair of diagrams adopts, as the researcher sees fit, some of the features of the foundational diagramming types (A), with the goal of portraying and aligning a coherent set of (i) management concerns, (ii) intellectual (including academic) notions and (iii) research methods for conducting applied business research in an agile mode.