An examination of the literature review exercise of an academic article: for MBA students: march 1

An examination of the literature review exercise of an academic article: for MBA students [information from chatpdf.com]

The article name: "Opening the black box of transition towards a sustainable business model" Long Range Planning.

My question 1: "What are the research objectives of the article?"

The reply: "The research objectives of the article are as follows:

1. Explore Mechanisms for Transition: The study aims to investigate the mechanisms that facilitate the transition of traditional business models to sustainable business models (SBMs).

2. Focus on Value Components: It emphasizes the need to transform all components of the business model—value creation, value delivery, and value capture—in a consistent manner when transitioning towards sustainability.

3. Contextual Examination: The research examines the specific context of three traditional industries in Finland (mining, paper production, and shipbuilding) to gain insights into their sustainability transitions.

4. Identify Intervention Points and Outcomes: The study aims to identify key intervention points and the potential outcomes of transforming business models towards sustainability.

5. Contribute to Literature: By deriving an integrative model, the research intends to contribute to the literature on sustainability transitions and dynamic views of business models.

These objectives aim to deepen the understanding of how companies can systematically approach and implement changes for sustainable practices , ."

My question 2: "What are the academic theories employed in the study?"

The reply: "The study employs several academic theories and frameworks to support its analysis of the transition towards sustainable business models (SBMs):

1. CIMO Framework: This framework stands for Context, Intervention points, Mechanisms, and Outcomes. It is used to structure the investigation of the transition mechanisms and to provide a systematic way to understand the dynamics involved in transitioning to SBMs , .

2. Mechanism-based Theorizing: The research utilizes mechanism-based theorizing, referencing works by Pajunen (2008) and Hedström and Swedberg (1998). This approach helps to unpack the intricate details of how business model transitions occur, focusing on the interconnectedness of various business model components , .

3. Business Model Literature: The study references various definitions and perspectives on business models, including those by Lambert and Davidson (2013), Timmers (1998), and Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010). This theoretical grounding helps to establish a comprehensive understanding of business models and their evolution towards sustainability , .

4. Dynamic Capabilities Framework: While not explicitly named, the study's focus on the need for organizations to adapt and innovate in their business models aligns with theories related to dynamic capabilities in organizational change and adaptation .

These theories collectively provide a robust conceptual framework for analyzing business model transitions in the context of sustainability."

My question 3: "Did the article evaluate these academic theories individually in its literature review effort?"

The reply: "The article does not evaluate each academic theory individually in a traditional literature review format. Instead, it provides a synthesis of various theoretical perspectives that are relevant to understanding business models and their transition to sustainability.

1. Theoretical Discussion: The beginning of the article presents a theoretical discussion that outlines the conceptual underpinnings of business models (BMs), transitions, and sustainable business models (SBMs) without extensively deconstructing each theory. Instead, it acknowledges the varying definitions and perspectives on business models from different scholars, indicating a broader view rather than a detailed critique of each individual theory , .

2. Reference to Mechanism-Based Reasoning: While the article refers to mechanism-based theorizing and the role of specific frameworks like CIMO, it primarily focuses on how these frameworks aid in understanding the transition process rather than developing a detailed individual assessment of each theory's merits or limitations , .

3. Contextual Integration: The study integrates these theories within the context of empirical findings from the three industrial settings examined (mining, paper production, and shipbuilding), suggesting that the focus is more on applying theoretical insights to practical scenarios rather than engaging in a systematic literature evaluation of each theory , .

Overall, the literature review in the article is more about establishing a foundation for understanding the research focus rather than conducting an individual evaluation of each academic theory."

My question 4: "Did the article conduct literature synthesis on these academic theories?"

The reply: "Yes, the article conducts a synthesis of various academic theories related to business models and sustainability transitions. However, the synthesis is not presented as a detailed critique of each theory individually; rather, it integrates insights from multiple sources to construct a cohesive understanding of the concepts surrounding sustainable business models (SBMs).

1. Conceptual Underpinnings: The article acknowledges the diverse definitions and perspectives on business models as noted by different scholars, such as Lambert and Davidson (2013) and Timmers (1998). This helps to illustrate the complexity and varying interpretations within the literature, thereby synthesizing these perspectives into a framework for discussing BMs in the context of sustainability .

2. Framework Integration: The CIMO framework is presented as a structuring tool to analyze the transition towards SBMs, allowing the study to pull together various mechanistic insights from the literature on sustainability transitions. This reflects a synthesis where various theoretical elements are woven together to support the research objectives , .

3. Tension and Dynamics: The article also highlights the dynamics and inherent tensions in transitioning to SBMs, synthesizing various scholarly insights to articulate how these tensions impact organizational processes. This synthesis adds depth to the understanding of the transitions and the role of different stakeholders in the process , .

4. Connection to Empirical Findings: The theoretical synthesis is further complemented by empirical findings from the industries studied, linking the conceptual frameworks to real-world applications and demonstrating how the theoretical insights translate into practice , .

In summary, while the article does not conduct a methodical literature synthesis in the traditional sense, it effectively synthesizes key theories and insights to inform its exploration of sustainable business models and their transitions."

My question 5: "Did the article discuss how these academic theories could inform the research method designs in the study?"

The reply: "Yes, the article discusses how academic theories inform the research method designs in the study, particularly through the application of the CIMO framework and the decision to adopt a qualitative, multiple-case study approach.

1. CIMO Framework: The article employs the CIMO framework (Context, Intervention, Mechanism, and Outcome) to structure the analysis of transitions towards sustainable business models (SBMs). This framework informs the research design by guiding the identification of relevant contexts and mechanisms involved in the transition process. By articulating the elements of the framework, the study can systematically investigate how firms transition from traditional business models to SBMs, thereby linking theoretical insights directly to methodological choices , .

