Proposed Research Design: Resilience And Entrepreneurship (Research Proposal Sample)

SUBJECT NAME: Research Methods
REFERENCE: HARVARD STYLE (MINIMUM 24 AND WITHIN 8 YEARS OLD)
LENGTH: 2450 words
ASSESSMENT TASK 3: PROPOSED RESEARCH DESIGN (TOPIC: RESILIENCE AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP) - FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDED STRUCTURE AND USE HEADINGS FOR THE SUBSECTIONS
Purpose To learn how to write a research proposal
Having identified and argued the importance of your topic of interest (Assessment task 1, PROVIDED) and reviewed the literature on that topic (Assessment task 2, PROVIDED), you must now apply the methodological knowledge and frameworks you have gained during this unit (i.e., the prescribed literature, PROVIDED) to propose a research design that will allow you to systematically, empirically, and rigorously investigate and answer your selected research question.
The research design proposal should include:
 A brief (re-)statement the topic and research question, and possible refinements as a result of insights gained after having completed Assessment tasks 1 and 2 (e.g., the prescribed literature, feedback from your lecturer); 

 A comprehensive description of your proposed research design, covering all relevant elements – such as type of design, data sources, data collection method, measurement instruments, research setting, sampling method, negotiating access and maximizing response, and time frame – using the methodological terminology and frameworks from the prescribed literature; 

 Beyond merely describing what your proposed research design looks like, it is equally important that you clearly justify your choices. That is, you need to use the methodological considerations and frameworks from the prescribed literature to argue why the research choices you propose will enable you to examine and answer your research question in a way that is methodologically superior to other research design choices; 

 This also means that you will need to critically evaluate both the strengths and weaknesses of your design and how your research design choices will impact the validity of the conclusions you will be able to derive from your research; 

 The proposal should describe research that you can realistically carry out, so you need to consider not only methodological requirements, but also practical and ethical constraints associated with your proposed design; 

