Keynote address from Professor Ghassan Aouad, Pro-Vice Chancellor (Research and Innovation), on real life experiences of supervising PhD students

1. “How to succeed in doing a
PhD: personal experiences”
A PhD is a journey of discovery & fun
Professor Ghassan Aouad
Pro Vice Chancellor for Research & Innovation
University of Salford
g.aouad@salford.ac.uk

2. Structure of the presentation
• General part covering generic issues
• Specific part covering technical
issues related to PhDs successful
completion
• An opportunity for Q/A

3. General Part
• Why PhDs are important for Salford?
• Support from Graduate Studies
Office
• How do we support our students?
• Continuous Improvement

4. Why PhDs are important to
• The PhD community is vibrant and bring
prestige to the institution
• Bring opportunities to the University
through their networks
• Strengthen our international reputation as
we attract students from across the globe
• Contribute to the development of our
workforce when we retain them
• PhDs produce publications which can be
submitted to future research

5. Why PhDs are important to Salford?
• PhDs contribute to teaching (GTA, other PG
Teachers etc)
• Additional funding through fees
• One of the metrics of the Government’s
Research Assessment is PhD recruitment and
completion
• Additional funding from Government is related
to the number of PhD students (home
students)
• PhD completion is a metric in most
international league tables
• Attract additional funding from Research
Councils
It is our duty to support this very important community

6. How do we support our students?

7. Support from Graduate Studies Office
• SPoRT programme: Salford Postgraduate
Research Training
– Progression Points and PhD evaluation
– Academic Writing Skills
– Surviving the Viva
• SPARC conference: Salford Postgraduate
Annual research Conference
• Conference attendance top-up funding
• Director of Graduate Studies ‘drop-in sessions’
• General support to supervisors and students
(DGS, Linda Kelly, Victoria Sheppard, Cristina Mendes-
da-Costa, Jaye McIsaac)

8. PhD Completion
• Strict Completion Timescales
– Induction Programme to students and supervisors
– Learning Agreement
– Training Programme
– Interim Assessment
– Internal Evaluation
– Introducing Mock Viva
– Introducing Incentive Schemes
– Only in very exceptional cases extensions will be granted
– A robust monitoring system will be introduced
• Improvement in the following areas
– Entry Standards (English & Academic)
– Supervision
– PGR identity
– PGR quality
– PGR accommodation

9. Technical Part
• Strong and Weak PhDs
• Do and Don’t (evidence based)
• Methodological Issues
• Personal experiences of some PhD
Holders

10. “To be a top performer you have to be
passionately committed to what you’re
doing and insanely confident about your
ability to pull it off”
(John Eliot)

11. Your confidence in me!!!
• Completed PhD in 1991
• External Examiner to more than 40 PhDs
and 4 Mphils (worldwide)
• Currently supervising 3 PhDs
• Internal Examiner to 9 PhDs
• Successfully supervised 18 Post Docs,
20 PhDs, 2 MPhils & 1 Mres over the last
15 years

12. The Ph.D Experience
Mihir Bellare
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
University of California at San Diego
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This document records some reflections and information for my current or
prospective students pursuing or wanting to pursue a Ph.D in computer
science at UCSD. It tries to tell you something about the research ``way of life''
as I see it, your relationship with your advisor, and the expectations and goals
of the program.
The views here are entirely personal. They do not reflect those of the
university, the department, or other faculty
http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~mihir/phd.html

13. History of PhD (Wikipedia)

16. The Key Ingredients of a Ph.D : Passion,
Humility and Development
P. W Chang
http://www.tbher.org/index.php/bher/issue/
view/2

17. http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/fe/watershd/mtgpresent/FE%20How%20to%20succeed%20as%20a%20PhD
%20student%20(final%20version)_files/frame.htm
How to succeed
as a PhD student
Prof. Jeff McDonnell, Richardson Chair
College of Forestry, OSU (Oregon State
University)

18. Prof. Jeff McDonnell,
Richardson Chair
College of Forestry, OSU

19. Why are you doing a PhD?

20. Why are you doing a PhD?
• Is it for the title?

21. Why are you doing a PhD?
• Is it for the title?
• Do you like research/
academia?

22. Why are you doing a PhD?
• Is it for the title?
• Do you like research/
academia?
• Better future prospect

23. Why are you doing a PhD?
• Is it for the title?
• Do you like research/
academia?
• Better future prospect
• To support your
teaching

