Posted: July 1st, 2015

Topic: Leading Innovation and Change

 

MOD053 Dissertation

 

Module Summary

 

 

Module Details:   Module Code & Title:    MOD053 Dissertation Level:                           Master’s           Credits:                        60 Academic Year:            2012/13 Semester:                     1 & 2

Module Director: Greig Mill   Module Tutors: Alistair Benson, Gabriel Jacobs Email: [email protected] [email protected]

 

 

MODULE AIMS

The dissertation is the final part of the programme. The dissertation aims to provide you with an opportunity to undertake independent research, through supported individual study, into one aspect of the foregoing studies from the postgraduate programme. It is intended that the study will build on elements of learning derived from one or more aspects of the programme modules

.

          You will undertake primary research, with the aim of facilitating an appreciation of quantitative or qualitative (or a combined methodology) approaches to research in your subject specialism.

         

          LEARNING OUTCOMES

By completing this module, you will be able to:

1. Define an area for research and establish a research question related to innovation, change and leadership
2. Critically evaluate a range of appropriate methodologies for data collection
3. Submit a research proposal to the University research ethics committee.
4. Critically evaluate approaches to collection and analysis of qualitative and / or quantitative data
5. Analyse and present research data in clear ways, to inform and interest the reader
6. Construct a conceptual framework which integrates theory and practice

Assessment Details

 

All the learning outcomes will be assessed through two pieces of work directed towards research into an aspect of leadership, innovation and/or change.

 

Research Proposal:

A written research proposal comprising 2,000 words (20% of module marks), outlining the key elements of your planned dissertation work, and including a detailed literature review.

Depending on the nature of your work, your research proposal may need to be submitted to the University’s Research Ethics Committee. This will be discussed with your tutor.

Dissertation:

A dissertation comprising 12,000 words (80% of module marks).

To preserve confidentiality, please anonymise the organisation or organisations you discuss in the assignment, eg by calling them Company X, or Governmental Organisation Y, or International Organisation Z. Similarly, where you write about private individuals, call them manager A, or leader B.

 

N.B. The word count will include quotations but exclude footnotes, bibliography, appendices, tables and graphs. See the link to word count limits regulations in the Module Handbook.

 

MODULE OUTLINE / TIMETABLE / KEY DATES

 

For the detailed schedule see the Online Campus syllabus and forum

Assessment Criteria / Marking scheme

 

The research proposal and the dissertation will be marked against the following criteria. The allocation of marks provides an indication of how much space should be given to each element of the proposal and the final dissertation. See page 6 of this summary for general Master’s level assessment criteria.

 

Research Proposal:

 

Criteria (including approximate word limit)	Indicative Weight	Comments
Problem definition and objectives, questions, or hypothesis (300 words)	15	Background to the research problem. Clarity and definition of the problem and objectives, questions, or hypothesis How focused is the problem/ comprehensiveness of the research objectives, questions or hypothesis and their appropriateness.
Literature review (1200 words)	60	Ability demonstrated in selectivity of material reviewed. Evidence of breadth and depth of the material reviewed. Critical review/analysis as opposed to paraphrasing Professionalism shown in quoting, and using other people’s work. Demonstration of a logical conceptual development.
Methodology – research design, justification of methods sampling etc. ( 400 words)	20	Primary and secondary sources: Explanation of methodology that will be used with reasons for the choices made. Details of data collection tools Information about potential sample Explanation of how data might be analysed
Timeline		Overview of stages of the dissertation with suggested dates
Limitations (100 words)	5	Identification of possible research limitations / bias
Total	100

 

Note: You should have at least two conversations with your tutor (ie exchange of emails, telephone/skype conversation, including seeking feedback on a draft proposal) before submitting your research proposal. You should have at least two further conversations, discussing progress with your research and/or getting feedback on your draft dissertation, before submitting the dissertation.

 

 

Dissertation Assessment Criteria

 

Criteria	Indicative Weight	Comments
Abstract / Introduction             Problem definition and objectives, questions, or hypothesis	10	What is the project about? What was its aim(s) What methodologies were used? What were the key findings? What were the key conclusions? Background to the research problem.   Clarity and definition of the problem and objectives, questions, or hypothesis How focused is the problem/ comprehensiveness of the research objectives, questions or hypothesis and their appropriateness.
Literature review                 Methodology – research design, justification of methods sampling etc.                             Primary and / or secondary research	60	Ability demonstrated in selectivity of material reviewed. Evidence of breadth and depth of the material reviewed. Critical review/analysis as opposed to paraphrasing Professionalism shown in quoting, and using other people’s work. Demonstration of a logical conceptual development. Logical nature of presentation of the primary and / or secondary data. Ability shown in organising the primary and / or secondary findings under logical, thematic headings.   Secondary research methodology: Statement of the information sought and the breadth and depth of sources identified. Assessment of availability, adequacy, accuracy and recency of secondary data. An indication as to how the secondary data has been used within the study. Primary research methodology: Identification of information needs from primary sources. Specification, choice criteria, justification for research philosophy, approach and strategy. Sampling design (sample size and sampling method) Data collection instrument (e.g. questionnaire, interview guide etc), design and pre testing Field work Statement of the analytical considerations Limitations   Methods used in presenting the primary and / or secondary findings. A variety of methods preferred.
Analysis, synthesis and development of primary and secondary data                 Conclusions and recommendations	20	Ability to use both secondary and primary data findings in conjunction in the analysis. Being able to reason the similarities and differences between secondary and primary data. Skills demonstrated in interpreting the results. Being able to relate the analysis to the research aim and objectives. Depth and synthesis of the results as opposed to mere reporting. Clarity in terms of stating the conclusions/recommendations. Discussion on each. Justification of each. With management implications.   Being able to critically reason the conclusions and recommendations in relation to the research aim and objectives. Extent to which the recommendations are realistic in the organisational context.
Reflection on dissertation process	10	Ability to explain and provide evidence of the work undertaken during the research process Ability to identify personal skills and provide evidence of these in relation to the dissertation Ability to identify areas of personal development required Critical understanding of the process of reflective practice for self development
Total	100

RESOURCES – KEY TEXTS

 

You will develop your own bibliography in response to the needs of your specific area of research. It is likely to include various titles already used in the preceding programme modules.

