I can see on your revision that you are very busy and that you have not revised the text (a lot) based on my comments in my last email. This is fully OK as it is your decision on how much you will adhere to my guidelines.
For the table you have inserted, please give it a table number and title.
Your research methodology is still short and you don’t introduce the two companies properly. I cannot see the companies described. Here you could use the companies’ websites. The text does not need to come from articles. You cannot assume that the reader knows the two companies. This is not OK for an academic text. They must be clearly introduced. In addition, data for analysis would typically come from reports on the companies’ websites.
Your RQs need grammatical revision as stated in the last email.
It would be expected that you in the within-case analyses and the cross-case analyses more explicitly combine input from the literature section to the empirical data from the two companies. You should clearly show which data you use (e.g. from company reports) and how the data analysis is done so that the reader can follow your line of argumentation. I attach Polina’s thesis so that you can see how she works with her company data.
The Table of Contents for the Discussion section only points to one of the sub-RQs which is confusing.
I suggest that you move the section on managerial implications to section 5, so that it comes after the two sub-sections on your sub-RQs. The Discussion section must have more references, as the idea is to discuss the empirical findings by pointing back to your literature review section.
Instead of section 6, I suggest you include the future research as the last section in the conclusion. This would mean that the Conclusion section now should be numbered as number 6.
Please revise your abstract. It is surprising that it doesn’t mention the two companies – as well as points more explicitly to the answers of the RQs. I think you still had the mechanisms in mind when you wrote it.
Please also remove ‘LIST OF FIGURES’ and ‘LIST OF TABLES’ from the Table of Contents, so that the Table of Contents starts with 1. INTRODUCTION. You can have the LIST OF FIGURES and LIST OF TABLES after the Table of Contents without referring to them, as this is expected
The post Your research methodology is still short and you don’t introduce the two companies properly. appeared first on Assignment Prep.