24. Why are you doing a PhD?
• Is it for the title?
• Do you like research/
academia?
• Better future prospect
• To support your
teaching
• To get some
promotion

25. Why are you doing a PhD?
• Is it for the title?
• Do you like research/
academia?
• Better future prospect
• To support your
teaching
• To get some
promotion
• Out of curiosity

26. Why are you doing a PhD?
• Is it for the title?
• Do you like research/
academia?
• Better future prospect
• To support your
teaching
• To get some
promotion
• Out of curiosity
• To please your family

27. Why are you doing a PhD?
• Is it for the title? • What is your
• Do you like research/ strategy?
academia? (Need to have an
• Better future prospect overall picture)
• To support your
teaching
• To get some
promotion
• Out of curiosity
• To please your family

28. Good PhDs
Reflections
(Amanda and Ghassan)
• Robust Methodology
• Clear aim, objectives, hypothesis,
research Questions
• Good data collection and analysis
methods
• Comprehensive literature review,
Critical Analysis
• Well presented, Interesting findings
• Strong Validation, Good reflections
• Good use of appendices
• Confidence, Other researchers will use
as a reference
• Work already published

29. Good PhDs
•Original findings
•Appropriate structure of chapters (flow)
•Writing style (exciting)
•Evidence based
•Well scoped (focus)
•Intellectuality and creativity are evident
•Strong theoretical underpinnings
•Researching a phenomena
•Refereed journal papers as references
•Contribution to knowledge clearly described

30. Weak PhDs
• Weak methodology
• Ambiguity in defining the aim,
objectives, research questions
• Weak data collection and analysis
methods
• Superficial literature review
• Superficial analysis
• Badly presented (spelling)
• Findings are not clearly reported
• No validation
• No reflections
• Bad use of appendices
• Bad Performance at viva

31. Weak PhDs
•Arrogance and ignorance
•Other researchers will not use as a reference
•No publications before viva
•Predicted findings
•No structure (flow)
•No excitement in the writing style
•Opinion based (unsupported statements)
•No scope, all over the place
•No intellectuality or creativity
•Weak theoretical underpinnings
•Reporting on a piece of software
•Conference papers and reports
•Contribution to knowledge is not sufficiently
addressed

33. Research
Process
and
Milestones

34. Start
Research
Process
and
Milestones

35. Start
Research
Process
and
Milestones

36. Start
LITERATURE
REVIEW
Research (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
and
Milestones

37. Start
LITERATURE
REVIEW
Research (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
and
Milestones

38. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
and
Milestones

39. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones

40. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis

41. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis
Develop
Research Plan

42. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis
Develop
Research Plan

43. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop
Research Plan

44. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected

45. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected

46. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected

47. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative

48. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means
of data collection

49. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means
of data collection

50. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey

51. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means
of data analyses

52. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means
of data analyses

53. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS

54. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS

55. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS
Development of
model/
frame work / and Evaluation

56. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS
Development of
model/
frame work / and Evaluation

57. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS
Development of
model/ Contribution to
frame work / and Evaluation existing knowledge

58. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS
Development of
model/ Contribution to
frame work / and Evaluation existing knowledge

59. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS
Development of
model/ Contribution to
frame work / and Evaluation existing knowledge
Write up
Conclusion

60. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS
Development of
model/ Contribution to
frame work / and Evaluation existing knowledge
Write up
Conclusion

61. Start
LITERATURE
Identification REVIEW
Research of the PROBLEM (Information from Existing knowledge)
“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”
Process
What is your contribution to knowledge?
Definition of the
AIM
and
Milestones
Establish
Objectives
and Hypothesis Identification of
the research population
Develop Quantitative
Identification of data
Research Plan to be collected qualitative
Identification of means Questionnaires,
of data collection interviews, survey
Identification of means Content analysis
Thematic analysis
of data analyses
NViVo or SPSS
Development of
model/ Contribution to
frame work / and Evaluation existing knowledge
Write up Contribution to
Conclusion existing knowledge

62. Useful
References

65. Research Approach
• An email with two questions was sent to
around 50 staff (mainly PhD holders)
• Response rate of 56%
• Content Analysis
– Three things we should do as part of the PhD
process
– Three things we shouldn’t do as part of the PhD
process