2. Qualitative Multiple-Case Study: The researchers justify the use of a qualitative, multiple-case study strategy based on the exploratory nature of their research question and the need for an in-depth understanding of the transition mechanisms. They refer to the case study approach as apt for capturing the complexities of change within specific contexts, which is grounded in the theoretical discussions on business model transitions. This reflects how theoretical perspectives on business model dynamics and transitions influenced the methodological choices , .

3. Context Selection: The selection of industries for the case studies (mining, paper production, and shipbuilding) is informed by the theoretical understanding that these sectors are traditionally associated with unsustainable practices and thus are primed for significant change. This selection aligns with the theoretical discussions on the need for substantial transitions in environmentally detrimental industries, demonstrating the direct impact of literature on research design , .

4. Data Collection and Analysis: The article describes the data collection methods, including interviews and secondary archival data, emphasizing how these methods were designed to gather rich, contextual insights that would lend themselves to the theoretical frameworks being applied. The systematic combining of empirical data with theoretical insights during data analysis reflects the iterative nature of qualitative research inspired by theoretical frameworks .

Overall, the article clearly illustrates how academic theories informed its research method designs by guiding the selection of frameworks, case contexts, and methodological approaches."

My question 6: "Did the article explain how the academic theories used can help in addressing the research objectives?"

The reply: "Yes, the article explains how the academic theories used support addressing the research objectives.

1. Mechanism-Based Theorizing: The article discusses the adoption of mechanism-based theorizing as a way to unpack the complexities of transitioning to sustainable business models (SBMs). By focusing on the interactions among various components (such as value creation, capture, and delivery), the theoretical framework allows researchers to identify specific mechanisms and processes that facilitate or hinder this transition. This theoretical grounding directly addresses the research objective of understanding how firms can effectively shift to sustainable practices within their business models , .

2. CIMO Framework Application: Utilizing the CIMO framework provides a structured approach to explore the contexts, interventions, mechanisms, and outcomes associated with SBM transitions. This framework helps clarify how different interventions can lead to successful outcomes in varying contexts, thus directly supporting the research objective of examining and theorizing on the transition processes within selected industries , .

3. Identifying Tensions: Theories regarding the inherent tensions in transitioning to sustainability are also highlighted. The article posits that understanding these tensions—derived from existing scholarly literature—enables firms to anticipate and manage challenges during their transitions, thereby aligning with the research objective of exploring the dynamics and complexities involved in moving towards SBMs .

4. Contribution to Existing Literature: By differentiating between business models with sustainability as an added feature versus those that integrate sustainability into core processes, the article clarifies theoretical distinctions that are crucial for advancing knowledge in the field. This clarity addresses the research objective of contributing to the literature on sustainable business models and providing actionable insights for practitioners , .

In summary, the article effectively articulates how the employed academic theories help in achieving the research objectives by providing frameworks for understanding mechanisms of change, identifying contextual factors, and exploring the tensions that influence the transition to SBMs."

Reference: a collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.

A review of the research methodology of an academic article: Purchasing and Supply

A review of the research methodology of an academic article: Purchasing and Supply [informed by chatpdf.com]

Article name: "Customer attractiveness: A comparative analysis of startups versus incumbents in supplier choice " Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management.

My question 1: "What are the research objectives of the article?"

The reply: "The research objectives of the article are as follows:

1. To assess the impact of company type (startup versus incumbent) on customer attractiveness: This involves understanding how the classification of a company influences its attractiveness to suppliers .

2. To identify and compare factors that significantly influence customer attractiveness for startups and incumbents: This objective is aimed at uncovering which specific attractiveness factors are more impactful for startups as compared to established companies .

These objectives guide the research in analyzing the competitiveness of startups in attracting supplier resources and understanding the dynamics at play in supplier selection , ."

My question 2: "What are the research methods employed as reported in the article?"

The reply: "The research methods employed in the article include:

1. Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE): The study used this method to empirically assess supplier preferences and how they choose between startups and incumbents. DCE allows for exploring preferences in a controlled environment by offering participants hypothetical choices and estimating the utility of different attributes , .

2. Sample Selection: The research targeted American salespersons, utilizing an online recruitment platform, Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). This approach provided access to a diverse participant pool while also emphasizing quality control measures . Various strategies were applied, such as demographic filtering to focus on U.S. salespeople and ensuring participant quality through specific criteria, including a minimum approval rate .

3. Data Quality Measures: To enhance the validity of the data collected, the researchers incorporated CloudResearch’s MTurk toolkit, conducted sample representativeness checks, and ensured fairness in participant compensation relative to typical hourly rates .

These methods collectively contributed to gathering insights on supplier perceptions of customer attractiveness across different company types."

My question 3: "What is the underlying research philosophy of the study as reported in the article?"

The reply: "The underlying research philosophy of the study is grounded in empirical and experimental research methodologies, particularly the use of the Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE). This approach is indicative of a positivist philosophy, which emphasizes observable phenomena and the collection of quantitative data to derive conclusions about supplier preferences in customer attractiveness.

The study aims to explore preferences through controlled experimental conditions rather than relying solely on traditional perceptual surveys, which may yield unreliable results due to limited experiences with certain types of customers (i.e., startups versus incumbents). The DCE methodology is designed to simulate real decision-making scenarios, allowing for the analysis of trade-offs suppliers consider when selecting customers , .

Thus, the research philosophy underscores a systematic and factual analysis, striving to produce generalizable insights based on empirical data regarding supplier behavior and preferences in the context of customer attractiveness."

My question 4: "Did the study employ the mono method, multi method or mixed method as its overall research approach?"

