Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Book Review

Book Review and ex- This tension in the book's focus-testing theories ploring institutional logics-exemplifies a broader issue: that of the inherent problems in turning a Ph.D. thesis into an academic monograph. A Ph.D. thesis does not translate into a book without considerable rewriting and reorientation. The two are for different audiences and have different roles to play. The first demonstrates the ability of the candidate to comprehend a theoretically informed question, its treatment in a body of literature, and illustrate its examination in a re- search exercise. In the latter, the author argues a case, dem- onstrating a comprehensive awareness of the theoretical and empirical material that must inform the analysis, able to inte- and grate and meld both, in the persuasive presentation demonstration of a thesis. In the former, the writer is a sup- plicant in a hierarchically structured process of examination, with the format of thesis introduction, an examination of the literature, methods, findings, discussion, and implications for further research fairly well entrenched. In the latter, authorial command of the material is assumed from the beginning, with the reader as an The for- and the author engages equal. mat of the material is driven by the argument, while the http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Administrative Science Quarterly SAGE

Book Review

Sastry, M. Anjali
Administrative Science Quarterly , Volume 44 (2): 3 – Jun 1, 1999
Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/book-review-9FzJ4vaF70

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© 1999 Johnson Graduate School, Cornell University
ISSN
0001-8392
eISSN
1930-3815
DOI
10.2307/2667003
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

and ex- This tension in the book's focus-testing theories ploring institutional logics-exemplifies a broader issue: that of the inherent problems in turning a Ph.D. thesis into an academic monograph. A Ph.D. thesis does not translate into a book without considerable rewriting and reorientation. The two are for different audiences and have different roles to play. The first demonstrates the ability of the candidate to comprehend a theoretically informed question, its treatment in a body of literature, and illustrate its examination in a re- search exercise. In the latter, the author argues a case, dem- onstrating a comprehensive awareness of the theoretical and empirical material that must inform the analysis, able to inte- and grate and meld both, in the persuasive presentation demonstration of a thesis. In the former, the writer is a sup- plicant in a hierarchically structured process of examination, with the format of thesis introduction, an examination of the literature, methods, findings, discussion, and implications for further research fairly well entrenched. In the latter, authorial command of the material is assumed from the beginning, with the reader as an The for- and the author engages equal. mat of the material is driven by the argument, while the

Journal

Administrative Science Quarterly – SAGE

Published: Jun 1, 1999

There are no references for this article.