Question:
Write an essay of approximately 2000 words which provides a critical analysis of abstracts relevant to the student’s area of research/interest.
The essay is expected to contain the following sections (with indicative word counts in brackets):
1. Abstract selection process
You need to select 4 abstracts in your field of research/interest. You need to indicate how you have found/selected/obtained the used abstracts (i.e. which search keywords, tools, database used). It would make sense if not all four abstracts were from the same (e.g. journal) source, and if this is not the case (so if they are all from the same source) this should be justified. The details of the abstracts provided should be sufficient to find them online. You should indicate the word count for each of the abstract and also provide an average word count. It is expected that you include the abstracts in an appendix to the essay.
2. Common aspects/differences (500)
You need to identify common aspects and differences in the selected abstracts. This could/should cover structure, style, level of detail, etc.
3. Own abstract
Write an abstract related to your own research/interest area. This should be aimed at your peer (research) group (and as such distinct from the assessment 2 abstract). The word count should be equal to the average of the 4 selected abstracts (see point 1. above).
4. Reflection (500)
Assess how your abstract compares to the 4 selected abstract, which common aspects / differences have you used. You can also reflect on the writing process: e.g. did you do several versions of the abstract and what was the editing process.
It is expected that you provide a word-count for each section.
Marking Criteria:
2,000 words. Worth 50% of overall mark. This assignment is designed to demonstrate an understanding of relevant transferable skills aspects in personal and professional development and in conducting research.
Solution:
1.0 Abstract Selection Process
In this study, the area of focus is the Innovation Challenges affecting its successful implementation in the UAE Public Sector. In active process of abstract selection, I adopted the use of 4 keywords. The keywords included innovation challenges in public sector, UAE public sector innovation, Technology challenges in UAE Public sector, and human factors affecting innovation implementation in public sector. Ideally, these key terms are the ones that are used in describing the research question and topic. The keywords were clearly demonstrated in the background information provided in the research proposal. In the active search process, I used quotation marks around the keywords for the purpose of phrase searching. This ensured that the sourced results were inclusive of the exact phrase. For instance, “UAE public sector innovation.” Additionally, I used Booleans such as AND, OR, and NOT for expanding and limiting my search results. In this case, only the results that were directly related to the keywords were sourced from the search process. This was used collaboratively with the truncation and wildcard search process which included the use of an asterisk (*) to facilitate gaining of variations of words in the sourced results. This lead to the collection of abstracts in tiers. For instance, in tier 1, the abstracts on innovation challenges in public sector were sources while the second tier linked with the subsequent keywords used in the study.
In search of websites, the databases that I used include NCBI, Google Scholar, PubMed, and EBSCO Host. For a maximum utilization of these databases, I ensured that only those abstracts which had a length of 1 or 2 paragraphs were considered as being potential to be included in this research. As noted by Higgins et al. (2006), the abstract selection process must take into account that its contents are only aimed at informing the reader on the fundamental points of the entire research paper. This is without necessarily having a look at other parts of the source as a link for understanding the content of the research. Additionally, all the key terms highlighted are supposed to form part of the contents in the abstract as they are essential in enhancing the communication of the identified research paper in a more harnessed and accessible language.
Additionally, in the search process, only the articles which were not older than 17 years were considered. In this case, they were to have been published between 2000 and 2017 and published by highly reputable journals to guarantee their reliability and validity. Nevertheless, there was no choice of the type of research design characterizing the articles where the abstracts were sourced from. This implies that they could have been carried out through systematic reviews, experimental studies, quasi-experimental studies, mixed method studies, qualitative approaches, case studies and survey-based research framework. The rationale for this is that the issue of innovation in UAE public sector is a consistently changing phenomenon hence a consistent reincarnation of challenges impacting on its success.
Considering the word count of the selected abstracts, it is worth noting that the average number of words is 200. As a consequence, all the selected abstracts were within the acceptable range of all abstracts of research papers.
The selected Abstracts in this essay include;
1. Gil-Garcia, Helbig & Ojo (2014) (Link: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7bf5/1374e59a87e26e264192b52ad145c6365576.pdf)
The total number of words in this abstract was 188 and published in Elsevier journal of government information quarterly. The research was done in the USA and published in 2014.
2. Bommert (2010) (Link: http://journals.sfu.ca/ipmr/index.php/ipmr/article/view/73/73)
The total number of words in this source was 181 words. It was published in 2010 and published in the international public management review electronic journal. This research was done in USA with insights on practices in the Middle East.
3. Borins (2002) (Link: http://www.mbc.org.br/mbc/uploads/biblioteca/1158007862.01A.pdf)
The total number of words was 169 and published in Canada in 2002 in the leadership and organization development journal.
4. Mergel & Desouza (2013) (Link: http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/35233/Mergel_0-357048.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y )
The total number of words were 179 and published in public administration review Journal in UK.
2.0 Common Aspects/ Differences There exist standard similarities and differences characterizing……………………………………………………………………………………………..Please contact us to receive guidance, support and tutorial services on this essay based on your topic selection, organisation background and any other relevant instructions