The reply: "The study employed a mono method approach as its overall research strategy. Specifically, it utilized the Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) as the sole methodological framework to examine supplier preferences in selecting attractive customers. The study focused exclusively on this quantitative method to gather empirical data and assess the factors influencing customer attractiveness without integrating other qualitative or alternative quantitative methods alongside it , ."

My question 5: "Were the research method design informed by any academic theories?"

The reply: "Yes, the research method design was informed by academic theories, particularly the reverse marketing concept. This theoretical framework was utilized to evaluate supplier choices regarding customer attractiveness in the DCE. Additionally, the study drew upon the liabilities of newness as a theoretical lens when operationalizing firm newness, distinguishing between startups and well-established companies , . These theoretical underpinnings guided the operationalization of attributes and the design of choice sets within the experiment, enhancing the study's relevance and rigor within the context of customer attractiveness research."

My question 6: "Did the study employ the deductive, inductive or the abductive research approaches?"

The reply: "The study primarily employed a deductive research approach. This is evident from its formulation of specific research questions based on existing theories and prior research related to customer attractiveness and the liabilities of newness. The study aimed to test hypotheses regarding the impact of company type (startup versus incumbent) on customer attractiveness and the influence of various attractiveness factors. By gathering empirical data through the Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) to validate or refute these hypotheses, the research aligned with a deductive framework, which typically involves testing theories through structured methodologies , , ."

My question 7: "Did the study employ the triangulation method?"

The reply: "The study did not explicitly mention employing the triangulation method in its methodology. Triangulation typically involves using multiple methods, data sources, or theoretical perspectives to enhance the credibility and validity of research findings.

While the study utilized a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) as its primary data collection method, it mainly focused on testing specific hypotheses related to customer attractiveness without integrating additional data sources or alternative methodological perspectives commonly associated with triangulation , . However, the study did integrate insights from prior qualitative and quantitative research when framing its hypotheses and discussing its findings, which could be considered a form of methodological robustness, but not strict triangulation as defined in qualitative research practices , ."

My question 8: "Does the research methodology design address the research objectives of the study?"

The reply: "Yes, the research methodology design effectively addresses the research objectives of the study. The study aimed to understand the factors that influence customer attractiveness from the perspective of suppliers, particularly in distinguishing between startups and incumbents. To achieve this, the methodology implemented a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE), which allowed researchers to assess supplier preferences for different customer attributes in a controlled and empirical setting , .

The DCE method aligns with the research objectives by enabling a systematic evaluation of how suppliers prioritize various factors influencing customer attractiveness. By establishing a clear choice architecture and generating decision-making scenarios that replicate real-world conditions, the study effectively fulfills its goal of exploring supplier preferences and trade-offs between customer attributes , .

Furthermore, the use of appropriate sample size calculations, attribute levels, and the participant demographic analysis bolster the methodological design, reinforcing its ability to provide substantial insights into the research questions posed , . Overall, the choice of methodology is well-structured to meet the study's objectives and validate the formulated hypotheses regarding customer attractiveness."

My question 9: "What is the research method design quality of the study, in terms of the qualitative research method design quality criteria and quantitative research method design quality criteria?"

The reply: "The research method design quality of the study can be evaluated in terms of both qualitative and quantitative research method design quality criteria as follows:

Qualitative Research Method Design Quality Criteria

1. Credibility: While the study primarily utilizes a quantitative approach (DCE), it draws from previous literature and qualitative insights to frame its hypotheses. This enhances its credibility by building on established findings within the field .

2. Transferability: The study's findings may have limited transferability due to the focus on American salespeople and the absence of industry-specific factors. This raises concerns regarding the generalizability of results to different contexts or countries. However, it aims for a diverse sample of respondents, which partially mitigates this limitation , .

3. Dependability: The project followed systematic procedures in designing the questionnaire and collecting data, ensuring that the processes were well-documented. This contributes positively to dependability. However, it acknowledges potential limitations due to the use of hypothetical scenarios, suggesting a need for caution in interpretation , .

4. Confirmability: The study provides clear methodological documentation, including the rationale for using DCE, which allows for a level of transparency in the process. Yet, the reliance on hypothetical choices may introduce biases that affect confirmability .

Quantitative Research Method Design Quality Criteria

1. Validity: The DCE method is a well-established approach in marketing and purchasing research, suggesting high validity in measuring supplier preferences regarding customer attractiveness . The attributes and levels used in the study were thoughtfully chosen based on theoretical frameworks, enhancing content validity.

2. Reliability: The study's careful design, including attention checks and pre-testing of the questionnaire, supports the reliability of the data collected , . The sample size (129 usable responses) is deemed sufficient for carrying out statistical analyses.

3. Generalizability: As noted, the focus on American respondents and a specific sample of salespeople may limit generalizability. The study recognizes this as a limitation and suggests avenues for future research in different cultural and industry contexts , .

4. Statistical Power: The study employs a fractional factorial design for the DCE, which optimizes the data collection process and enhances the power of the analysis while reducing complexity for respondents .

Conclusion

Overall, the study demonstrates strengths in both qualitative and quantitative aspects but also faces challenges related to generalizability and the potential biases introduced by hypothetical scenarios. While it effectively employs established methodological frameworks, further research could enhance the robustness of its findings across diverse contexts."

Reference: a collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.

A review of the research methodology of an academic article: Entrepreneurship

A review of the research methodology of an academic article: Entrepreneurship [informed by chatpdf.com]

Article name: "Para-social mentoring: The effects of entrepreneurship influencers on entrepreneurs" Journal of Business Venturing.

My question 1: "What are the research objectives of the article?"

