Lez Rayman-Bacchus /Research/ 2012 December

Research Proposal for Research Degrees

(PhD/MPhil)
A proposal means outlining what investigation you would like to do in the near future
(that is, 12-24 months following the writing of this proposal). There should not be any
Case Description or Analysis in a Proposal; case description and analysis should be
written after you have done the research, and have something to analyse.
The model of research proposal presented here is based on the idea that research follows
a logical developmental process. In this process the researcher begins by identifying a
clear focus (Aim and Objectives or Research Question(s), followed by a review of existing
published knowledge around that focus (Literature Review). This establishes for the
researcher what is known and importantly what is not known. S/he then explains how
they intend to investigate some aspect of the unknown (Research Design or
Methodology). This is followed by Conclusions, and list of References.

The Proposal
The Proposal should be organised as explained below. Follow the format presented here
using the same main headings, and in the same order as shown here. All sections must
be completed. Suggested word count is 1500 - 2000.

Introduction
a.
b.
c.
d.

Introduction to the Proposal [outline the sections of the proposal for the reader]
Research Aim and Objectives
Rationale of research: why you want to do it, why it interests you
Background: significance of the topic and issues [practical or theory] relevant to the
study. Identify (and cite) the debates.
e. Potential contribution to knowledge. Findings should be significant, with implications
for existing theory, methodology, practice, or some combination. More on what is a
contribution to knowledge here.

Research Aim and Objectives or Research Question(s)

Specify as clearly as possible the focus of your research, written as an Aim and
subordinate Objectives or as one or more Research Questions.
Think of a Research Aim as an orange, and the objectives as the segments. You would not
try to put the whole orange in your mouth. Rather you would divide the orange into
segments and eat each segment. In a similar way think of the Research Aim as a broad
statement, which you need to divide into segments [subordinate objectives] in order to
carry out the study.
If your research is driven by policy debates, describe the specific aspects of these
debates on which your research will focus. If your research is driven by theoretical
debates, or apparent omissions or inconsistencies in the existing literature (theoretical or
empirical), what aspects of these debates will you address? If your research focus is on
the nature of practice in some field (e.g., business management or science research),
then what aspects of practice will you explore (e.g., managerial behaviour or scientific
discovery?
In thinking about Aim and Objectives it may be useful to keep in mind the purpose of
most research. Research is normally undertaken for differing (and sometimes
overlapping) intellectual reasons:
Exploratory: provides initial insight to a new situation, issue or phenomenon.
Descriptive: classifies phenomena questions on who, what, where, when and
how]

Lez Rayman-Bacchus /Research/ 2012 December

Explanatory: seeks to explain a causal relationship that is meaningful why
questions
Evaluative: seeks to assess or measure impact [assumes a causal relationship]
More on formulating research aims and objectives, and research questions, here.
[word count: 200 300]

Literature Review
Following the stated Aim or Research Question, you must review the published literature,
where you show what has already been proposed, claimed, or established. The literature
you review should normally comprise theoretical and empirical studies, policy and
industry reports, and articles published in the quality periodicals and newspapers.
Summarise and evaluate the usefulness of these previous studies in relation to your
stated aim or research question.
It is important you show awareness of the most important and relevant theories, models,
empirical studies and methodologies. A good literature review will compare and contrast
theories and empirical results, pointing out agreement and disagreement, gaps and
overlaps of argument. A poor literature review often simply provides summarised lists of
theories and empirical studies, with little or no attempt to compare, contrast or evaluate
these theories and empirical studies.
Make clear how well these published studies address your research focus, by examining
the extent to which they provide insight to, or answer, each of your research objectives
or questions. The identification of omissions or weaknesses in the published literature
leads to the opportunity and justification for your study. In addition, identifying
weaknesses and omissions within the published knowledge base represents your
contribution to knowledge; a contribution that you will seek to elaborate and establish
more firmly through carrying out your own empirical research.
Depending on your intended research design (next step) you may convert the identified
weaknesses and omissions into hypotheses. A hypothesis is a simple but testable
statement that proposes that one factor (call it A) causes another factor (call it B) to
behave in a certain way.
[Word count: 600 - 750

