1. Writing Literature Review for PhD research Graduate School Seminar College of Business and Law Friday December 2 nd, 2 to 4.30

2. Why a specific seminar on LR? Critical step / deliverable in PhD research Critical skill of the researcher Critical stage in the research Hard to write a good thesis with a bad LR Source of much soul searching and time “wasting” Rules have changed so what role for the LE in a 3 year PhD?

3. Speed and the 12 year PhD Did you spend? – 1 year to find a topic – 3 years to write a lit review – 1 year to get in the field – 2 years to get out of the field – 2 years to analyse the data – 2 years to write-up research – 1 year to submit final version Do you: – Cross street when seeing supervisor ahead – Tell big fat lies to your entourage Would you be afraid to: – Drop out with loads of work done – Undertaking far too much rework at various stages Do you generally feel a mismatch between the time invested and the return? The famous 12 year PhD!

4. Topic related problems Where do topics come from – A “special” paper – Anecdotes – Experiences – Supervisor / source of funding Needs careful evaluation in the shape of “feasibility study” Where is the theoretical support going to come from? Lack of topic can be huge waste of time also don’t take for granted that a topic will come From a supervisors’ viewpoint topic is pretty important but mismatch can be adjusted with co-supervisor

5. What a topic looks like My 3 pillars of topic selection: – Design It is all a matter of decisions (McGrath et al, 1982) Is it relevant to the topic? You tell me! An investigation into WW in/on XX using YY – the case of ZZ Evolutionary – but think Lego ®

6. Literature review writing Critical / pivotal activity at the outset Where detailed research objective comes from Definitely where research questions come from Also where theoretical backing comes from BUT, paradoxically you NEED a purpose in order to write a proper lit review – Dialogue between project and lit review material – Actively avoid later re-works and PhDs need an outstanding lit review – else fail My 3 (4) pillars of LR writing: – Analysis/ Synthesis – See Webster and Watson 2003 and my previous presentation – Structure – Thread / Purpose Signposting

7. Lack of speed in LR writing Failure to capture the essence of the topic – The What is it really about? problem hits the thread – generic LR and the promise of much rework Failure to acquire a substantial theoretical basis – will hit the structure and hamper future stages Failure to take some distance with material will hit the synthesis – Symptom: one paper / one paragraph….. Conclusion MUST provide solid foundation for research Dichotomy Lit review / Research Method is misleading and requires a research framework as bridge There is great peril in proceeding without this LR work done

8. What should it look like / lead to? A comprehensive statement of research objective An organised list of propositions A framework with underlying hypotheses to be tested A set of research questions Practically: depends on the type of research From a tabular synthesis of literature with specific references organised in themes to a complete research model

9. Exemplar (1) Weidong Xia and Gwanhoo LEE (2005) – see table 1 page 49-51 ABSTRACT: This paper conceptualizes and develops valid measurements of the key dimensions of information systems development project (ISDP) complexity. A conceptual framework is proposed to define four components of ISDP complexity: structural organizational complexity, structural IT complexity, dynamic organizational complexity, and dynamic IT complexity. This research represents a first step toward conceptualizing and developing measures of the key dimensions of ISDP complexity. This is a purposeful classification of previous research dedicated to underpinning their research endeavour

11. Exemplar (2) Brown 2005 – See Figure 1 page 700 and table 1 page 701 This is a rather useful classification and characterisation of an entire block of literature – Abstracted view Very useful but no research questions

13. Exemplar (3) Beaudry and Pinsonneault (2005) – see figure 1 on page 499 This is a complete process model – exploited to wonderful effect in the analysis of the case data (see my previous presentation on the “chain of evidence”) Positivist because determined a priori

15. Exemplar (4) Adam (2008) Habilitation thesis A dedicated framework to establish a formal linkage between difficult concepts in Decision Making literature Again no RQs, but perfect for locating a topic in a broad segment of literature

16. Exemplar (5) Dehning and Richardson (2002) – see figure 1 page 10 and figure 2 page 11 to 16. This is the ultimate purposeful review of literature providing an organisation principle for hundreds of papers Causal model

19. Quick Recap Take the time to get very good at it – but not too much time Read fast(er) Tidy up Show it and discuss it regularly Don’t wallow – you have ran out of excuses not to write long ago