The reply: "The research objectives of the article are primarily to explore how entrepreneurship influencers affect follower-entrepreneurs and to understand the implications of this relationship. Specifically, the study aims to:

1. Interpretation of Influencer Content: Investigate how follower-entrepreneurs interpret the content provided by entrepreneurship influencers.
2. Impact on Entrepreneurial Outcomes: Examine how this influencer content influences various entrepreneurship-related outcomes among follower-entrepreneurs.

Through these objectives, the study seeks to introduce the concept of "para-social mentoring" as a new framework within entrepreneurship research, emphasizing its benefits and potential hazards for entrepreneurs , ."

My question 2: "What are the research methods employed as reported in the article?"

The reply: "The article employs a two-study approach using different research methods:

1. Study 1 - Qualitative Method:

• Data Collection: This study utilized semi-structured interviews to gather qualitative data from entrepreneurs. A total of 22 interviews were conducted in two waves: the first wave included 15 interviews in Spring 2019 and the second wave had 16 interviews in Fall 2023.
• Sampling: Entrepreneurs were selected using purposive sampling from personal networks and entrepreneurship support organizations. The interviews focused on participants' experiences and interpretations of consuming influencer content.
• Data Analysis: The data from interviews were analyzed iteratively to develop a conceptual model around the para-social mentoring construct.

2. Study 2 - Quantitative Method:

• Survey Method: This study involved surveying 613 entrepreneurs across two time points to test the hypotheses that emerged from the qualitative findings of Study 1.
• Hypothesis Testing: The survey aimed to validate the relationships proposed in the para-social mentoring model.

By combining qualitative and quantitative methods, the research seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of how entrepreneurship influencers impact follower-entrepreneurs , , ."

My question 3: "What is the underlying research philosophy of the study as reported in the article?"

The reply: "The underlying research philosophy of the study is primarily qualitative and interpretivist in nature. This is evident from the use of semi-structured interviews in Study 1, which focused on understanding the personal experiences, interpretations, and subjective meanings that entrepreneurs attribute to their interactions with entrepreneurship influencers.

The qualitative approach aligns with the interpretivist paradigm, which emphasizes understanding social phenomena from the perspective of the participants involved, highlighting the complexities of human behavior and relationships, such as the attachment and meanings entrepreneurs assign to influencers as para-social mentors , .

Furthermore, the study incorporates grounded theory methodology, which involves inductively developing theories based on the data collected from interviews. This process reflects a commitment to understanding the context and nuances of the entrepreneur-influencer relationship, rather than testing pre-defined hypotheses , .

In summary, the study operates within an interpretivist framework that values subjective insights and aims to develop a conceptual understanding of para-social mentoring in an entrepreneurial context."

My question 4: "Did the study employ the mono method, multi method or mixed method as its overall research approach?"

The reply: "The study employed a mixed method approach as its overall research strategy. This is evident from the combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods in the two studies conducted:

1. Study 1 utilized qualitative methods through semi-structured interviews to explore how follower-entrepreneurs interpret content from entrepreneurship influencers and the effects of such content on their entrepreneurial outcomes. This study involved collecting and analyzing qualitative data to develop a conceptual model of para-social mentoring.

2. Study 2 followed up with quantitative methods by surveying 613 entrepreneurs to test the hypotheses derived from the qualitative findings of Study 1. This involved gathering numerical data to statistically validate the relationships outlined in the conceptual model.

Such an integration of qualitative insights with quantitative validation indicates a mixed method approach aimed at providing a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomena under study , , ."

My question 5: "Were the research method design informed by any academic theories?"

The reply: "Yes, the research method design was informed by several academic theories. The primary theoretical framework guiding the studies is the concept of para-social relationships, particularly as they relate to mentoring functions in entrepreneurship. This theory describes the one-sided relationships that media users (in this case, follower-entrepreneurs) develop with media figures, perceiving them as sources of support and guidance despite the lack of reciprocal interactions , , .

In specific terms, the following theoretical influences were identified in the studies:

1. Para-Social Relationship Theory: This theory, referenced in the context of Labrecque (2014) and Tukachinsky et al. (2020), suggests that individuals create emotional attachments to media figures, akin to mentor-protégé relationships, even when personal connections do not exist. This theoretical lens guided the exploration of how entrepreneurs relate to influencers and the perceived mentoring roles they occupy.

2. Mentoring Theory: Traditional mentoring theory, including references to the works of Haggard et al. (2011) and Kram (1985), underpins the investigation into the mentoring-like functions that entrepreneurs attribute to influencers. This informs the study’s conceptual framework linking para-social experiences to various entrepreneurial outcomes such as self-efficacy and venture optimism , .

3. Grounded Theory: The qualitative research was structured around grounded theory methodology, which allows researchers to develop theories based on systematic data collection and analysis, thereby aligning the resulting conceptual model with empirical observations gathered from entrepreneurs .

In summary, the research design was indeed informed by these academic theories, contributing to both the development of the conceptual model in Study 1 and the hypotheses tested in Study 2."

My question 6: "Did the study employ the deductive, inductive or the abductive research approaches?"

The reply: "The study primarily employed an inductive research approach in its initial phase (Study 1). This is evident from the qualitative nature of the research, where the authors conducted semi-structured interviews to gather data and develop a conceptual model based on the participants' experiences and interpretations regarding entrepreneurship influencers and their content. The inductive approach allowed the researchers to derive themes and insights from the qualitative data without pre-existing hypotheses, focusing on how follower-entrepreneurs perceived and interacted with influencers as mentors , .

In contrast, Study 2 utilized a deductive research approach. This phase involved testing specific hypotheses derived from the conceptual model developed in Study 1 using quantitative methods, specifically through a survey of 613 entrepreneurs. The researchers formulated hypotheses based on the insights gained during the inductive phase and then sought to confirm or refute these hypotheses through statistical analysis , .

