HANDOUT FOR XLRI DOCTORAL COLLOQUUM, 2014

Session: Selecting A Topic

Campbell, John P., Daft, Richard L., and Hulin, Charles L. (1982). What to study:
Generating and developing research questions. Sage Publications: New Delhi.

Three approaches for selecting a topic:

1. Questions from top 5 journals (last 2 years or more)

Students should identify the top five research journals in their respective areas.
A survey of the research papers published in the last two years would provide
data regarding the current themes and trends in research, the frequency and
relative focus on these themes, and the suggested areas for future research. This
provides the student with a list of possible research topics in their field of study.

2. Opinion of experts

Students can survey the research interests of their faculty members. This would
also enable the selection of appropriate faculty guide with related interests.

3. Real world: Practitioner problems

Understanding the problems faced by the practitioners is also a possible source

for identifying relevant research topics. However, it is important to convert /
relate these practitioner problems to relevant theoretical underpinnings for a
better understanding of the phenomenon, as well as identifying possible
research topics.

Common errors in selecting topic (to be avoided):

1. It is the researchers favorite method that determines the problem rather than vice-versa.

Summary prepared by: Apurva.Sanaria@gmail.com

Page 1 of 3

2. The applied and theoretical contribution of the research is not clear. These could
create problems in thesis defense as well as paper publication.
3. Research questions are faddish to the extreme. These questions would seem irrelevant
after the fad is out of fashion.
4. Many findings are highly specific to specific instrumentation. The instruments used
should not be driving the findings.
Doing significant research and avoiding not-so-significant research:

Students can refer two published papers to guide regarding these aspects (papers freely
available on www.scholar.google.com.
a. Davis, M. S. (1971). Thats interesting. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1(2),
309-344.
b. Gottfredson, S. D. (1978). Evaluating psychological research reports:
Dimensions, reliability, and correlates of quality judgments. American
Psychologist, 33(10), 920-934.

Predictors of significant research:

1. Activity

It is important for researchers to have frequent interactions and networking with

others (including people for other fields, practitioners, etc.).

2. Convergence

Several activities or interests converge at the same time (e.g., an idea converges
with a method, students ideas converge with a faculties thoughts on the topic).

3. Intuition

The importance of the research and the interest in it seem to be guided by

intuition and feeling rather than logical analysis (e.g., a feeling of excitement, a
perceived eloquence, as if researchers know they are doing the right thing).

Summary prepared by: Apurva.Sanaria@gmail.com

Page 2 of 3

4. Theory

A primary goal is to understand or explain something. The researcher is curious,

is concerned with a puzzle, or clarifies something that is poorly understood.

5. Real world

Research questions should not simply be elaborations of abstract, academic

ideas that are unrelated to organizations. The ideas are tangible, useful, and
pertaining to ongoing business activities.

Predictors of not-so-significant research:

1. Expedience

The research is easy, cheap, quick, or convenient.

2. Method

Statistical technique or method takes priority over theory and understanding.

3. Motivation

Absence of researchers personal interest in the topic.

4. Lack of theory

The underlying complex theoretical issues are not worked out in advance, i.e.
before setting out on the research project.

Summary prepared by: Apurva.Sanaria@gmail.com

Page 3 of 3