66. Never give
Get up Get
published organised
Keep Focus
Reading
Mentoring Networking
Good
Methodology Directions
Relationship
with
supervisor Dealing with
problems
Rigour
Ownership
Encouragement Defending
Your PhD
Think out of the
box
Key Findings

67. Good Methodology: Basic Definitions
• Paradigm: “An integrated cluster of substantive
concepts, variables and problems attached with
corresponding methodological approaches and tools…”
• Epistemology: one of the major branches of philosophy,
most often contrasted with ontology. Epistemology is
the study of how we know what we know. The branch of
philosophy that deals with the varieties, grounds, and
validity of knowledge.
(Thomas Kuhn, Wikipedia, Oxford English Dictionary)

68. Good Methodology: Basic Definitions
• Ontology: derives from the Greek ‘ontos’ (‘being’ or
‘what exists’) and ‘logos’ (‘rational account’ or
‘knowledge’). From the philosophical perspective,
‘ontology’ is synonymous with ‘metaphysics’ as
classically conceived. It is an account of being in the
abstract’. The science or study of being; that part of
metaphysics which relates to the nature or essence of
being or existence
• Methodology: the science of methods. The branch of
knowledge that deals with method and its application in
a particular field. Also, the study of empirical research
or the techniques employed in it. A body of methods
used in a particular branch of study or activity
(Thomas Kuhn, Wikipedia, Oxford English Dictionary)

69. Good Methodology
We all bring (often implicit?!) assumptions and
path dependencies to our research!
• What knowledge is – ontology
• How we know it – epistemology
• What values go into it – axiology
• How we write about it – rhetoric
• The process of studying it – methodology
(Sexton 2002)

71. Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it
all together! (Sexton, 2002)

72. Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it
all together! (Sexton, 2002)
Ontology
Epistemology
Axi
olo
(Aes
the
gy
eth tics
,
jus ics,
tice
)

73. Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it
all together! (Sexton, 2002)
Realism Idealism
A commonly An unknowable
experienced external reality perceived in
reality with predetermined different ways by
nature and structure individuals
Ontology
Epistemology
Axi
olo
(Aes
the
gy
eth tics
,
jus ics,
tice
)

74. Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it
all together! (Sexton, 2002)
Realism Idealism
A commonly An unknowable
experienced external reality perceived in
reality with predetermined different ways by
Positivism nature and structure individuals
A search for general
laws and cause-effect
relationships by
Ontology
rational means
Epistemology
Interpretivism
A search for Axi
explanations olo
of human action by
(Aes
the
gy
understanding the way eth tics
,
jus ics,
in which the world is tice
understood by )
individuals

75. Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it
all together! (Sexton, 2002)
Realism Idealism
A commonly An unknowable
experienced external reality perceived in
reality with predetermined different ways by
Positivism nature and structure individuals
A search for general
laws and cause-effect
relationships by
Ontology
rational means
Epistemology
Value neutral
Research is value
Interpretivism free
A search for and objective Axi
explanations olo
of human action by
(Aes
the
gy
understanding the way eth tics
,
jus ics,
in which the world is tice
understood by )
individuals

76. Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it
all together! (Sexton, 2002)
Realism Idealism
A commonly An unknowable
experienced external reality perceived in
reality with predetermined different ways by
Positivism nature and structure individuals
A search for general
laws and cause-effect
relationships by
Ontology
rational means
Epistemology
Value neutral
Research is value
Interpretivism free
A search for and objective Axi
explanations olo
of human action by
(Aes
the
gy
understanding the way eth tics
,
jus ics, Value-biased
in which the world is tice Research is value-
understood by ) laden and
subjective
individuals

77. Locating some common methods
Realism Idealism
A commonly An unknowable
experienced external reality perceived in
reality with predetermined different ways by
nature and structure individuals
Positivism
A search for general Ontology
laws and cause-effect
Epistemology
relationships by Objectivist
rational means approaches
Experiment
Interpretivism Case study
A search for
explanations Action research
of human action by Ethnography
understanding the way Subjectivist
approaches
in which the world is
understood by
individuals

78. Case Study: Knowledge sharing within a Kuwaiti
Higher Education Context
Generalisation of approach
Reliability & Validity and not results
Outcome: Award PhD subject to minor corrections

79. Postpositivism
The postpositivism approach can be positioned in
the middle of the two extremes '' positivism and
interpretivism'' as that reflects the use of mixed
methods approach or triangulation which is
referred to as the pragmatic approach.
The criticism to the two main extremes in the
epistemology of knowledge and mainly to
positivism had led to the development of the
postpositivism/pragmatic approach

