A note on historical studies for MBA dissertation project works (information from perplexity.ai)
My question
1: "In the context of doing MBA dissertation projects, what could be
value of studying historical and past events, e.g. Asian Financial Crisis, a
corporate merger failure of a company some years ago or, an IT project failure
of a company a few years ago, in the design of an overall research methodology
for the dissertation projects. It appears that MBA dissertation projects should
focus on studying contemporary business issues, not historical events (which is
study domain of history)."
The reply: "Studying
historical events like the Asian Financial Crisis or corporate failures adds
significant value to MBA dissertation methodologies by providing empirical
depth and practical insights into contemporary business challenges. These
analyses bridge past patterns with current issues, enhancing research rigor
without confining it to pure history.
Key Methodological Benefits
Historical case
studies enable qualitative and mixed-methods approaches, such as comparative
analysis or event studies, to test theories against real-world data. For
instance, dissertations have applied Minsky's Financial Instability Hypothesis
to the 1997 Asian crisis, using secondary sources and interviews to inform
regulatory reforms relevant today. This supports inductive theory-building,
where patterns from failures (e.g., merger integration issues or IT project
mismanagement) validate or refine frameworks like risk assessment or governance
models.
Linking to Contemporary Issues
Past events
illuminate recurring risks in modern contexts, like financial vulnerabilities
or project execution flaws, allowing MBA research to draw actionable lessons
for strategy and policy. Examples include theses analyzing Lehman Brothers'
collapse or IT failures to highlight people-related predictors of success,
directly informing current portfolio diversification or agile methodologies. Up
to 40% of management master's dissertations employ case studies for this
holistic view, blending archival data with stakeholder insights.
Pragmatic Research Fit
In pragmatic
methodologies—aligning with your interests—these studies favor mixed methods
over pure positivism, prioritizing practical outcomes like crisis prevention
strategies. They counter the "contemporary-only" view by showing
history as a repository for avoiding fads, as seen in business history
integrations that evolve management research. This approach suits MBA projects
by focusing on transferable lessons, not rote history, enhancing employability
through evidence-based recommendations."
My question
2: "Suggest four advices on research method practices (e.g. in data
gathering and data analysis methods) on studying historical events in the
context of MBA dissertation projects."
The reply: "Studying
historical events in MBA dissertations benefits from structured research
practices that ensure data reliability and analytical depth. Here are four key
pieces of advice on data gathering and analysis, drawn from established case
study methodologies.
Use Triangulation for Data Gathering
Collect data from
multiple secondary sources like archival records, financial reports, news
articles, and academic papers to validate findings on events such as the Asian
Financial Crisis. Supplement with semi-structured interviews from experts or
survivors for contextual richness, ensuring comprehensive triangulation that
enhances credibility in pragmatic MBA research.
Apply Thematic and Content Analysis
Employ qualitative
methods like thematic coding to identify recurring patterns in historical
documents, such as governance lapses in merger failures, using tools like NVivo
for systematic organization. Combine with quantitative event study techniques
to measure market impacts, providing robust evidence for theory testing.
Ensure Validity Through Rigorous Checks
Establish
trustworthiness by cross-verifying data across sources, documenting biases
(e.g., hindsight in failure analyses), and using peer debriefing or member
checks where possible. Pilot your analysis plan on a subset of data to refine
codes and address limitations inherent in retrospective studies.
Leverage Mixed Methods for Insights
Integrate
qualitative narratives with statistical analysis of trends, such as regression
on economic indicators from past IT project failures, to link history to
contemporary applications. This pragmatic approach aligns with MBA goals,
yielding actionable recommendations while maintaining methodological
balance."
My question
3: "In general, what does the field of history study tell us the
"valuable and holistic lessons learned" and "problem-solving
insights offered from history study that can enrich research methodology design
and practices in MBA dissertation project works?
The reply:
"Historical studies offer MBA research profound lessons on contextual
complexity, long-term patterns, and human factors in decision-making, enriching
dissertation methodologies beyond ahistorical snapshots. These insights promote
methodological pluralism, turning history into a tool for rigorous,
forward-looking business analysis.
