On reflexivity and
bracketing for MBA students
Highlight 5
main ideas on each of the 2 topics of "reflexivity" and
"bracketing" in qualitative research, notably in doing MBA
dissertation projects. Specifically, discuss how reflexivity and bracketing
contribute to the quality of qualitative research project findings.
In
qualitative MBA dissertation projects, reflexivity and bracketing both
help make findings more trustworthy, but they do so in different ways:
reflexivity keeps you aware of how you shape the research, while bracketing
helps you deliberately manage your prior assumptions so participants’ meanings
stay central. Together, they improve the quality of findings by reducing bias,
increasing transparency, and strengthening credibility and confirmability.
Reflexivity
1.
Awareness of the
researcher as an instrument.
In qualitative research, the researcher is not neutral; your background, role,
values, and expectations can influence what you notice, ask, and interpret.
2.
Continuous
self-examination.
Reflexivity is not a one-time statement in the methodology chapter; it is an
ongoing process across design, interviewing, coding, and interpretation.
3.
Transparency about
positionality.
For MBA dissertations, reflexivity helps you explain how your professional
experience, industry knowledge, or managerial beliefs may shape the study,
which makes the research easier to evaluate critically.
4.
Richer
interpretation of data.
By reflecting on your own assumptions, you are less likely to rush to familiar
explanations and more likely to detect subtle or unexpected meanings in
participants’ accounts.
5.
Improved
trustworthiness of findings.
Reflexive practice strengthens credibility because readers can see how
conclusions were reached, not just the final claims.
In an MBA dissertation, this is especially important when the topic is close to
your workplace or industry, because reflexivity helps show that findings are
grounded in the data rather than in your preferences.
Bracketing
1.
Setting aside
preconceptions.
Bracketing means consciously suspending prior beliefs, theories, and
experiences so you can attend more openly to participants’ perspectives.
2.
Reducing
researcher bias.
In qualitative inquiry, bracketing limits the extent to which your own
expectations distort data collection or interpretation, which improves the
credibility of findings.
3.
Keeping
participants’ voices central.
The goal is not to eliminate subjectivity completely, but to prevent the
researcher’s assumptions from overpowering the lived experiences described by
participants.
4.
Supporting more
authentic findings.
When bracketing is done well, the analysis is more likely to reflect what
participants actually said, rather than what the researcher expected to hear.
5.
Strengthening
rigor and confirmability.
Bracketing enhances methodological rigor by making it more likely that findings
are shaped by the evidence, not by the researcher’s personal lens.
For MBA dissertations, this is particularly valuable when the researcher
already knows the organization, sector, or problem area being studied.
How they improve findings
Reflexivity and
bracketing contribute to quality in complementary ways: reflexivity helps
you notice your influence, while bracketing helps you manage it
during the research process. Used together, they support more credible,
transparent, and defensible dissertation findings, especially in interviews,
case studies, and phenomenological projects where researcher interpretation is
central.”
When are reflexivity
and bracketing mainly employed in an MBA dissertation report writing, i.e.,
chapter 1 (Introduction), chapter 2 (literature review), chapter 3 (research
methodology), chapter 4 (presentation of research findings), chapter 5
(discussion of research findings), chapter 6 (conclusions and recommendations),
and chapter 7 (reflection on the dissertation project experience). Try to
clarify your discussion with reference to the research theme of "an
evaluation of the charismatic leadership style on Gen Z employees' job
engagement in the Hong Kong hotel sector.
For
your MBA dissertation on “an evaluation of the charismatic leadership
style on Gen Z employees’ job engagement in the Hong Kong hotel sector,” reflexivity
and bracketing are used mainly across the methodology and
interpretation-heavy chapters, not equally in every chapter. Reflexivity is
a continuous practice that should be visible from design to final write-up,
while bracketing is most important when you collect, code, and interpret data
so your own assumptions do not dominate the findings.