80. Reliability
Reliability is the extent to which an
experiment, test, or any measuring procedure
yields the same result on repeated trials.
Without the agreement of independent
observers able to replicate research
procedures, or the ability to use research
tools and procedures that yield consistent
measurements, researchers would be unable
to satisfactorily draw conclusions, formulate
theories, or make claims about the
generazibility of their research
http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/relval/pop2a.cfm

81. Validity
Validity refers to the degree to which a study
accurately reflects or assesses the specific
concept that the researcher is attempting to
measure. While reliability is concerned with
the accuracy of the actual measuring
instrument or procedure, validity is
concerned with the study's success at
measuring what the researchers set out to
measure.

82. Validity
Researchers should be concerned with both
external and internal validity. External validity
refers to the extent to which the results of a
study are generalizable or transferable. (Most
discussions of external validity focus solely on
generalizability). Many qualitative research
studies are not designed to be generalized.

83. Validity
Internal validity refers to (1) the rigor with which the
study was conducted (e.g., the study's design, the
care taken to conduct measurements, and decisions
concerning what was and wasn't measured) and (2)
the extent to which the designers of a study have
taken into account alternative explanations for any
causal relationships they explore (Huitt, 1998). In
studies that do not explore causal relationships, only
the first of these definitions should be considered
when assessing internal validity.

84. http://www.documentingexcellence.com/stat_tool/reliabilityvalidity.htm

85. Be Critical
The baby and the bathwater: research methods in construction management
Authors: Wing C.K.; Raftery J.; Walker A.
Source: Construction Management and Economics, Volume 16, Number 1, 1 January 1998, pp. 99-104(6)
Abstract:
This note is written in response to Seymour, D., Crook, D. and Rooke, J. (1997) Construction
Management and Economics, 15 (1), 117-19. We argue against their narrow focus on the
interpretative approach. Also, Seymour et al. are incorrect in implying that the 'rationalist
approach' is necessarily quantitative. Our contention is that the choice of research approach in
construction management depends on the nature of the problem. However, whatever choice of
approach is adopted, it is important that the problem and associated key concepts are defined clearly and
that the methods used, underlying assumptions and limitations are transparent and defensible. It is difficult
to argue in favour of any single approach based purely on epistemological grounds as what constitutes
knowledge is still an unsolved philosophical issue. Since construction management is a practical subject,
we suggest that the choice of approach should be a pragmatic one: the approach that is likely to generate
practical solutions should be adopted. Seymour et al.'s suggestion serves only to limit our choice of
research tools. Furthermore, a lot of the research issues in construction management are practical
problems which involve generalization of experience and formulation of hypothesis that can generate
empirically testable implications. For problems of this nature, testability of hypothesis and reproducibility of
results are important, and the naturalist approach (which is labelled 'rationalist paradigm' in Seymour et al.)
of discovering causal relationship is more likely to produce general practical solutions. However, this does
not deny the value of the interpretative approach, as it may be more suitable for certain types of problem.
Moreover, in practice, an understanding of human behaviour 'from within' often provides useful insights for
formulation of empirically testable hypotheses, despite the philosophical incompatibility of the interpretative
and naturalist approaches.
Keywords: EPISTEMOLOGY; INTERPRETATIVE; APPROACH; RESEARCH; METHODS

86. A successful PhD - some hints
• Never submit a PhD without the approval of your supervisor
• Never exceed the number of words specified by the University (Ideal PhD:
200 pages). Read the University regulations.
• The introductory and conclusions chapters are the most important- take
great care to manage expectations and understand the limitations
• The Research Methodology chapter should be clearly written and justified:
– Qualitative or quantitative
– Single case study or multiple case studies
– Data collection
– Statistical analysis
– Research Process Map
• Research findings should be rigorous and statistically proven if possible
• The literature review should be comprehensive (Critique and not reporting)
• Proof reading is important:
– Minor typographical errors - Acknowledgements
– Clear abstract - Referencing

87. More hints –the Viva
• Remember that the PhD viva is a formal examination, but in most cases it
is operated like a discussion
• Make sure that you arrange a mock viva before the real thing
• Read about your examiners’ work
• Be confident, not arrogant and show passion towards your research
• Listen to the question you have been asked
• Agree with the examiners if you can’t support your argument -don’t waffle
• Bring a list of corrections to the viva
• Mark up your copy of the thesis in order to find your way easily during the
viva
• Don’t read the PhD the night before the viva, try to relax
• Typical questions:
– Tell me about the story of your PhD, what is your main contribution?
– Why did you choose the topic or this research method?
– Give me the names of two experts in this area (well known
researchers)
– How did you validate your work?
– Would you do this research the same way again?

