Lecture note on the literature review tasks for writing an MBA dissertation report chapter 2 (literature review): on interpretivism

Lecture note on the literature review tasks for writing an MBA dissertation report chapter 2 (literature review): on interpretivism

 

In the context of doing an MBA dissertation project, based on interpretivism, recommend 4 specific literature review tasks to perform on writing the dissertation report chapter 2 (literature review).

 

For an interpretivist MBA dissertation, Chapter 2 should not merely catalogue “what previous studies found.” It should build a context-sensitive account of how different actors make sense of your phenomenon, while showing how your own research will develop that understanding.

Four literature-review tasks

1.    Map competing meanings of the focal phenomenon

Identify how key concepts in your research question are defined, understood, and experienced by different stakeholders, settings, and cultures. Extract not only formal definitions but also the assumptions, language, values, and viewpoints embedded in each study.

For example, if studying consumers’ responses to AI-generated marketing, compare whether authors frame “trust” as credibility, emotional security, perceived competence, risk reduction, or a socially negotiated relationship. Interpretivism assumes social reality is subjective and context-laden, so differences are potentially meaningful rather than simply inconsistencies to eliminate.

2.    Conduct a thematic, interpretive synthesis—not a study-by-study summary

Group literature around meaning-centred themes that answer what, how, and why, rather than organising the chapter only by author or date. Actively compare studies to construct an argument: where do perspectives converge, diverge, or depend on a particular organisational, cultural, or market context?

A useful structure is:

·        Theme 1: How the phenomenon is understood

·        Theme 2: Conditions shaping that understanding

·        Theme 3: Consequences for decisions, behaviours, or relationships

·        Theme 4: Tensions, contradictions, and unexplained experiences

Your themes should be analytical claims, not labels such as “prior research” or “consumer attitudes.” In interpretive work, themes are developed through the researcher’s engaged reading and represent an interpretive account of patterns of meaning.

3.    Critically examine each study’s context, voice, and method

For the most relevant papers, record: whose perspective was studied, where and when it was studied, the organisational/cultural setting, the research method, and what perspectives were excluded. Give particular attention to qualitative studies, case studies, interviews, ethnographies, and interpretive analyses that can inform your own design.

This task helps you avoid treating findings as universally applicable. A survey of Hong Kong retail customers, for instance, may illuminate prevalence or relationships between variables, but interviews may be more useful for understanding how customers themselves interpret service quality, authenticity, or trust. Reviewing methods alongside findings also supports a coherent justification for your eventual methodology.

4.    Build a provisional conceptual lens and identify an interpretive gap

Use the synthesis to develop a provisional framework showing the relationship among stakeholder meanings, contextual influences, and the process/outcomes you intend to explore. This is not necessarily a fixed hypothesis model. It is a sensitising lens that guides your interview questions, sampling, and initial coding, while remaining open to revision through fieldwork.

State the gap as a lack of understanding, rather than simply a shortage of studies. For example:

Existing research shows that perceived authenticity influences consumer engagement, but it insufficiently explains how Hong Kong online shoppers construct authenticity when evaluating AI-assisted brand communication.

Include a short reflexive note on why you consider this gap important and how your academic/ professional position may shape your reading of the literature. Interpretivist reviews are iterative and recursive: questions, search choices, relevance judgments, and theoretical framing can be refined as understanding develops.

Practical Chapter 2 output

By the end of these four tasks, Chapter 2 should deliver:

·        A clear definition of the phenomenon as socially and contextually interpreted.

·        A critical thematic narrative rather than an annotated bibliography.

·        A reasoned explanation of whose perspectives existing evidence represents—and omits.

·        A defensible, meaning-oriented research gap and provisional conceptual framework that aligns with an interpretivist qualitative methodology.