Research Design
Following your review of the literature, outline how you plan to go about collecting
empirical data that will build the understanding required to fulfil your research aim, or
test the hypotheses you have developed from your review of the literature. Describe how
you will carry out your study, referring to frameworks and concepts found in the research
methods literature.
Specifically this section must describe your overall Approach and specific
Methods/Techniques of collecting data. You must also explain how you will analyse the
data collected (Methods/Techniques of Data Analysis), what measures you are taking to
ensure the quality of your research design (Research Quality issues), and show an
awareness of ethical considerations around academic research (Research Ethics issues).
The proposal requires that you have made firm arrangements with your target (e.g., the
organisation or community you propose to study or work with) for access to data prior to
writing the proposal, rather than describing that you plan to seek access to your target
after the proposal is written.

Lez Rayman-Bacchus /Research/ 2012 December

a. Overall Approach. This will be either Qualitative or Quantitative, or some combination

of the two. Describe your particular Approach, e.g., ethnographic case study, survey,
or experiment; and why the chosen Approach is appropriate for the study.
b. Methods/Techniques of Data Collection .The overall Approach is broken down into
specific methods/techniques of data collection. For example a Qualitative Approach
can be broken down into semi-structured interviewing and observation, while a
Quantitative Approach is broken down into questionnaires, experiments, and others.
Describe your chosen methods/techniques and explain why they are appropriate
techniques for achieving your research objectives or testing your hypotheses.
c. Methods/Techniques of Data Analysis. How will you analyse the data collected?
Describe the methods/techniques of data analysis, for example the procedures you
will use for analysing text or quantitative data or patterns (e.g., statistical analysis).
d. Research Quality issues. Explain how you will ensure that you collect the right data to
address the research questions or hypotheses, or that the data you collect is reliable.
This requires some discussion about the validity and reliability of your data, and what
triangulation techniques have been employed to strengthen the validity and reliability
of your data. Your findings should also be generalisable rather than only valid for the
particular phenomenon you studied. You are encouraged to check the meaning and
relevance of these terms in any research methods textbook (see References).
e. Research Ethics issues. Does your proposed research topic raise any ethical issues?
For example, does your research design present any possible danger to your subjects
(physical, emotional, professional)? If so what will you do to avoid that?
[500 700 words]

Conclusions
Summarise your proposal, including your potential contribution to knowledge.
[200 250 words]

References
According to Harvard style
Name (year), Article title, Journal name, vol xs: page no.
Name (year), Book name, Publisher, Place of publication.
Include some Research Methods sources. Indicative:
Bryman A & Bell E (latest edition) Business Research Methods, Oxford University Press
Bryman A & Cramer D (latest edition) Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS, Routledge.
Burton D (ed.) (2000), Research Training for Social Scientists, Sage Publications Inc.
Collis, J. and Hussey, R. (2003), Business Research. A Practical Guide for Undergraduate
and Postgraduate Students (2edn.), London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Creswell, J.W. (latest edition), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Approaches, Sage.
Cuba L and Cocking J (1994), How to write about the social sciences, Harper Collins.
Curran J. & Blackburn R (2001) Researching the Small Enterprise, Sage
Easterby-Smith M., Thorpe R., Jackson P., Lowe A., (latest edition), Management
Research: Theory and Practice, Sage.
Girden, E.R (2001), Evaluating Research Articles: From Start to Finish. (2nd ed), Sage
Publications, London, UK.
Gomm, R. (2003), Social Science Research Methods, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lez Rayman-Bacchus /Research/ 2012 December

Holborn, G. (1999), Legal Research Guide, Butterworths.
Jankowicz AD (2000), Business Research Projects, Thomson Learning.
Johnson P and Duberley J (2000), Understanding Management Research, Sage.
Punch K F (2000), Developing Effective Research Proposals, Sage.
Robson C. (2002), Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitionerresearchers, Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Ryan B, Scapens RW and Theobald M (2002) Research Methodology in Finance &
Accounting, Thomson
Saunders M, Lewis P and Thornhill A (latest edition) Research Methods for Business
Studies, Financial Times Management
Smith M (2003) Research Methods in Accounting, Sage.
Stott, D. (1999), Legal Research, Cavendish.
Usunier J-C (1998) International and Cross-Cultural Management Research, Sage
Yin RK (latest edition) Case Study Research Design and Methods, Sage
Zikmund W.G., Babin B.J., Carr J.C, Griffin M. (latest edition),
Business Research Methods, Cengage Learning.

