Developing a convincing argument in your thesis Richard

Developing a convincing argument in your thesis Richard Thorpe BAM Conference – Portsmouth - September 2015

Doctoral Work Ref: drawn from March and Birch – the nature of Scholarship � Scholarly work � Recognised by others working in a similar area � Original � � � Takes a different angle Adopts a different methodology Provides a different explanation � Situated � Is located with knowledge of other literatures � Critically reflexive � � � Of other literatures Of its own limitations Of theories generated � Logically consistent � Is not internally contradictory � Methodologically coherent � � Methods and data collection and analysis support the aims and objectives Offers a critically informed rationale for the selection of particular methods � Synthesis � Provides a synthesis of theory and data � Audience � Addresses primarily an academic rather than a practitioner audience

What does a Ph. D. contain? � Contribution to knowledge � � � BSC, MSc, Ph. D. Pattern Recognition Generalisability Realism of Context (problem Set) Replicability � Training in research � � To perfect a Methodology BEING ‘SCIENTIFIC’ COMES NOT FROM WHAT YOU STUDY AND WHAT YOU DO WITH IT BUT THE METHODOLOGY. � Implications for policy and or practice � � � Dissemination, pathways to impact Impact ? Benefits Knowledge transfer Developed within thesis but explicitly articulated within the conclusions with some confidence (candidates often find this difficult for students to do

Coherence– disciplines and paradigms �Views differ on what constitutes proper research �Different disciplines within the field of management do take a different emphasis �Different stakeholders value different styles Unilateral –vs- collaborative (coproduction) � Investigate – vs – Discover � Realist vs constructionist (ontology) � Multidisciplinary research often encounters conflict of styles and these can lead to discussions about coherence

Mixed Methods? �Reconnecting with Ontological and Epistemological Commitments

It often depends on what is being mixed. . . . �What is being mixed? �Is it method within one family (Qualitative or quantitative) or. . . �Between families (Qualitative and quantitative data) or. . . �Between epistemologies � How data is being assembled - data collection �e. g. Triangulation (different perspectives on the same issue) or. . �In the facilitation (the sequence; which dominates) or are methods �Filling gaps? �Analysis �Cross dressing – using quantitative data from essentially qualitative studies

POSITIVISM, CONSTRUCTIONISM and MIXED

Ontology and Epistemology Ontology Realism Internal Realism Relativism Nominalism Single Truth is obscure Many truths No truth Facts exist to be revealed Facts exist but are hard to uncover Facts depend on view of observer Facts are all created Epistemology Positivism Constructionism

Epistemology and Methodology POSITIVISM CONSTRUCTIONISM Positivism / Constructionism

POSITIVISM Epistemology ‘Hard’ POSITIVISM Aims Discovery Starting points Hypothesis Designs Experiments Data types Numbers & data Analysis Verification & Falsification Outcomes Confirm theories

Positivism / Constructionism Epistemology Soft Positivism Soft Constructionism Aims Exposure Convergence Starting points Propositions Questions Designs Large surveys Cases & small surveys Data types Numbers and words Words and numbers Analysis Correlation Triangulation Outcomes Test and generate theories Theory generation

CONSTRUCTIONISM Epistemology ‘Hard’ CONSTRUCTIONISM Aims Invention Starting points Critique Designs Engagement Data types Words; experiences Analysis Sense making; understanding Outcomes Insights and actions

Issues for and against mixed methods �For: �Richer results; more credibility; explaining why; depth and breadth; longitudinal and cross-sectional; [OK] �Just in case �Between epistemologies �Against: �Ontological incompatibility; conflicting purposes

Some thoughts on the issue of mixed methods �You need to be aware of consistency in epistemologies both as a judge and when yourself are being judged. �Its probably OK to mix weak epistemologies, provided you indicate your awareness of what you are doing. �Beware of 50/50 studies, its probably better to lead with one and add value to the study with the other. �Its probably the case that hard epistemologies can’t be mixed �It is also probably the case that adjacent ontologies can be mixed but no further?

What is scholarship? Research is not collecting data and packaging a solution it is justifying your results and explaining why you chose to go down one route rather than another. Research substantiates, regulates, organises or generates our theories and produces evidence which may challenge our own beliefs and those of society in general (May, 1993)

TRUTH BEAUTY GOOD USE

Other Issues � Offering evidence of the quality of the data, including caveats � Use of personal voice to bring into thesis a reflective or reflexive dimension � Consider the innovative nature of the work -high dives and low dives

Stephen Toulmin and Argument Analysis

Issues related to the oral defence Firstly the forms* (university of Leeds –Ph. D) � That the degree of Ph. D be awarded � That, subject to minor editorial corrections, the degree of Ph. D be awarded � That, subject to the correction of stated minor deficiencies, the degree of Ph. D be awarded � That the application be referred for resubmission for the degree of Ph. D * Caveat: Institutions differ considerably in their regulations

Its good practice to ask for a mock viva �To get attuned and used to answering questions �To get used to answering questions you didn’t know were issues �Get an early insight into any potential gaps or weaknesses in in thesis in advance

What you might do before the oral defence �Re-read thesis �Consider the contribution to knowledge � Ph. D in the field of X � Where the gap lies � What I’ve done is ? And addressed abc and found xyz � And this has implications for 1, 2, 3. . . �Prepare your John Humphrey test

Oral defence Standing your ground �Don’t defend the indefensible �That got me thinking. . �I’ve never thought of it in that way. . . There are different processes in operation �The role of the internal and external with and without a panel �Chairs �Video