Overall, the study reflects a combination of inductive and deductive approaches, aligning with a sequential exploratory design: starting with inductive qualitative research to build a conceptual framework and followed by deductive quantitative research to test that framework."

My question 7: "Did the study employ the triangulation method?"

The reply: "Yes, the study employed a triangulation method. The researchers utilized different data sources and research methods to enhance the robustness of their findings. Specifically, they conducted qualitative interviews in Study 1 to explore how follower-entrepreneurs interpreted the content of entrepreneurship influencers and to develop an inductive conceptual model. This qualitative data provided rich insights into the experiences and beliefs of the participants , .

In Study 2, the researchers tested the hypotheses developed from the qualitative data using a quantitative survey of 613 entrepreneurs. By comparing findings from the qualitative phase with those from the quantitative phase, the authors triangulated their results to strengthen the evidence for their conclusions regarding the impact of para-social mentoring on entrepreneurship-oriented outcomes , .

The combination of qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys allowed the researchers to validate their findings and ensure a comprehensive understanding of the research questions, thus demonstrating the use of triangulation in their study design."

My question 8: "Does the research methodology design address the research objectives of the study?"

The reply: "Yes, the research methodology design effectively addresses the research objectives of the study. The study's objectives were centered on understanding how entrepreneurship influencers impact follower-entrepreneurs, specifically examining the interpretation of content by these followers and the resulting entrepreneurship-related outcomes.

1. Study 1 (Qualitative Methodology): The qualitative methodology, which involved semi-structured interviews, was well-suited to address the first objective: to explore how follower-entrepreneurs interpret the content of entrepreneurship influencers. This methodology allowed the researchers to capture nuanced insights and personal experiences from a diverse group of entrepreneurs, providing depth to the understanding of para-social mentoring relationships that develop with influencers. The inductive approach enabled the emergence of themes related to mentoring functions (e.g., coaching, role modeling) and identification of key entrepreneurship-related outcomes (like self-efficacy and feelings of inadequacy) directly from the participants' voices , , .

2. Study 2 (Quantitative Methodology): To address the second research objective of evaluating how such influencer content affects entrepreneurship-related outcomes, the researchers implemented a quantitative survey. This allowed them to systematically test hypotheses derived from the qualitative findings in Study 1 across a larger sample of entrepreneurs. The survey results provided empirical evidence supporting the positive relationships between para-social mentoring and various entrepreneurship-oriented outcomes, thereby validating the conceptual model developed in the first study , .

Overall, the sequential use of qualitative and quantitative methodologies—first to explore and then to confirm—aligns with the research objectives and enhances the validity and reliability of the findings. It effectively addresses both the interpretative and evaluative dimensions of the study's goals."

My question 9: "What is the research method design quality of the study, in terms of the qualitative research method design quality criteria and quantitative research method design quality criteria?"

The reply: "The research method design quality of the study can be evaluated based on qualitative and quantitative research method design quality criteria.

Qualitative Research Method Design Quality Criteria

1. Credibility: The study demonstrated credibility through a thorough inductive qualitative approach, conducting semi-structured interviews to gather rich, in-depth data from 22 entrepreneurs. The researchers ensured that the interviews were comprehensive, with a focus on participants' lived experiences and interpretations of influencers' content , .

2. Transferability: While the sample size in Study 1 was relatively small (22 interviews), the study carefully described the context and demographic backgrounds of participants, which can help readers assess the applicability of findings to other contexts. However, there may be limitations in generalizing findings due to the small sample size .

3. Dependability: The research followed best practices in qualitative research, such as iterative data analysis and memoing, which enhanced the dependability of findings. These methods support a systematic approach to data interpretation .

4. Confirmability: The research focused on ensuring that findings were derived from the data collected, with the participants’ voice emphasized. The researchers articulated how their themes emerged from the interviews, enhancing confirmability , .

Quantitative Research Method Design Quality Criteria

1. Internal Validity: Study 2 employed a robust survey methodology with a sample size of 613 entrepreneurs. The use of control variables and the collection of data at two time points supported the internal validity of the study. The power analysis indicated that the sample size was adequate for detecting relationships in the data, which strengthens the validity of the conclusions drawn , .

2. External Validity: The study utilized Prolific, a platform known for providing access to diverse respondents, which enhances the external validity and representativeness of findings. The demographic details collected from respondents also allow for the assessment of generalizability .

3. Reliability: The survey instrument was carefully designed with attention to data quality; measures included timing checks, attention checks to filter out careless responses, and ensuring high completion rates. This rigor in survey design contributes to the reliability of the findings .

4. Statistical Analysis: The hypothesis testing in Study 2 was clearly outlined, with results supporting nine out of ten hypotheses. This demonstrates the survey's effectiveness in evaluating the relationships outlined in the theoretical model developed in the qualitative phase , .

Overall Assessment

Overall, the research method design quality of the study is strong in both qualitative and quantitative aspects. The qualitative phase provides a depth of insight into the phenomenon of para-social mentoring, while the quantitative phase offers empirical validation of the theoretical framework. The careful attention to methodological rigor in both stages contributes positively to the quality of the research design. However, the small sample size in the qualitative phase could be noted as a limitation for broader applicability."

Reference: a collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.

Chapter 3: Research Methodology (chapter structure) [the agile literature review approach {the academic-oriented type}]

Chapter 3: Research Methodology (chapter structure) [the agile literature review approach {the academic-oriented type}] For MBA students

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

3.1.1. Chapter introduction

*** insert the academic literature review tree-b

*** try to insert a flow chart to show the task dependency (e.g. finish to start, start to start, etc.) of the research tasks involved.