88. Getting published
Why refereed Journals?
• Not commercial: no fees • Academic Career
• Status • Establish a name
• Reputation
• More weight
• Support your PhD viva
• More rigour • Knowledge
• Researchers refer to dissemination
• RAE • Lead to collaboration

89. How to choose a Journal?
• Start with a conference paper
• Study carefully a sample of journal papers, this will give you some
insights into the expectations and standards for a paper
• Decide on a journal
– Quality: Journal ranking
– Speed of publication
– Relevance of subject
– Ask staff colleagues for help
– Visit the web and library, plenty of information
– Join mailing lists
– Ask the editor of the journal
• Draft an outline of your paper and discuss with supervisor
• Produce the first draft
• Pass paper to your supervisor for comments
• Improve paper
• Submit paper

90. Drafting your paper
• Abstract: Concise, to the point, research methodology, main
contribution
• Introduction: subject matter, introducing the paper
• Literature review: comprehensive & critical, refereed papers
• Research methodology: very clear, rigorous
• Main findings: statistics, etc
• Testing and validation:
• Conclusions and further work
• References: Harvard, etc
• Follow guidelines strictly
• Respond to corrections (include a covering letter that identify the
corrections)
• Never give up
• If rejected, improve and send it somewhere else

91. Some key questions
• Readability - Does it communicate the right message? Is it
clear? Is there a logical progression without unnecessary
duplication?
• Originality - Why was it written? What’s new?
• Credibility - Are the conclusions valid? Is the methodology
robust? Can it be replicated? Is it honest – don’t hide any
limitations of the research? You’ll be found out.
• Applicability - How do findings apply to the world of
practice? Does it pinpoint the way forward for future
research?
• Internationality - Does it take an international, global
perspective?
(D Amaratunga)

92. Research Ethics
• Your PhD is publicly available
• The sensitivity of the research topic
• You must consult with the research ethics
panel

94. Personal Experiences from

95. Sense of
Achievement
06/83 09/87 06/91 02/92 02/99 05/03 08/06 07/08
BSc MSc PhD RF Chair HoS Dean PVC
RID
Time
This is my life (TMP 14)

96. Some Stability
The 2nd 6
months
A lot of confusion
The first 6 The 2nd year
months
Good Productivity
Looking Back The final year
+ few extra
months
Impatience
Anxiety
Confidence
My Own Experience

97. “DO”
• Define a POA (plan of action) from day one!
• Find a topic that you are really interested in
• Work with your fellow PhD students
• Work closely with your supervisor to get full support
• Undertake a thorough and critical review of the literature
• Present papers at conferences and publish in high quality
refereed journals so as to improve your writing skills and obtain
early critical comments from external reviewers and peers
• Take over – PhD ownership is important
• Write and keep on writing, it cements your thoughts
• Reward yourself when significant milestones are achieved
• Be confident (not arrogant)

98. “DO NOT”
• Prolong your PhD
• Take long breaks ( it is difficult to start again)
• Depend 100% on your supervisor
• Be forced down a specific theme / methodology route just
to fit in with the supervisor's interests
• Think the supervisor knows everything
• Have poor time management
• Lose focus or direction
• Let any third party or your supervisor control your PhD
• Plagiarise
• Underestimate the writing up period
• Ignore the importance of meeting your supervisor on a
regular basis
• Take criticism negatively, but as a challenge!

99. Dr Bingunath Ingirige’s PhD Experience
“A PhD is 80% thinking and 20% doing” (May 2000)
YOU ARE SHOWING AN
IMPROVEMENT FROM LAST
TIME. BUT THERE IS A LOT
MORE TO DO!!!!

100. Dr Bingunath Ingirige’s PhD Experience
“A PhD is 80% thinking and 20% doing” (May 2000)
YOU ARE SHOWING AN
IMPROVEMENT FROM LAST
TIME. BUT THERE IS A LOT
MORE TO DO!!!!