•  Finally, provide some preliminary ideas about how you would go about analysing your data.
GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT TASK 3: PROPOSED RESEARCH DESIGN
The meat of a research proposal is the methods section. You have been preparing for the entire unit to assemble a rigorous, well-justified, feasible, and ethical research design for your proposed study. This proposal ought to resemble the methods section of most scholarly articles in your topic area.
Your task for the third assessment is to
(1) write up a thorough and well-justified methods section for your proposed project;
(2) discuss how the proposed study is feasible and ethical; and
(3) reflect on the strengths and limitations of your proposed study using concepts covered in the course.
These 3 elements of your assessment task map directly onto the marking rubrics:
Criteria 1 and 2 refer to your methods section.
Comprehensiveness of research design description (10 Marks) = The description is very comprehensive and complete, covering all elements, clearly highlighting nuances and complexities. Indicates that student has a remarkably clear and in-depth idea of exactly how s/he will proceed to conduct the empirical study.
Substantiation of research design choices (10 Marks) = There is an excellent substantiation of why specific research design choices were made, and it's very complete and comprehensive. An assessment of the research design's strengths, weaknesses, and validity implications is present and correctly in all places. Indicates a remarkably in-depth understanding of how research design choices affect one's ability to answer research questions.
Criteria 3 refers to your discussion of feasibility and ethics.
Thoughtfulness of practical and ethical considerations (10 Marks) = There is an excellent discussion of practical and ethical considerations, and it's very complete and comprehensive. Issues are correctly identified in all places. Indicates remarkably careful thought about the practical feasibility of the proposed research design.
Criteria 4 refers to your reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of your research design, drawing on unit's readings and online content to make your arguments.
Systematic application of concepts and frameworks from the unit's literature (10 Marks) = Heavily draws on the concepts/frameworks from the prescribed literature. Uses them consistently and in a systematic manner, and applies them in the correct manner. Indicates remarkably in-depth understanding of the prescribed literature. Complements this with recommended literature.
Structure, clarity of expression, visualisation, and referencing (10 Marks) = The text is highly logically and well-structured. There are virtually no issues with sentence formulation, grammar, spelling and/or punctuation. Makes very effective use visualisations to clarify or organise the content in the text in meaningful ways. Referencing is complete, consistent and follows established guidelines.
FOLLOW THIS!!! RECOMMENDED STRUCTURE:
• Start with a brief (re-)statement of the topic and research question (one paragraph).
• Use the first major section to cover all relevant elements of the research methods. Be sure to both DESCRIBE AND JUSTIFY your choices. USE HEADINGS FOR THE FOLLOWING SUBSECTIONS:
o RESEARCH DESIGN section: describe whether you have chosen to conduct a quant or qual study, as well as the specific type of quant or qual study (e.g. field survey, quasi-experiment, participant observation, semi-structured interviews).
o RESEARCH SETTING section: describe the setting in which the study will be conducted.
o PARTICIPANTS section: summarize and justify the intended sample, sampling strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria to be used. If planning to use secondary data, consult with your lecturer for slightly revised guidelines.
o PROCEDURE section: summarize and justify how you will collect data, including but not limited to securing organizational access, recruiting participants, maximizing response rates, and collecting data (when, how often, from whom, which variables). If planning to use secondary data, consult with your lecturer for slightly revised guidelines.
o MATERIALS section
• If quant, list the psychometrically validated measures to be used (if opting to construct your own measure, please consult your lecturer for revised guidelines) and any evidence that the measure is valid.
• If qual, outline the interview schedule you plan to use (questions, probes) with supporting justification.
• If using secondary data, describe in detail the indices to be used and any evidence for their validity.
• Note: Remember that the term ‘valid' has a precise meaning in research. If you are unsure, consult your lecturer.
o ANALYSIS section – very briefly describe how you would know if your hypothesis were supported (quant, secondary data), or how you would distil answers to your research question from the qualitative data to be collected (qual)
• THE SECOND SECTION (2-3 paragraphs) covers feasibility and ethics. Briefly summarize in one paragraph each the practical feasibility and ethical considerations in your study. For the paragraph on ethical considerations, you are expected to:
(1) IDENTIFY POSSIBLE HARMS TO PARTICIPANTS FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE STUDY; AND
(2) EXPLAIN PRECISELY HOW YOU MITIGATE THAT HARM IN YOUR RESEARCH DESIGN. IN A SEPARATE SHORT PARAGRAPH, YOU MAY ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSS THE IMPLICATIONS OF YOUR PROPOSED STUDY FOR PRACTICE. EXPLAIN EXACTLY HOW THE KNOWLEDGE GENERATED IN YOUR STUDY CAN BE USED IN THE WORKPLACE.
• USE THE THIRD SECTION (2-4 paragraphs) to summarize both the STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS of your proposed study, linking back to principles in the unit readings. Just as in the first two assessment tasks, whenever you draw on criteria from unit content, please be explicit.
General guidelines
• Word limit is 2,450 words. The word limit excludes references.
• Look to the methods sections of high-quality articles in your area for inspiration. That's the kind of writing and structure that we are looking for.
• Don't forget to justify your methodology choices! That's the entire 2nd criterion of the rubric.