3.1.2. Chapter concluding remarks

3.2. Specific methodology review questions and tasks

3.2.1. Question 1: What are the research objectives of the study?

3.2.2. Question 2: What are the research methods employed?

    {provide concrete research method plans of the research methods used in this study}

3.2.3. Question 3: What is the underlying research philosophy of the study?

3.2.4. Question 4: Did the study employ the mono method, multi method or mixed method as its overall research approach?

3.2.5. Question 5: Are the research method design informed by any academic theories?

3.2.6. Question 6: "Did the study employ the deductive, inductive or the abductive research approaches?

3.2.7. Question 7: Did the study employ the triangulation method?"

3.2.8. Question 8: Does the research methodology design address the research objectives of the study?"

3.2.9. Question 9: What is the research method design quality of the study, in terms of the qualitative research method design quality criteria and quantitative research method design quality criteria?

3.3. Chapter concluding remarks

_______

**** Try to present your discussion by referring to the academic literature review tree-b from time to time to make the discussion content more coherent and organized.

References: 

1. On reviewing research methodology.

2. The three ALRA deliverables (for the academic-oriented type)

Chapter 1: Introduction (chapter structure) [the agile literature review approach {the academic-oriented type}]

Chapter 1: Introduction (chapter structure) [the agile literature review approach {the academic-oriented type}] For MBA students

1.1. Chapter introduction

1.2. An introduction to the research theme of the study

1.3. The academic context of the study and the research gaps chosen for the study

1.4. The public domain context of the study and the public media-reported issues chosen for the study

1.5. The researcher's positionality with regard to this study

1.6 The research gaps and research objectives of the study

*** insert the research gaps-research objectives table here.

1.7 An overview of the dissertation report structure

1.8 Chapter concluding remarks

_______

References: 

1. On dissertation project contextualization.

2. The three ALRA deliverables (for the academic-oriented type)

3. On the task of formulating research objectives.

4. On the exploratory task to examine a research theme and to study the related project background.

Chapter 2: Literature review (chapter structure) [the agile literature review approach {the academic-oriented type}]

Chapter 2: Literature review (chapter structure) [the agile literature review approach {the academic-oriented type}] For MBA students

Chapter 2: Literature review

2.1 Chapter introduction

** insert the academic literature review tree

2.2. Specific literature review questions and tasks to address

2.2.1 Question: What are the research objectives of the study?

2.2.2. Question: What are the academic theories employed in the study?

2.2.3. Task: On reviewing the academic theories individually.

2.2.4. Task: A literature synthesis on these academic theories.

2.2.5. Question: How do the chosen academic theories inform the research method designs?

2.2.6. Question: How do the chosen academic theories help in addressing the research objectives?

2.3 Chapter concluding remarks

__________________

*** try to make reference to the academic literature review tree in you discussion from time to time so as to make the chapter content coherent.

References: 

1. a collection of blog notes about the literature review questions and tasks.

2. The three ALRA deliverables (for the academic-oriented type)

An example of asking poe.com to come up with a dissertation proposal (blind box toy business related)

An example of asking poe.com to come up with a dissertation proposal (blind box toy business related): for MBA students [information from poe.com] {related to the agile literature review approach [the academic-oriented project type]}

My question 1: "I am a part-time MBA student, currently trying to formulate my dissertation proposal. My research theme is on "how can the Hong Kong blind box toy sector strengthen its viability with business model innovation " I intend to use 2 business model theories, notably on business model innovation as well as 2 strategic management theories for my dissertation project. My dissertation proposal should specify 4 research objectives that explicitly respond to 2 research gaps and 2 public media reported issues. I will conduct semi-structured interview with 5 of my friends, 2 of whom being blind  box toy store owners in Hong Kong, 3 being blind box toys customers in their 20s. I will also conduct a focus group with 6 of my friends, 2 of whom being regular Hong Kong customers of blind box toys, 1 of whom being a blind box toys store owner in Hong Kong and 2 being frequent toy customers (non-blind box ones) in Hong Kong and the last one being a blind box toys store owner in Taiwan. My last research method is a desk research to study my research theme. My overall research philosophy is pragmatism. With these ideas from me, could you offer a dissertation proposal to me? Tks in advance."

The reply: "Certainly! Below is a structured dissertation proposal based on your research theme and methodologies.

---

Dissertation Proposal

Title

Strengthening Viability in the Hong Kong Blind Box Toy Sector Through Business Model Innovation

Introduction

The blind box toy market in Hong Kong has gained significant attention, yet it faces challenges that threaten its sustainability. This dissertation aims to explore how business model innovation can enhance the viability of this sector. By addressing specific research gaps and public media reported issues, this research will provide valuable insights for stakeholders in the industry.

Research Objectives

1. To identify and analyze the current business models utilized in the Hong Kong blind box toy sector.

   • This objective addresses the gap in understanding existing models and their effectiveness.

2. To explore customer perceptions and expectations of blind box toys among young consumers in Hong Kong.

   • This objective targets the lack of research on consumer behavior and preferences in this niche market.

3. To evaluate the impact of innovative business models on the operational success of blind box toy stores.

   • This will respond to the public media's concern regarding sustainability and profitability in the sector.

4. To compare the strategies of Hong Kong and Taiwan blind box toy retailers to identify best practices.

   • This objective addresses the reported issues of competition and market differentiation in the industry.

Research Gaps

1. Limited understanding of existing business models within the blind box toy sector in Hong Kong.
2. Insufficient research on consumer behavior and preferences for blind box toys, particularly among younger demographics.

Public Media Reported Issues

1. Concerns over the sustainability of blind box toy stores due to rising competition and changing consumer preferences.
2. The challenge of market differentiation as more retailers enter the blind box toy market.

