Hey,
I have gotten feedback on my research paper but don’t have the time to implement it. Underneath you will find the feedback on the paper I have attached. The goal here is to edit the paper were it is necessary, you don’t have to rewrite the whole thing only implement the feedback and that’s it. It is very important that there is no plagiarism. Also the second part of the paper is fieldresearch I have done, I have replaced all names and companys because of privacy of the subjects, I think there needs a lot of work in that part of the paper. An important aspect of the feedback is that now the interviews are reviewed per person and not per question, and that will need to change.
It is very important that the paper stays in the same style as it is written now.
Feedback:
Points for improvement:
· Relatively short, and missing a thorough elaboration on the subject
· Tables without table title
· Many paragraphs are written with only one reference, or even no reference. A critical writing style is missing
· You might consider starting with thoroughly defining an entreprise architecture, and which frameworks are attached to this. On the one hand, this would help to orient the reader to your subject. On the other hand, it allows to compare different theoretical views that may help to better understand or theorize the related roles
· The literature overview would benefit from a structured literature approach. Although §4 hints in this direction, a protocol-based and comparative approach is missing.
· The methodology section is very short, and misses important details regarding the motivation for the research methods, selection of respondents, operationalization, coding techniques, and criteria of validity and reliability.
· Interviews are rather a data collection technique, please position this into a broader research method
· Not a single methodological reference is provided.
· The interview results seem to be presented per respondent, without thorough synthesis.
· No interview transcripts in appendix.
· Also the use of coding tables is missing. This is however crucial for conducting a qualitative analysis
· The interview results are rather a series of short paragraphs, starting with some bold keywords.
· The same summary-based writing style has been used in the discussion, without a deeper theory building attempt
· The reference list is very small and showing a lot of white space. This also explains the lack of insight into the work