101. What challenges?
• being self motivated, positive attitude
• setting your own deadlines
• being ruthless with yourself
• continuous discussions with peers and
maintain their interest in your work
• get the supervisor interested in your work
• access to companies

102. Sometimes I felt ….
Doing really well
I am going nowhere
and my level of interest, enthusiasm, and
motivation

103. PhD requires a significant
• Get the PhD thinking going!!!
Linking and Narrowing Down – The funnel
What values do you bring with you ??
• Why ?
• Why not ?
focus
• How ?
• What ?
• So What ?

104. Achievement of major
Research Problem &
research Individual / company
questions access
to collect data
Research hypothesis Analysis
/ hypotheses
Substantial completion
of field research Substantial
Level of resolution Write up
Contribution to
Overall Methodology knowledge

105. Overheard…….
“Sometimes I feel, why I
started it in the first place”
Can’t do it any more.
Please give me the
doctorate!!!

106. But, look at the bright

107. Concluding remarks
• A good problem identification underpinned by a
sound methodology will take you through
• Read books such as “how to get a PhD”, quite
earlier on in your process – gain insights
• No ‘silver bullet’ – but commitment and
endurance
• Several alternative paths available

108. Dr Richard Haigh’ s
PhD experience
Snow White and the Seven

109. Dr Richard Haigh’ s
PhD experience
Snow White and the Seven
At first you’re Bashful
and Dopey.

110. Dr Richard Haigh’ s
PhD experience
Snow White and the Seven
At first you’re Bashful
and Dopey.
Two years later you’re sick (Sneezy),
tired (Sleepy), and irritable (Grumpy).

111. Dr Richard Haigh’ s
PhD experience
Snow White and the Seven
At first you’re Bashful
and Dopey.
Two years later you’re sick (Sneezy),
tired (Sleepy), and irritable (Grumpy).
Finally, everyone calls you
Doc, and then you’re Happy.

112. Motivation
Time

113. “I’m going to
make a real
contribution to
science”
Motivation
Time

114. “I’m going to
make a real
contribution to
science”
Motivation
“Why did I ever
start this?”
Time

115. “I’m going to
make a real
contribution to
science”
Motivation
“Just give me the
Doctorate”
“Why did I ever
start this?”
Time

116. Your supervisor
• Your supervisor may be your “best” friend - your
success is their success !
• Unlike marriage, they expect (and want) you to leave,
to see you stand on your own feet - more like children?
• The dream supervisor…
– A good knowledge of the topic in year one
– Interested in your subject
– Excellent knowledge of research methodology
– Provides feedback timely, fast and consistently
– Promotes their academic and publishing contacts
– Agrees to meet frequently
– Second supervisor offers an alternative perspective but is not
fundamentally opposed to the first

117. Friends Network
Publish Recognition
s
es
cc
su
Reflection Vision
to
s
Sharing Trust
ep
St
Application Confidence
Curiosity Enlightenment
(Dr Vian Ahmed’s
PhD Experience)
Reading Knowledge

118. Be part of a community if you can

119. Outcomes
Methodology
Underpinning
Theory

120. Outcomes
Methodology
Underpinning
Theory

121. PhD
Outcomes
Methodology
Underpinning
Theory

122. PhD
PhD
Outcomes
Methodology
Underpinning
Theory

123. Heart
Mind
“Research with Passion is the True
Ingredient to Success”
•Passion for reading around the subject
•Passion for learning
•Passion for applying concepts
•Passion for analysing
•Passion for publishing
•Passion for writing
•Passion for being critical
“To be a top performer you have to be passionately committed to what
you’re doing and insanely confident about your ability to pull it off”

124. Do not think that
you are going to
Final Thoughts Do not think that
you are going to
conquer the resolve all
world problems
Focus
Prolong your PhD = Prolong your misery
If you are a perfectionist = It will take longer to finish
Doing a PhD is art and science
Doing a PhD needs sheer determination, but it is easier
than doing a bachelor degree (personal view)
Doing a PhD is a pleasure, you will be trained to become a
researcher
Likelihood to pass your PhD is = Prepare for a big celebration
very high

126. Spot the PhD

127. !!!!!Enjoy it!!!!!
Spot the PhD

128. Thank you for listening
• Q/A
• Presentation will be made available if needed
• Good luck with your PhDs
• Always remember that a PhD is an opportunity
for you to be trained as a researcher
Text
• Always remember, that you are not alone,
thousands of PhDs are in the same position
g.aouad@salford.ac.uk
© Copyright rests with authors. Please use and cite appropriately.