The second assessment is an individual 2000 word essay entitled ‘Critique of Quantitative Methods Journal Paper’ and represents 60% of the total assessment for this course. This assignment builds on your weekly seminar papers for discussion and is concerned with critically evaluating and interpreting a business and management journal article that adopts quantitative methodology.
You are asked to interpret and evaluate the following journal paper attached with this assignment:
Edwards, Tony, Sanchez-Mangas, Rocio, Belanger, Jacques and McDonnell, Anthony, (2015), Why are Some Subsidiaries of Multinationals the Source of Novel Practices while Others Are Not? National, Corporate and Functional Influences, British Journal of Management, Vol. 26, pp. 146-162.
Areas for discussion within the essay are:
? Introduction: Key research gaps that the paper is trying to fill
? Brief description of current theory and empirical research illustrating incoherencies, inconsistencies and uncertainties
? The nature of sample used in the study and an appraisal of its fit for the research question as well as its shortcomings
? The major part of your paper (at least 1000 words) is to describe the most significant statistics in the paper and what they mean
? Conclusions: Discuss how the researchers could have done the study differently. Here I’m looking for your creative thinking especially linked to seminar discussions of other papers during this course.
I would like you to appraise the journal article in your own words rather than copying material straight from the paper or purely paraphrasing it. This will show me that you have thought about the paper deeply and developed your own understanding. This exercise is aimed at helping you deconstruct quantitative journal articles and develop a reflexive critique towards future articles you may read on your undergraduate programme.

The second assessment is an individual 2000 word essay entitled ‘Critique of Quantitative Methods Journal Paper’ and represents 60% of the total assessment for this course. This assignment builds on your weekly seminar papers for discussion and is concerned with critically evaluating and interpreting a business and management journal article that adopts quantitative methodology.
You are asked to interpret and evaluate the following journal paper attached with this assignment:
Edwards, Tony, Sanchez-Mangas, Rocio, Belanger, Jacques and McDonnell, Anthony, (2015), Why are Some Subsidiaries of Multinationals the Source of Novel Practices while Others Are Not? National, Corporate and Functional Influences, British Journal of Management, Vol. 26, pp. 146-162.
Areas for discussion within the essay are:
? Introduction: Key research gaps that the paper is trying to fill
? Brief description of current theory and empirical research illustrating incoherencies, inconsistencies and uncertainties
? The nature of sample used in the study and an appraisal of its fit for the research question as well as its shortcomings
? The major part of your paper (at least 1000 words) is to describe the most significant statistics in the paper and what they mean
? Conclusions: Discuss how the researchers could have done the study differently. Here I’m looking for your creative thinking especially linked to seminar discussions of other papers during this course.
I would like you to appraise the journal article in your own words rather than copying material straight from the paper or purely paraphrasing it. This will show me that you have thought about the paper deeply and developed your own understanding. This exercise is aimed at helping you deconstruct quantitative journal articles and develop a reflexive critique towards future articles you may read on your undergraduate programme.