Methodology

1. Semi-Structured Interviews:

   • Conduct interviews with five friends, including two blind box toy store owners and three customers aged in their 20s. This qualitative approach will help gather insights on business operations and customer perceptions.

2. Focus Group:

   • Organize a focus group with six participants: two regular customers of blind box toys, one blind box toy store owner in Hong Kong, two frequent toy customers (non-blind box), and one blind box toy store owner in Taiwan. This will allow for deeper discussions on consumer behavior and competitive strategies.

3. Desk Research:

   • Conduct a literature review on business model innovation and strategic management theories relevant to the toy industry. This will provide a theoretical framework to support the primary research.

Research Philosophy

This study will adopt a pragmatic research philosophy, focusing on practical implications and real-world applications of the findings. By combining qualitative methods with theoretical insights, the research aims to provide actionable recommendations for enhancing the viability of the blind box toy sector in Hong Kong.

Conclusion

This dissertation will contribute to the understanding of business model innovation in the blind box toy sector and provide practical solutions for store owners and marketers. By addressing the identified research gaps and public issues, the findings will be beneficial for both academic and industry stakeholders.

References

(A placeholder for references will be included here once the literature review is conducted.)"

My question 2: "Tks for the proposal made. Could you provide me with a more concrete research method design for each of the three research methods chosen, i.e. focus group, semi-structured interview and desk research? Tks a lot."

The reply: "Sure! Here's a more detailed research method design for each of the three methods you've chosen:

1. Semi-Structured Interviews

Objective: To gather in-depth insights on the perspectives of blind box toy store owners and customers regarding business model innovation.

Participants:

• 2 blind box toy store owners in Hong Kong
• 3 blind box toy customers in their 20s

Interview Structure:

• Introduction: Brief overview of the study and its purpose.
• Demographic Questions: Age, occupation, and familiarity with blind box toys.
• Core Questions:
  • What motivated you to enter the blind box toy market (for store owners)?
  • How do you perceive the current challenges facing the blind box toy sector?
  • What innovative business models do you think could enhance viability?
  • How do customer preferences influence your business strategies?
  • What role does community or social media play in your marketing?

Data Collection:

• Conduct interviews in a quiet, comfortable setting (in-person or via video call).
• Record the sessions (with consent) for accurate transcription and analysis.

Analysis:

• Use thematic analysis to identify common themes and insights from responses.
• Compare perspectives between store owners and customers.

---

2. Focus Group

Objective: To explore collective views on blind box toys and potential business model innovations.

Participants:

• 1 blind box toy store owner from Hong Kong
• 2 regular Hong Kong customers of blind box toys
• 2 frequent toy customers (non-blind box)
• 1 blind box toy store owner in Taiwan

Focus Group Structure:

• Introduction: Explain the purpose of the discussion and establish ground rules for respectful dialogue.
• Icebreaker: Ask participants about their favorite toys as children.
• Discussion Questions:
  • What do you enjoy most about blind box toys?
  • How do you decide to purchase a blind box toy?
  • What improvements would you like to see in the blind box toy market?
  • How do you perceive the differences between blind box toys and traditional toys?
  • What trends do you see influencing your purchasing decisions?

Data Collection:

• Facilitate the session in a relaxed environment (in-person or virtual).
• Record the discussion (with consent) and take notes on group dynamics.

Analysis:

• Analyze the conversation for common themes and notable disagreements.
• Highlight insights that could indicate potential business model innovations.

---

3. Desk Research

Objective: To analyze existing literature, market reports, and media articles relevant to the blind box toy sector.

Sources:

• Academic journals on business model innovation and strategic management.
• Market analysis reports specific to the toy industry in Hong Kong and Taiwan.
• Public media articles discussing trends, challenges, and consumer behavior in the blind box toy market.

Research Steps:

1. Literature Review: Identify key theories and frameworks related to business model innovation and strategic management.
2. Market Analysis: Gather quantitative data on sales, market size, and demographic trends in the blind box toy sector.
3. Case Studies: Examine successful blind box toy brands or stores that have implemented innovative business models.

Data Collection:

• Use academic databases, online libraries, and toy industry reports.
• Collect statistical data and qualitative insights from case studies.

Analysis:

• Synthesize findings to identify gaps in current research and practical implications for the blind box toy sector.
• Cross-reference desk research findings with qualitative data from interviews and focus groups to validate insights.

---

This structured approach should provide a solid foundation for your research, ensuring comprehensive data collection and analysis. Let me know if you need further assistance!"

My question 3: "Could you indicate which research objective is related to which research gaps and which public-media reported issues? Tks."

The reply: "Certainly! Below is a breakdown of how each research objective relates to the identified research gaps and public media reported issues:

Research Objectives and Their Connections

1. Research Objective 1: Analyze the current business models employed by blind box toy stores in Hong Kong.

   • Related Research Gap: Lack of comprehensive studies on existing business models in the blind box toy sector.
   • Related Public Media Issue: Reports on declining sales in the toy sector, highlighting the need for innovative approaches.

2. Research Objective 2: Identify consumer preferences and behaviors regarding blind box toys among young adults.

   • Related Research Gap: Limited understanding of the target demographic's preferences in the blind box toy market.
   • Related Public Media Issue: Coverage of shifting consumer trends and interests in collectible toys.

3. Research Objective 3: Explore potential business model innovations that could enhance the viability of blind box toy stores.

   • Related Research Gap: Insufficient exploration of innovative business models specific to niche toy markets.
   • Related Public Media Issue: Articles discussing the necessity of innovation in retail sectors facing challenges.

4. Research Objective 4: Assess the impact of community engagement and social media on the marketing strategies of blind box toy stores.

