The document outlines the expectations of 15 examiners for a research thesis. In general, examiners expect the thesis to: 1) Make an academic, practical, or social contribution and ask rigorous research questions addressed through an appropriate methodology. 2) Have a precise title that describes what was done and not be too ambitious. 3) Include an in-depth, relevant literature review of seminal and highly cited works that shows a deep understanding beyond the specific context. 4) Have a sound conceptualization supported by theory that leads to clear hypotheses or a conceptual framework. 5) Use valid and appropriate quantitative and qualitative methods, measures, and analyses to properly justify the methodology and interpret all findings.

1. Expectations of
Examiners from
Research Thesis
Dr.K.Prabhakar,
Professor: BSA Crecent IST
Expectation of Examiner 1

2. Overall
 Has the thesis made a contribution (academic, practice,
social significance)?
 Has the research question/s been rigorously developed
based on gap analysis and hypotheses?
 Has the research methodology is appropriate?
 Is there sufficient rigour overall?
 Is it written in academic language?
 Is it free from plagiarism-check for plagiarism check by
URKUND or Turnitin.
Expectation of Examiner 2

3. Title
 Is it precise?
 Does it describe what has been done?
 Is it too ambitious?
Expectation of Examiner 3

4. Literature Review
 Are there too many theoretical streams? Which
theoretical stream is adopted for study?
 Is it in-depth?
 Is it relevant?
 Does it include seminal works?
 Does it include the most cited research?
 Does it show deep understanding
 Does it consider concepts / theoretical issues, beyond
the specific context?
 Does it provide a logical pathway to the research
questions?
Expectation of Examiner 4

5. Conceptualisation /
Hypothesis Development
 Is the conceptualisation sound?
 Is it supported by rigorous theoretical understanding?
 Is it logical and well argued?
 Does it lead to a conceptual framework and/or
hypotheses
 For inductive research, does it provide a sufficiently
strong conceptual base?
Expectation of Examiner 5

6. Hypothesis Development
 Are the hypotheses developed and argued with a strong
theoretical / conceptual logic?
 Are the hypotheses correctly presented?
 Are they simply and clearly presented?
 One relationship per hypothesis (use sub-hypotheses for
related areas)
 Are they ‘testable’?
Expectation of Examiner 6

7. Model Development
 Are the variables (types) valid e.g. latent, observable,
nominal, categorical etc?
 Are the measures appropriate for the model and
variables (e.g. formative and reflective measures)?
 Are the relationships understood and explained properly
with rigorous logic (e.g. direct, interaction effects
(moderating and mediating).
Expectation of Examiner 7

8. Justifying Methodological
Choice
 Sound and rigorous justification is necessary
 Very good overview articles:
 Edmondson & McManus
 Van Manen
 Academy of Management Review and Academy of
Management Journal have excellent methodology /
theory development articles (often Editorials)
Expectation of Examiner 8

9. Methodology
 Is the methodology being used properly justified (see
previous slide)
 Mixed methodology
 Is the role of the qualitative and quantitative components
clear and clearly explained? Use references to justify.
Expectation of Examiner 9

10. Quantitative Methodology
 Are the methods being used appropriate and properly
justified?
 Data collection:
 Is the survey design appropriate / tested?
 Are the constructs clearly understood and obtained from
the literature
 Does the questionnaire draw on established measures and
scales
Expectation of Examiner 10

11. Quantitative Methodology
 Data Analysis
 Are the correct analytical tools being used?
 Are they sophisticated enough?
 Have you done the necessary checks for validity,
reliability, etc?
 Have you tested for bias (e.g. non-response bias, social
desirability effects common method bias, indigeneity,
single informant bias, etc.)?
Expectation of Examiner 11

12. Qualitative Methodology
 Is the appropriate method/s being used – and justified?
 Cases study/ies
 Interviews
 Ethnography
 Focus groups
 Action research
 Etc.
 Is the conceptualisation rigorous (very important)?
 Are you clear about whether it is inductive or deductive
(or abductive)?
Expectation of Examiner 12

13. Qualitative Methodology
 Data Analysis
 Is it rigorous?
 Are you using appropriate tools?
 Justifications!!
Expectation of Examiner 13

14. Discussion: Interpretation of
findings
 Very important part of the thesis!
 Is it logical, creative, in-depth, insightful?
 Is it well linked to the literature?
 Must cover all the findings – including non-significant
findings, which may be important!
 Is the contribution clear and clearly stated?
Expectation of Examiner 14

15. Conclusion, Implications and
Limitations
 Does this section provide a clear and rigorous overview of
the thesis and its contribution?
 Does it note the important implications?
 Theoretical implications? (or perhaps methodological, if
relevant)
 Managerial implications?
 Policy implications? (if relevant)
 Implications for future research? (Important!)
 Have the limitations been noted (mention only important
limitations)
 These need to be discussed in a sound manner, with a good
understanding demonstrated
 Suggestions for overcoming limitations should be made
Expectation of Examiner 15