Author: Ricardo Morais
Date: 2014-09-28 - 19:24:59 (GMT)
Self-evaluation: 50%
 
 

Key words

Unit of analysis

Streams of thought

Pathos

Level of analysis

Research gap

Logos

Ethos

Nature of data

Research question or hypothesis

Wisdom

Trust

Time

Origin of data

State of the science

Philosophical stance

Research strategy

Collection techniques

Analysis techniques

Quality criteria

Sample

Key words

Unit of analysis

Streams of thought

Pathos

Level of analysis

Research gap

Logos

Ethos

Nature of data

Research question or hypothesis

Wisdom

Trust

Time

Origin of data

State of the science

Philosophical stance

Research strategy

Collection techniques

Analysis techniques

Quality criteria

Sample

Key words

Unit of analysis

Streams of thought

Pathos

Level of analysis

Research gap

Logos

Ethos

Nature of data

Research question or hypothesis

Wisdom

Trust

Time

Origin of data

State of the science

Philosophical stance

Research strategy

Collection techniques

Analysis techniques

Quality criteria

Sample

 
Key words
1/21. Theoretical question: which are the two main keywords of your research?
The focus of my research is the relationship between personal contacts and multinational coordination.

Personal contact is defined as an instance of communication between two people.

Coordination is defined as any means of integration between different entities (Martinez & Jarillo, 1989).

References: Martinez, J. & Jarillo, J. 1989. The evolution of research on coordination mechanisms in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 20(3), 489-514.
Self-evaluation: 100%
Streams of thought
2/21. Theoretical question: which are the two main streams of thought of your literature review?
Two opposite streams of thought about my research topic are the process approach to multinationals (Doz & Prahalad, 1991) and the network approach to multinationals (Forsgren & Johanson, 1992).

The main debate between these two streams of thought is whether the informal mechanisms of coordination in multinationals are designed top-down or organic bottom-up.

References: Doz, Y. & Prahalad, C. 1991. Managing DMNCs: A search for a new paradigm. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 145-164. Forsgren, M. & Johanson, J. (Eds.) 1992. Managing Networks in International Business. Philadelphia: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.
Self-evaluation: 50%
Research gap
3/21. Theoretical question: which is the main gap that your research addresses?
The individual contact networks as facilitators and driving forces of internationalisation is a known phenomenon among managers, but little researched by academics (Axelsson & Agndal, 2000).

References: Axelsson, B. & Agndal, H. 2000. Internationalisation of the firm: A note on the crucial role of the individual's contact network. Proceedings of the 16th IMP Annual Conference. Bath, UK.
Self-evaluation: 0%
Research question or hypothesis
4/21. Theoretical question: which is the main question or hypothesis of your research?
My research question is how personal contacts influence multinational coordination.
Self-evaluation: 100%
State of the science
5/21. Theoretical question: which is the current answer to your research question or hypothesis?
The current answer to my research question is that socialisation is an important mechanism of coordination in multinationals (Martinez & Jarillo, 1989).

References: Martinez, J. & Jarillo, J. 1989. The evolution of research on coordination mechanisms in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 20(3), 489-514.
Self-evaluation: 50%
Philosophical stance
6/21. Methodological question: which is the philosophical stance of your research?
The specific term for the philosophical stance of my research is realism (e.g. Morais 2011).

References: Morais, R. 2011. Critical realism and case studies in international business research. In Piekkari, R. & Welch, C. (Eds.) Rethinking the Case Study Approach in International Business and Management Research: 63-84. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Self-evaluation: 0%
Research strategy
7/21. Methodological question: which is the qualitative, quantitative or mixed method of your research?
My research strategy is case study (e.g. Yin, 1994).

References: Yin, R. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Self-evaluation: 100%
Collection techniques
8/21. Methodological question: which are the data collection techniques of your research?
The data collection techniques adopted in my research are collection of documents and interviews (e.g. Patton, 1990).