   • Related Research Gap: Lack of insights into how community and social media influence niche market strategies.
   • Related Public Media Issue: Reporting on the effectiveness of social media marketing in engaging younger consumers.

This structure clearly links each research objective to the respective gaps and issues, providing a comprehensive framework for your dissertation."

My question 4: "Tks. Could you indicate which academic concepts and academic theories are employed to (1) investigate which research objectives and (2) inform which research methods chosen? Tks."

The reply: "Sure! Here’s a breakdown of the academic concepts and theories that can be employed to investigate each research objective and inform the chosen research methods.

Academic Concepts and Theories

1. Research Objectives and Corresponding Theories

• Research Objective 1: Analyze the current business models employed by blind box toy stores in Hong Kong.

  • Academic Concept: Business Model Canvas
  • Academic Theory: Value Proposition Theory

• Research Objective 2: Identify consumer preferences and behaviors regarding blind box toys among young adults.

  • Academic Concept: Consumer Behavior Theory
  • Academic Theory: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (to understand motivations)

• Research Objective 3: Explore potential business model innovations that could enhance the viability of blind box toy stores.

  • Academic Concept: Disruptive Innovation Theory
  • Academic Theory: Business Model Innovation Framework

• Research Objective 4: Assess the impact of community engagement and social media on the marketing strategies of blind box toy stores.

  • Academic Concept: Social Media Marketing
  • Academic Theory: Stakeholder Theory (to understand community engagement)

2. Research Methods and Corresponding Theories

• Semi-Structured Interviews:

  • Informed by: Qualitative Research Theory (to gather rich, detailed data)
  • Academic Concept: Thematic Analysis (for analyzing interview data)

• Focus Group:

  • Informed by: Group Dynamics Theory (to explore collective opinions and interactions)
  • Academic Concept: Focus Group Methodology (to facilitate discussion and gather diverse perspectives)

• Desk Research:

  • Informed by: Secondary Data Analysis (to synthesize existing literature and reports)
  • Academic Concept: Literature Review Methodology (to identify gaps and contextualize findings)

Summary

This framework links academic theories and concepts directly to your research objectives and methods, providing a solid foundation for your dissertation proposal."

My question 5: "Could you tell me what are the strengths and weaknesses of the research philosophy and research methods chosen for this dissertation project?"

The reply: "Certainly! Here’s an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen research philosophy (pragmatism) and the research methods (semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and desk research) for your dissertation project.

Research Philosophy: Pragmatism

Strengths:

• Flexibility: Pragmatism allows for the use of multiple methods, combining qualitative and quantitative approaches to gain a comprehensive understanding of the research problem.
• Focus on Practical Outcomes: It prioritizes practical solutions and real-world applications, making it highly relevant for business contexts.
• Adaptability: Researchers can adjust their methods and approaches as new insights emerge during the study.

Weaknesses:

• Lack of Rigidity: The flexible nature of pragmatism can lead to challenges in maintaining a consistent methodological framework, potentially affecting the reliability of findings.
• Potential Bias: The emphasis on practical outcomes may lead researchers to prioritize certain findings over others, skewing results based on personal or societal biases.
• Complexity in Integration: Combining different methods can complicate data analysis and interpretation, making it harder to draw cohesive conclusions.

Research Methods

1. Semi-Structured Interviews

Strengths:

• Depth of Insight: Allows for in-depth exploration of participants’ thoughts and feelings, yielding rich qualitative data.
• Flexibility: Interviewers can adapt questions based on responses, leading to unexpected insights.
• Personal Connection: Builds rapport with participants, encouraging openness and honesty.

Weaknesses:

• Time-Consuming: Conducting and analyzing interviews can be resource-intensive.
• Subjectivity: Responses may be influenced by the interviewer's biases or the participants' perceptions.
• Limited Generalizability: Findings from a small sample may not be representative of the broader population.

2. Focus Groups

Strengths:

• Group Dynamics: Participants can stimulate each other's thoughts, leading to richer discussions and insights.
• Real-Time Interaction: Facilitates immediate feedback and clarification of ideas.
• Diverse Perspectives: Engages multiple viewpoints, enhancing the breadth of data collected.

Weaknesses:

• Dominance of Voices: Some participants may dominate the conversation, limiting contributions from quieter members.
• Groupthink: The desire for consensus may suppress individual opinions and lead to conformity.
• Logistical Challenges: Coordinating schedules and managing group dynamics can be complex.

3. Desk Research

Strengths:

• Cost-Effective: Utilizes existing data, saving time and resources compared to primary data collection.
• Breadth of Information: Access to a wide range of studies, reports, and publications enhances contextual understanding.
• Foundation for Further Research: Helps identify gaps in existing literature and informs subsequent research methods.

Weaknesses:

• Outdated Information: Some sources may be outdated or not relevant to current market conditions.
• Lack of Specificity: Secondary data may not address specific research questions directly, leading to gaps in understanding.
• Quality Variability: The reliability and validity of sources can vary, potentially affecting the study’s credibility.

Summary

By evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of your chosen research philosophy and methods, you can better anticipate challenges and leverage the advantages to enhance the overall quality and impact of your dissertation project."

*** try to conduct a preliminary exploratory exercise with perplexity.ai before formulating the dissertation proposal with poe.com.

*** my suggestion:

Research Objectives

1. To identify and analyze the current business models utilized in the Hong Kong blind box toy sector. (main research objective)

2. To explore customer perceptions and expectations of blind box toys among young consumers in Hong Kong. (minor research objective)

3. To evaluate the impact of innovative business models on the operational success of blind box toy stores. (main research objective)

4. To compare the strategies of Hong Kong and Taiwan blind box toy retailers to identify best practices. (minor research objective)

Reference: a collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.