(Substantiation of research design choices (10 Marks) = There is an excellent substantiation of why specific research design choices were made, and it's very complete and comprehensive. An assessment of the research design's strengths, weaknesses, and validity implications is present and correctly in all places. Indicates a remarkably in-depth understanding of how research design choices affect one's ability to answer research questions.)
• High-quality writing is important. Researchers need to be understood by the general public. The most important thing is that the writing is organized logically. A few grammatical errors will not be too bad. However, writing that is incomprehensible or lacking logical structure will earn poor marks on the last criterion in the rubric. (Structure, clarity of expression, visualisation, and referencing (10 Marks) = The text is highly logically and well-structured. There are virtually no issues with sentence formulation, grammar, spelling and/or punctuation. Makes very effective use visualisations to clarify or organise the content in the text in meaningful ways. Referencing is complete, consistent and follows established guidelines.)
PRESCRIBED LITERATURES:
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornbill, A. (2016). Research Methods for Business Students. Pearson, 7th edn, England.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 5 – Formulating the research design.
• Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodological fit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1155–1179.
• Creswell, W., Hanson, W. E., Clark Plano, V. L., & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative research designs: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 236-264.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 11 – Collecting primary data using questionnaires.
• Grant, A. M., & Wall, T. D. (2009). The neglected science and art of quasi-experimentation: Why-to, when-to, and how-to advice for organizational researchers. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4), 653-686.
• Robinson, M. A. (in press). Using multi-item psychometric scales for research and practice in human resource management. Human Resource Management.
• Colquitt, J. A. (2008). Publishing laboratory research in AMJ: A question of if, not when. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 616-620. Accessible through: http://aom.org/uploadedFiles/Publications/AMJ/04_ColquittAug08FTE.pdf
• Simsek, Z., Veiga, J. F., & Lubatkin, M. H. (2005). Challenges and guidelines for conducting internet-based surveys and strategic management research. Research Methodology in Strategy and Management, 2, 179–196.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 5 - Formulating the research design, pp. 178-183, which focus on experiments and surveys.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 10 – Collecting primary data using semi-structured, in-depth, and group interviews.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 9 – Collecting primary data through observation.
• Rowley, J. (2012). Conducting research interviews. Management Research Review, 35(3/4), 260-271.
• Hermanowicz, J.C. (2002). The Great Interview: 25 Strategies for Studying People in Bed. Qualitative Sociology, 25(4), 479-499.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 6 – Negotiating access and research ethics (pp. 220-239).
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 7 – Selecting samples.
• Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Dorrit Guassora, A. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760.
• Shen, W., Kiger, T. B., Davies, S. E., Rasch, R. L., Simon, K. M., & Ones, D. S. (2011). Samples in applied psychology: Over a decade of research in review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 1055– 1064.
• Anseel, F. Lievens, F., Schollaert, E., & Choragwicka, B. (2010). Response rates in organizational science, 1995–2008: A meta-analytic review and guidelines for survey researchers. Journal of Business & Psychology, 25, 335–349.
• Grant, A. M., & Wall, T. D. (2009). The neglected science and art of quasi-experimentation: Why-to, when-to, and how-to advice for organizational researchers. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4), 653-686.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 8 – Using secondary data.
• Barnes, C. M., Dang, C. T., Leavitt, K., Guarana, C. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (forthcoming). Archival data in micro-organizational research: A toolkit for moving to a broader set of topics. Journal of Management.
• Ketchen, D. J., Ireland, R. D., & Baker, L. T. (2013). The use of archival proxies in strategic management studies: Castles made of sand? Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 32-42.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 5 – Formulating the research design (pp. 201-207).
• Gibbert, M., Ruigrok, W., & Wicki, B. (2008). What passes as a rigorous case study? Strategic Management Journal, 29, 1465–1474.
• Stone-Romero, E. F. (2002). The relative validity and usefulness of various empirical research designs. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 77-98). Malden: Blackwell.
• McGrath, J.E. (1981). Dilemmatics: The study of research choices and dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 25(2), 179-210.
• Brutus, S., Aguinis, H., & Wassmer, U. (2013). Self-reported limitations and future directions in scholarly reports: Analysis and recommendations. Journal of Management, 39(1), 48–75.
o Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 6 – Negotiating access and research ethics (pp. 239-263)
o Buchanan, D. A., & Bryman, A. (2007). Contextualizing methods choice in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(3), 483-501.
• Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 297-319). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 2 – Formulating and clarifying your research topic (pp. 53-60).
• Saunders et al. (2016), Chapter 14 – Writing and presenting your project report.
Extra Resources
Research proposal website of the University of Western Australia: http://www.postgraduate.uwa.edu.au/students/proposals/preparing.