Chapter-by-chapter use
|
Chapter |
Reflexivity |
Bracketing |
|
Chapter
1: Introduction |
Light
use: explain why you chose this topic and any insider position you may have
in hospitality or management. |
Minimal
use: not the main place for bracketing, except to note your awareness of
possible preconceptions. |
|
Chapter
2: Literature review |
Moderate
use: show how your prior beliefs are informed and challenged by the
literature. |
Some
use: keep your assumptions from forcing the literature into a one-sided
argument. |
|
Chapter
3: Research methodology |
Heavy
use: explain your positionality, access to participants, interview role, and
how you managed bias. |
Heavy
use: explicitly state how you bracketed assumptions during sampling,
interviewing, coding, and analysis. |
|
Chapter
4: Presentation of findings |
Moderate
use: briefly note how your interpretation process affected theme development. |
Heavy
use: ensure themes come from participants’ accounts, not from your expectations
about charismatic leadership. |
|
Chapter
5: Discussion of findings |
Heavy
use: compare findings with literature while acknowledging how your standpoint
may shape interpretation. |
Moderate
use: check that you are not over-interpreting findings to fit pre-existing
theories. |
|
Chapter
6: Conclusions and recommendations |
Moderate
use: be careful that recommendations follow evidence, not personal
preference. |
Light
to moderate use: confirm that conclusions remain grounded in the data. |
|
Chapter
7: Reflection on the dissertation project experience |
Very
heavy use: this is the main chapter for reflexive reflection on what you
learned about yourself as researcher. |
Light
use: you may mention how you continually tried to bracket assumptions, but
the focus is reflection rather than bracketing itself. |
How this fits your topic
In this study, you
may already have views about whether charismatic hotel leaders improve Gen Z
employees’ engagement. Reflexivity is needed because your managerial
experience, hotel-sector knowledge, or beliefs about Gen Z can influence which
interview answers you notice as important and how you interpret them.
Bracketing is needed because participants may describe charisma differently
from your own expectations, so you must avoid pre-deciding that “charisma”
always means inspiration, motivation, or positive engagement.
Practical chapter guidance
Chapter 1
Use reflexivity
only briefly, usually in a short paragraph explaining your motivation and
possible insider status. This is enough to show transparency without turning
the introduction into a reflexive essay.
Chapter 2
Use reflexivity
when you critically assess the literature and recognise that your reading
choices are shaped by your own assumptions. Bracketing is limited here, but it
helps you avoid selecting only studies that support your preferred view of
charismatic leadership.
Chapter 3
This is the main
chapter for both concepts. Reflexivity explains your role as interviewer and
analyst, while bracketing explains how you managed prior beliefs about Gen Z
motivation, leadership style, and hotel work conditions. For example, if you
believe Gen Z employees value authenticity more than hierarchy, you should
state that this belief exists and explain how you prevented it from steering
the interview prompts or coding.
Chapter 4
When you present
themes such as “leader inspiration,” “personal recognition,” or “emotional
connection,” bracketing helps ensure these themes emerge from participant
narratives rather than from your expectations. Reflexivity can be used briefly
to show that you remained aware of how your interpretive lens shaped theme
naming and organization.
Chapter 5
This is a major
reflexive chapter because you interpret the findings in light of theory and
prior studies. You should also use bracketing here by checking whether your
discussion is drifting into advocacy for charismatic leadership instead of
staying faithful to the evidence.
Chapter 6
Use both concepts
only indirectly. Reflexivity helps you make balanced recommendations for hotel
managers, while bracketing helps you avoid overstating what the data can
support.
Chapter 7
This is the
strongest chapter for reflexivity because it is your personal research
reflection. You can discuss how your understanding of leadership, Gen Z, and
Hong Kong hotel workplaces changed through the project, and how your
assumptions were challenged or confirmed. Bracketing may be mentioned as a
technique you attempted throughout the project, but it is not the central focus
of this chapter.
Best placement rule
A simple rule is
this: reflexivity belongs everywhere, but especially in Chapters 3, 5,
and 7; bracketing belongs mainly in Chapters 3 and 4, and then again in 5 when
you check your interpretations. For your hotel-sector topic, that means the
dissertation should show both that you were self-aware and that you actively
prevented your own assumptions about charismatic leadership from shaping the
findings too strongly.