References: Patton, M. 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Self-evaluation: 50%
Analysis techniques
9/21. Methodological question: which are the data analysis techniques of your research?
The data analysis techniques adopted in my research are taxonomy and analytical induction. The software adopted in my research is QSR NUD*IST for qualitative data analysis (e.g. Richards, 2000).

References: Richards, L. 2000. Using N5 in Qualitative Research. Melbourne: QSR International Pty.
Self-evaluation: 0%
Quality criteria
10/21. Methodological question: which are the tactics of your research to ensure scientific quality criteria?
In my research, I adopt the following quality criteria: external validity, internal validity, construct validity, convergent validity, and reliability (e.g. Guba & Lincoln, 1998).

My research adopts tactics to increase external validity (sample for analytical generalisation), internal validity (quasi-inductive reasoning for theory development), construct validity (pilot interview, interview clarifications, interviewee feedback, and interview transcripts), convergent validity (triangulation of streams of thought, collection techniques, and data origin) and reliability (data matrix, consent form, standardised open interview guide, and software for qualitative data analysis).

References: Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. 1998. Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.) The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues, 195-220. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Self-evaluation: 100%
Unit of analysis
11/21. Empirical question: which is the unit of analysis of your research?
The unit of analysis that I compare in reality to operationalise the relationship between personal contacts and multinational coordination is the contact network of the foreign subsidiary manager.
Self-evaluation: 50%
Level of analysis
12/21. Empirical question: which is the level of analysis of your research?
The level of analysis of my unit of analysis is individual.
Self-evaluation: 0%
Nature of data
13/21. Empirical question: which is the nature of the data of your research?
The qualitative data collected in my research include text (interview transcripts and documents) and multimedia (websites).

The quantitative data collected in my research are key figures of multinationals and their subsidiaries.
Self-evaluation: 100%
Origin of data
14/21. Empirical question: which is the origin of the data of your research?
The primary data collected in my research include text (interview transcripts).

The secondary data collected in my research include text (documents) and multimedia (websites).
Self-evaluation: 50%
Sample
15/21. Empirical question: which is the sample of your research?
My sample includes 11 contact networks of foreign subsidiary managers, including 3 parent country nationals, 4 host country nationals, and 4 third country nationals.
Self-evaluation: 0%
Pathos
16/21. Rhetorical question: which are the positive and negative emotions of your research?
The positive emotions associated with my research are scientific publications for science, services of multinational management consulting for industry, and public policies of foreign direct investment.

My research is not associated with negative emotions in terms of ethics or conflicts of interest as it is mentioned in the consent form signed by interviewees before data collection.
Self-evaluation: 100%
Logos
17/21. Rhetorical question: which is the scientific logic of your research?
The scientific logic adopted in my research is quasi-inductive.
Self-evaluation: 50%
Ethos
18/21. Rhetorical question: which are the limitations of your research?
The main theoretical limitation of my research is the absence of other streams of thought about personal contacts and multinational coordination.

The main methodological limitation of my research is the absence of other research strategies than case study.

The main empirical limitation of my research is the absence of data about the personal contacts described by the interviewees.
Self-evaluation: 0%
Wisdom
19/21. Authorial question: which is your education and experience related with your research?
My education is a degree in Management being synergetic with my research on the influence of personal contacts in multinational coordination.

My experience includes a position of controller in the Brazilian subsidiary of a Finnish multinational, being synergetic with my research on the influence of personal contacts in multinational coordination.
Self-evaluation: 100%
Trust
20/21. Authorial question: who are the partners of your research?
My literature review is supported by my supervisor, lecturers of advanced topics courses, and experts that I have contacted in conferences and by email.

The implementation of my research strategy is supported by my supervisor, lecturers of methodology courses and seminars, and methodological experts that I have contacted in conferences and by email.

My data collection is supported by relatives, friends, and acquaintances with access to real cases.
Self-evaluation: 50%
Time
21/21. Authorial question: which is your availability of time and resources for your research?
I have full-time availability to conduct my research.

In addition to time, I need a four-year grant and specific grants for international conferences.
Self-evaluation: 0%