Formulating Aim and Objectives: general conditions

Aims
1. Are broad statements of desired outcomes, or describe the general intentions of
the research, the focus of your research proposal.
2. Emphasize what is to be accomplished, not how it is to be accomplished.
3. Identify the scope of the project outcomes.
4. Should reflect the aspirations and expectations of the research topic.

Once aims have been established, the next task is to formulate the objectives. Generally,
a project should have no more than one or two aim statements, and should include a
number of objectives consistent with the aim[s].

Objectives
1. Are the steps you are going to take to answer your research aim or question
2. Are a specific list of tasks needed to accomplish the goals of the project
3. Must be clear and achievable
4. May describe an intention to provide an immediate project outcome (such as a
new model)
5. Make accurate use of concepts and be sensible and precisely described
6. May emphasize how aims are to be accomplished

Lez Rayman-Bacchus /Research/ 2012 December

7. Are usually numbered so that each objective reads as an 'individual' statement to
convey your intentions
Aims and Objectives should not:
1. Be too vague, ambitious or broad in scope; aims are often over-optimistic of what
the project can achieve.
2. Repeat each other in different terms
3. Be a list of things related in an unspecified way to your research topic
4. Discuss details of your job or research topic
Example research questions and potential hypotheses
These need to be testable
1. Does X have a positive or negative impact on Y?
2. Does X vary by level in Y? [e.g. Does job satisfaction vary by level in the
organization]
3. Does X lead to Y or Z?

Contribution to Knowledge
In thinking about what could be your contribution to knowledge, consider:

The importance of the question. Why is the question worth asking?

The significance of the findings. Why do these findings matter?

What are their implications for theory, methodology, practice?

What are the limitations to generalization of the findings?

Making a 'significant contribution' means adding to existing knowledge or to the

discourse around a phenomenon.
Research work is part of an ongoing discourse among many researchers, each critiquing
the available evidence and providing fresh argument and evidence that contributes to
knowledge and understanding.
Research involves questioning the accepted wisdom (the obvious), examining and
analysing phenomena from a different perspective, and investigated through a variety of
techniques. Research seeks to create new understanding of the world, using new ideas
and approaches, rather than describing it using existing frames and tools.
As more evidence is presented, existing explanations are re-evaluated. In this way
knowledge is constantly reconfirmed, elaborated, revised, or overturned.
Knowledge claims may be small and still contribute to the discourse.
Potential Contributions:

Re-contextualization of an existing theory or method, applying a technique in a new

context, testing theory in a new setting, showing the applicability of a model to a new
situation, and evaluating the result and any implications.

Lez Rayman-Bacchus /Research/ 2012 December

Corroboration and elaboration of an existing model (e.g. evaluating the effects of a

change of condition; experimental assessment of one aspect of a model).

Falsification or contradiction of an existing model, or part of one.

Drawing together two or more existing ideas and showing that the combination
reveals something new and useful.

Developing and testing a new concept, showing that something is feasible and
valuable (or not) and why.

Implementation of someones framework or principle to some field of practice,

showing how it work and its limitations.

Empirically-based characterization of a phenomenon (e.g. detailed, critical, analytic

account of the evolution of an idea; detailed analytic characterization of a crucial
case study or a novel chemical compound, or a new planet).

Providing a taxonomy of observed phenomena.

Well-founded critique of existing theory or evidence (e.g. correlating the results of a

number of existing studies to show patterns or omissions).

End