Options of academic-oriented project profile in terms of knowledge type & purpose: a note

Options of academic-oriented project profile in terms of knowledge type & purpose: a note

In order to further clarify the overall research objective of an academic-oriented dissertation project, the researcher (e.g. my MBA students) can describe the dissertation project in terms of knowledge type and purpose. This is depicted in the following table:

The table is based on the video on this topic (goals of science). There are four options identified in the table, as types A, B, C and D. Regarding the dissertation projects done by MBA students, which are mainly applied in knowledge purpose and particularistic in knowledge type, most likely option D is to be chosen. The D type of project profile is more in line with the design spirit of an MBA programme.

Describing the academic-oriented dissertation project profile (using the ALRA) helps in clarifying the overall research objective of the dissertation project.

Additional reading: on research gap and research objective statement formulation.

Zone and item numbering convention in the agile literature review approach diagrams (the consulting-oriented type)

Zone and item numbering convention in the agile literature review approach diagrams (the consulting-oriented type)

MCs are management concern items

UMCs are urgent management concern items

Items are by nature research objectives.

ACs are academic concepts

The chain of evidence practice for the academic-oriented project type of the agile literature review approach: a brief note

The chain of evidence (COE) practice for the academic-oriented project type of the agile literature review approach: a brief note

In order to develop clear line of reasoning in the dissertation report writing for for the academic-oriented project type of the agile literature review approach, it is useful to employ the chain of evidence (COE) practice in the dissertation report writing. The COE practice makes use of the following technique:

Explicit labeling  of the main elements of the ALRA (mainly its diagrams):

1. The research-gap translation diagram: the triggering point of intellectual curiosity: TPOIC

2. The research gap-research objective table: the research-gap statements (RGS1, RGS2..etc) and the research objective statements (ROS1, ROS2... etc)

3. The academic ideas on the academic literature review tree: the academic ideas on tree branch 1 (ai 1.1, ai 1.2..., etc).

4. Research methods on the academic literature review tree-b: research method 1 (RM1), research method 2 (RM2), ... etc.

5. Research findings in dissertation report chapter 4 (Presentation of research findings): research finding 1 (RF1), research finding 2 (RF2),... etc.

6. Discussion findings in dissertation report chapter 5 (Discussion of findings): discussion finding 1 (DF1), discussion finding 2 (DF2),... etc.

7. Recommendations in the report chapter  6 (Conclusions and recommendations): Recommendation 1, recommendation 2, ... etc.

When writing your dissertation report, try to provide explicit labels of the ALRA elements in your line of reasoning so that readers can follow your reasoning with reference to your dissertation report 's "evidence ingredients". 

Relevant readings: the chain of evidence practice note for the consulting-oriented project type of the ALRA.

A collection of notes on ALRA (academic oriented type).

The life history of an academic literature review tree branch: a visual illustration

The life history of an academic literature review tree branch: a visual illustration:

To illustrate how the various ALRA academic-oriented project type deliverables are related, I depict the following visual illustration on the life history of an academic literature review tree branch in form of a diagram. This is shown as follows:

The life history depicts three main life stages: 

Main life stage 1: the embryonic stage (broken down into life stages 1 and 2)

Main life stage 2: the literature review stage (i.e. life stage 3)

Main life stage 3: the research methodology design stage (i.e. life stage 4)

It is important to note that each individual life stage has specific deliverable to produce:

Life stage 1: the research gap-translation diagram

Life stage 2: the research gap-objective table

Life stage 3: the academic literature review tree

Life stage 4: the academic literature review tree-b.

There are two additional (nice-to-have) activities that are complementary in nature:

Construction of theoretical framework A (complementary to life stage 3)

Construction of theoretical framework B (complementary to life stage 4)

In short, the life history goes through 3 main life stages, broken down into 4 life stages.

The life history diagram indicates the locations of the 6 deliverables of the agile literature review approach (the academic-oriented project type). The 6 deliverables are:

Deliverable 1. The research-gap translation diagram

Deliverable 2. The research gap-objective table

Deliverable 3. The academic literature review tree

Deliverable 4. The theoretical framework A

Deliverable 5. The academic literature review tree-b

Deliverable 6. The theoretical framework B.

Regarding the academic ideas hanging on the branch of the literature review tree (deliverable 3), together, they represent the concrete outcome of the researcher's literature review effort on the relevant academic literature (mainly academic journals, textbooks and other dissertation reports). As such, they comprise:

1. theoretical perspectives, theories, concepts and process models from the academic literature.

2. research methods, research techniques and research instruments

3. empirical findings that have reference value to inform the dissertation project methodology design and/or dissertation project findings and analysis.

Two illustrative examples on the formulation of research gap statements and the derived research objective statements.

Two illustrative examples on the formulation of research gap statements and the derived research objective statements. 

This practice note is for study of the academic-oriented dissertation project type that employs the agile literature review approach (ALRA)

Illustration One:

Huber F., Vollhardt, K., Matthes, I. and Vogel, J.. 2010. “Brand misconduct: Consequences on consumer–brand relationships” Journal of Business Research 63, Elseiver: 1113–1120

“Recent research on the relationship between a company and its customers emphasizes the role of the relationship between the brand and the individual (Aaker, 1996; Aaker et al., 2004; Blackston, 2000). In her seminal work Fournier (1994, 1998) states that such relationships are highly vibrant entities that can emerge in various forms. Long lasting relationships can yield concrete benefits for the relationship partners, in particular financial gain for the firm in question (e.g., Reichheld et al., 2000). Yet, thinking for example of Shell's plan to scuttle the Brent Spar oil platform or Google's censorship of search engine results in China, companies and their brands do not always behave according to consumers' expectations. Klein et al. (2004) refer to a company's perceived misbehavior as an egregious act. Focusing on consumer–brand relationships this study takes an interest in companies as brand owners and thus uses the term brand misconduct”.