Contextual Nuance and Causal Depth
History teaches
that events unfold in layered contexts—economic, social, cultural—demanding
multi-source triangulation in MBA designs to avoid oversimplification. Holistic
lessons emphasize narrative analysis alongside data, revealing non-linear
causation (e.g., how overlooked human elements fueled past crises), fostering
richer problem-solving via abductive reasoning.
Long-Term Patterns and Recurrence Risks
By identifying
cycles and contingencies in business history, such as management fads or
governance failures, studies provide predictive insights for scenario planning
in dissertations. This counters positivist biases, advocating mixed methods
that integrate archival data with contemporary metrics for robust risk modeling
and strategy validation.
Human-Centric Problem-Solving
History
underscores behavioral drivers like leadership biases or cultural inertia, offering
MBA researchers tools for qualitative depth in quantitative-heavy fields.
Insights from past experiments (e.g., Hawthorne) inspire ethnographic elements
in designs, enhancing holistic evaluations of ethics, sustainability, and
stakeholder dynamics.
Methodological Pluralism and Innovation
Business history
promotes openness to diverse epistemologies—archival, oral, digital—enriching
MBA practices with secondary data rigor and peer learning models. Valuable
lessons include democratizing knowledge exchange, as in interwar management
movements, to build adaptable, evidence-based frameworks that bridge theory and
practice."
My question
4: "Provide one illustrative example of using a historical research
method, together with 2 other primary research methods, to constitute an
overall research methodology, based on critical realism, for a part-time
4-month MBA dissertation project."
The reply: "Critical
realism (CR) suits short MBA dissertations by enabling layered analysis of
underlying mechanisms behind observed business events, blending historical
depth with primary data for practical insights within 4 months. A strong
example is studying "Governance failures in corporate mergers," using
one historical method (archival case study) alongside two primary methods
(elite interviews and surveys).
Overall CR Methodology Design
Adopt a
retroductive logic: start with empirical merger failure patterns (e.g., value
destruction), interrogate real mechanisms (e.g., power asymmetries), and
validate via actual experiences. Timeline: Month 1 for design/literature; Month
2 for historical data; Month 3 for primary collection/analysis; Month 4 for
synthesis/write-up. Use stratified ontology—empirical (data), actual (events),
real (causal powers like cultural clashes)—with triangulation for
trustworthiness.
Historical Method: Archival Case Study
Analyze the 1999
AOL-Time Warner merger as a single in-depth case, drawing secondary data from
SEC filings, earnings calls, and news archives to reconstruct events and
identify mechanisms (e.g., over-optimism masking integration flaws). Code
thematically with NVivo for patterns, spending 4-6 weeks; this grounds CR's
"real" domain in verifiable history, avoiding present bias.
Primary Method 1: Elite Interviews
Conduct 8-10
semi-structured interviews (30-45 mins each) with merger-experienced
executives/managers from Hong Kong/Singapore firms, recruited via
LinkedIn/alumni networks. Probe lived experiences of similar failures to
surface demi-regularities (e.g., trust erosion), using CR-guided prompts for
reflexivity; transcribe/analyze interpretively to refine historical mechanisms.
Primary Method 2: Targeted Surveys
Distribute online
surveys (e.g., Qualtrics) to 100+ MBA peers/professionals on merger risk
perceptions, using Likert scales and open fields for quantitative trends (e.g.,
regression on governance factors) plus qualitative nuance. Analyze via SPSS for
correlations, integrating with interviews to test generative mechanisms across
CR domains.
Integration and Outputs
Converge findings
iteratively: historical case demystifies structures, interviews reveal agency,
surveys quantify tendencies—yielding a CR-informed framework for merger success
(e.g., adaptive governance model). This pragmatic, multi-method design fits part-time
constraints, enhancing validity through explanatory critique."
My suggested videos to study: (1) What History Was, Is, and Will Be and (2) why study history?
A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.