INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT: “Critique of Quantitative Methods Journal Paper”
POTENTIAL STRUCTURE OF INDIVIDUAL ESSAY

1.    Introduction
•    Gaps and contributions;
•    Aims of the research.

2.    Theory (do a search on Google Scholar and Web of Knowledge)
•    Evaluation of the theory;
•    Previous use of theory;
•    Use of the theory in this study.

3.    Quantitative Methods and Analysis (The biggest section in the essay – at least 1000 words)

•    Hypotheses;
•    Study design and sample;
•    Measures – Independent, Dependent and Control Variables;
•    Reliability and validity;
•    Statistical techniques used to test the hypotheses;
•    Statistical analysis and findings – explain what key statistics mean. Are there any unusual findings?

4.    Conclusion
•    Theoretical contributions;
•    Practical contributions and implications for managers;
•    Limitations;
•    Improvements – suggest how you could do the study differently.

The second assessment is an individual 2000 word essay entitled ‘Critique of Quantitative Methods Journal Paper’ and represents 60% of the total assessment for this course. This assignment builds on your weekly seminar papers for discussion and is concerned with critically evaluating and interpreting a business and management journal article that adopts quantitative methodology.
You are asked to interpret and evaluate the following journal paper attached with this assignment:
Edwards, Tony, Sanchez-Mangas, Rocio, Belanger, Jacques and McDonnell, Anthony, (2015), Why are Some Subsidiaries of Multinationals the Source of Novel Practices while Others Are Not? National, Corporate and Functional Influences, British Journal of Management, Vol. 26, pp. 146-162.
Areas for discussion within the essay are:
?    Introduction: Key research gaps that the paper is trying to fill
?    Brief description of current theory and empirical research illustrating incoherencies, inconsistencies and uncertainties
?    The nature of sample used in the study and an appraisal of its fit for the research question as well as its shortcomings
?    The major part of your paper (at least 1000 words) is to describe the most significant statistics in the paper and what they mean
?    Conclusions: Discuss how the researchers could have done the study differently. Here I’m looking for your creative thinking especially linked to seminar discussions of other papers during this course.