Research gap statement 1 (suggested): The existing conceptual proposition on the "relationship between brands and individuals" of Aaker (1996), Aaker et al. (2024) and Blackston (2000) that “long lasting relationships between and individual… can yield benefits for the relationship partners” (Huber et al., 2010) has difficulty to explain brand misconduct of companies.

Derived research objective statement 1 (suggested): To develop new concepts and empirical findings beyond that of Aaker (1996), Aaker et al. (2024) and Blackston (2000), in order to explain and evaluate brand misconduct of companies in the Hong Kong retail sector in 2024.

 

Illustration Two:

Son, M.H. and Han, K. 2011. “Beyond the technology adoption: Technology readiness effects on post-adoption behaviour” Journal of Business Research 64, Elsevier: 1178–1182.

“Much of the existing research on new product diffusion focuses on uncovering the factors influencing technology adoption (Huh and Kim, 2008; Shih and Venkatesh, 2004). But the long-term survival and substantial success of technological firms rely on the continued use of the new technology, rather than the first adoption, especially for subscription-based services”.

Research gap statement 2 (suggested): The existing research on new product diffusion predominantly focuses on studying factors influencing technology adoption (Huh and Kim, 2008; Shih and Venkatesh, 2004), while neglecting factors contributing to “the continued use of the new technology… especially for subscription-based services” (Son and Han, 2011).

Derived research objective statement 2 (suggested): To explore factors that can influence Hong Kong consumers’ continued use of new technology-based financial services in 2024.

Additional comments on the research gap analysis for doing dissertation projects:

1. At the initial stage of formulating your dissertation proposal, try to support your research gap analysis with reference to 3 to 4 academic articles.

2. Your initial research gap analysis should lead you to come up with 3 to 4 associated research gap statements (and the corresponding research objective statements). Preferably, two of your research objectives should be the main research objectives, with the rest being the minor research objectives. You could also state that the main research objective(s) constitute your core-focus-domain of your dissertation project. The way to arrive at a coherent set of research gap statements and research objective statements can take the following three sequential activities:

Related study materials: on research gap analysis and on the overall research objective profile.

A collection of notes on ALRA (academic oriented type).

The generic form of a theoretical framework level 1-c without the need for a gatekeeper consent form

The generic form of a theoretical framework level 1-c (ALRA) without the need for a gatekeeper consent form

For students unable to do a case study at the individual organizational or the business sector level due to inability to obtain the required gatekeeper consent form, their research methodology blueprint in the form of a theoretical framework level 1c most likely takes the following generic form:

Regarding this theoretical framework level 1c, the core-focus-domain is located in zone 1 (environmental drivers). In this case, the primary research methods (e.g. research method 1: research interview and research method 2: questionnaire survey) are employed to study public opinions on topics such as consumer preferences and company reputation. Participant (interviewees and survey respondents) informed consent forms are needed but not the gatekeeper consent form.

As to items (i.e. research objectives) in zones 2, 3a and 3b, the researcher conducts secondary research method using Internet research (or desk research or library research method) to gather data and docs in the public domain. In this regard, there is no need to use a gatekeeper consent form.

Finally, the researcher needs to justify his/her research topic and research methodology and consult his/ her project supervisor for feedback.

A brief description of "intellectual maturity" and its influence on a student's academic performance

 A brief description of "intellectual maturity"

1. "Intellectual maturity demands rigorous critical thinking, open-mindedness, and humility. It involves recognising the limitations of one’s understanding and being open to questioning and challenging our own assumptions. It involves recognising the limitations of one's understanding and being open to questioning and challenging our own assumptions. It also necessitates adaptability – the capacity to learn, unlearn, and relearn as circumstances evolve.

This quality is grounded in curiosity and a deep-seated love for learning. An intellectually mature leader continually seeks knowledge and understanding across a broad spectrum of fields, understanding that wisdom can emerge from the most unexpected places. They recognise the interconnectedness of things, appreciating how an insight gleaned from one domain can spark innovation in another.

In our post-modern era, where change is a constant and uncertainty the norm, intellectual maturity provides leaders with the necessary mental agility to navigate the turbulent waters of the unknown. It equips them with the ability to discern patterns amidst chaos, drawing upon their broad knowledge and intellectual insight to connect the dots and steer their organisations forward.

Intellectual maturity is also intimately tied to empathy. It’s about understanding and valuing diverse perspectives, fostering an inclusive culture that empowers people to bring their full selves and unique insights to the table". [re: ref 1].

2a. Maturity is the state of being fully developed or adult. [re: ref 2a].

2b. Intellectual means involving a person's ability to think and to understand ideas and information. [re: ref 2b].

My research question is what is the required level of intellectual maturity for students to study for an MBA degree programme and a DBA degree programme?

The research context of discussion is that there are quite some negative comments on studying for an advanced degree programme, including an MBA and a DBA degree programme:

Video 1: 4 reasons to quit your PhD program

Video 2: I quit my PhD

Video 3: The truth about dropping out of a PhD

Video 4: Leaving my PhD Program

Video 5: 3 Reasons Quitting My PhD Was The Best Decision Of My Life

Video 6: The #1 Reason You Should (NOT) Get A Doctorate In Business Administration

Video 7: The Downside Of Pursuing An Executive DBA

A conceptual framework to study a student's academic performance on an advanced degree programme (a draft)