The methods used by the authors to collect data were appropriate. They were able to interview different students who have used the Structured Literature Review and with their information, they were able to give conclusions on the method. Masters’ degree students gave the problems they encountered while using Structured Literature Review and the hardships they went through to complete their dissertations. Through their answers, the authors were able to conclude that the method is only good for doctoral level and not masters or undergraduate students. When used by masters and undergraduate students, they get many methodology and data collection problems hence it is fit for doctoral level students.
The evidence used by the authors was accurate since they considered many sources before coming up with their conclusion. The authors also compared the views of other writers and analyzed their views critically hence they were able to come up with the most appropriate findings. The authors have given their critiques on the articles that they used and explained their reasons for supporting or being against these articles. Their arguments are clear and easy to understand, and their reasons are valid and have enough evidence. Therefore, their work is valid and advisable to be used by students.
The conclusions of the authors are convincing to the readers, and they can be able to give the same conclusion as the authors. The readers can conclude the same thing as the authors because they have given enough sources of the information and through comparison; one can agree with the authors of the article. The interpretation of the evidence by the authors is good enough to make the reader make the right decision on the method to use in completing their dissertation.
There is no other evidence that can support a counter-argument. The authors gave concrete evidence for their conclusion and therefore it is hard for one to be against their work. It is clear from the article that the data collected was from people who have experience with the Structured Literature review hence it is not easy for one to launch a counter-argument on the evidence given. The findings were confirmed to be true with the students who had tried to use this method in completing their dissertations and with this; everyone is convinced that it is accurate. With the methods used to collect data, the reader does not have doubt that the information in the article is first hand and reliable.
The articles and the evidence are not valid because they are out of date. The sources used for the research are for long time and since then, most things have changed. Due to change of things, there is a difference between how things were during the time of the research and in the present time. It is therefore not advisable to use this article for making conclusions because it can lead to inaccurate results. Conclusions made using this article may not be valid because it is a research that was carried out many years ago. The current methods are better than the proposed methods that the authors give hence using this article will give invalid conclusions. The article needs to be revised for the information to be up to date and usable in the current world. I could also advise the authors to give their arguments basing on the current methods that people use to complete their dissertations.
In conclusion, I agree with the authors’ findings. Through the sources that they used to analyze the Structured Literature Review, it is evident that what they have written is true and their findings are accurate. I do agree that systematic methods should be introduced to help the researchers get more options to select from and complete their dissertations without difficulties. The reason I agree with the authors is that the methods they used to collect data were accurate, and they give a convincing explanation of the topic being discussed. It is also evident that there is a need for a systematic methodology to help in getting better and accurate results. The work gives a clear understanding of the hardships that students who use Structured Literature Review to do their dissertations go through ad the alternative ways they can use to overcome the problems. The work is a good guidance for undergraduate and masters’ degree students who plan to do their dissertation. With this article, they can be able to choose the methods that are not cumbersome for them to complete their dissertations successfully.
Bibliography
Boaz, A. Hayden, C. and Bernard, M. (1999) Attitudes and aspirations of older people: a British Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, special issue, pp. 41-8.
Conner, K.R. and Prahalad, C.K. (1996) “A resource-based theory of the firm: knowledge versus opportunism”, Organization Science, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 477-501.
Davenport, T.H. and Prusak, C. (1998) Working Knowledge, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Denyer, D and Tranfield, D. (2006) Using qualitative research synthesis to build an actionable knowledge base,Management Decision, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp.213-227.
Easterby-Smith, M, Thorpe, R. and Lowe, A. (2002) Management Research: An Introduction,2nd ed.London, Sage.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Santos, F.M. (2002) “Knowledge-based view: a new theory of strategy?in Pettigrew, A. (Ed.), Handbook of Strategy and Management,London, Sage, pp. 138-64.
Fink, A. (2005) Conducting Research Literature Reviews, London, Sage.
Hammersley, M. (2002) Systematic or unsystematic, is that the question? Some reflections on the science, art and politics of reviewing research evidence.Talk given to the Public Health Evidence Steering Group of the Health Development Agency, October, 2002.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995) Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation,Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press.
Macdonald, G. (1996) “Ice therapy? Why we need randomised controls”, What Works? Effective Social Interventions in Child Welfare,Barnados, Ilford, UK