 

In support of this module, a pack of recommended reading on research approaches and research methods will be made available through Moodle, which you can download as pdf files, as well as the full reading list, below.

 

*Items in the list below marked with an asterisk are available as e-books through the University library. Your ability to access these will depend on the download speed available to you – please check on this early in the module.

 

# Where items in the list are marked with a hashmark, a chapter of the book is available in the Moodle site, to download as a pdf.

 

Core Reading

 

If you were to buy one book to support your work on this module, we would recommend:

 

*Mark Saunders, Philip Lewis & Adrian Thornhill 2009 Research Methods for Business Students, 5th ed. Harlow, Pearson Education.

 

Recommended Reading

*Judith Bell 2010 Doing Your Research Project, Open University

#Alan Bryman 2008 Social Research Methods, 3^rd ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

#Alan Bryman & Emma Bell 2011 Business Research Methods, 3^rd ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

#Amanda Coffey and Paul Atkinson 1996 Making Sense of Qualitative Data Sage; London

*Catherine Dawson 2009 Introduction to Research Methods, How To Books

*Martyn Denscombe 2007 The Good Research Guide, OU: McGraw Hill

#Mark Easterby-Smith, Richard Thorpe & Paul R Jackson 2010 Management Research, 3^rd rd. London, Sage.

#Colin Fisher 2010 Researching and Writing a Dissertation 3rd ed FT Prentice Hall

*Mark Fox 2007 Doing Practitioner Research, Sage

#Pervez Ghauri and Kjell Gronhaug 2010 Research Methods in Business Studies FT Prentice Hall: Harlow

*Bill Gillham 2005 Research Interviewing, OU

#Harvey Maylor and Kate Blackmon 2005 Researching Business and Management Palgrave Macmillan

#Colin Robson 2011 Real World Research 3rd ed Wiley

*Gordon Rugg 2007 A Gentle Guide to Research Methods, OU

#Robert K Yin 2009 Case Study Research Sage

 

 

 

Your Academic Support Librarian to contact for help is Jane Munks ([email protected])

 

 

This summary should be read in conjunction with the Module Handbook

 

 

 

	80-100	70-79	60-69	50-59	Narrow Fail  40-49	(20-39)
Class of Module/ Masters Award	Distinction		Merit	Pass	Fail
Knowledge and understanding	Command of the topic, unusual creativity, perception and insight, all suggesting that work should be published in an academic forum	Demonstrates command of the topic by showing creativity, perception and insight – a serious contribution to the academic debate	Demonstrates a well informed understanding of the topic by showing creativity and insight – a serious contribution to the academic debate	Understanding of contemporary academic debate, with some creative input and insight	Descriptive while demonstrating reasonable understanding	Limited/poor understanding demonstrated Any creative input is somewhat off the point
Content and Exploration of theories and ideas	Outstanding selection that makes a substantial contribution to academic debate	Outstanding selection from a wide relevant and innovative range of perspectives and sources	Selection from a wide and relevant range of perspectives and sources that draws upon contemporary academic debate	Relevant selection from a good and relevant range of perspectives and sources Sources mostly well-integrated into the overall argument	Relevant but not wide selection from a reasonable range of sources	Some/minimal relevant sources and limited topic coverage
Analysis and Synthesis	Outstanding use of source material Excellent argument that is of the highest academic quality	Sources very well integrated into the overall argument Clear, well structured argument that is well crafted and cogent	Sources well-integrated into the overall argument Clear, cogent and well-structured argument	Mostly clear, cogent and well-structured argument	Sources sometimes properly integrated into the argument Some tendencies towards a clear and cogent argument	Sources only occasionally/not at all integrated into the argument Some/minimal structure and argument present
Critical engagement and analysis	Critical distance and outstanding analysis of the question, to a high degree of excellence	Critical distance and outstanding analysis of the question	Critical distance and sound analysis of the question	Demonstrates criticality and generally good analysis	Some successful analysis with a tendency to accept the source material at face value	Limited/poor analysis and criticality with reliance on limited sources
Technical skills and referencing	Referencing impeccable using appropriate conventions No errors in grammar or spelling	Referencing clear and accurate using appropriate conventions Virtually no errors in grammar or spelling	Referencing clear and accurate using appropriate conventions Near perfect grammar and spelling, with only a few errors	Referencing clear and mostly accurate using appropriate conventions Good grammar and spelling with some errors	References adequate but clearer and/or more references needed. Reasonable grammar and spelling but with several notable errors	References limited/inappropriate Many errors in grammar and spelling, making it difficult or impossible to read

NB: A non-serious attempt (0-19) is a non-submission, or an answer irrelevant to the set question, or completely insufficient