Research Proposal Elements

DEVELOPING
A SUCCESSFUL RESEARCH
PROPOSAL
Ray M Kekwaletswe, PhD.

Faculty of ICT, Tshwane University of Technology
Additional notes to the May 4th lecture

TWO MAIN TYPES OF RESEARCH
1. Research you really want to do:
2. Topics your dept wants to see done:

What should the proposal accomplish?
1. FOR SCIENTIFIC AGENCIES:

Need to convince reviewers of scientific merit, and of
your qualifications and ability to successfully make an
important contribution to the state-of-the-art.
2. FOR SPECIFIC TOPIC RFP’s:

Need to convince sponsoring agency that you
understand the problem, that you have a realistic
approach that is likely to succeed, that could be
implemented, and that you will deliver results that will
make them look good.
PROPOSAL ELEMENTS:
Problem Definition and Significance
• Define the problem– specifically.
• Clearly explain why it is important:
(1) intrinsically, within the discipline, for its scientific or technical

significance (e.g. you want to provide empirical validation of a
principle or assumption that has provided the basis for a whole
theory or approach, and yet lacks formal validation); and
(2) from a broader standpoint, to society or in economic terms.

Problem Definition and Significance
(ctd.)
• Clearly explain what the specific contribution of your work will be;
– a new result, new data to confirm a known but still questioned result,
– a new theory, a new methodology to solve a certain problem,
• E.g., a new process for fabrication of microchips that will produce higher
performance at lower cost, a new algorithm that finds a solution faster than
previous approaches...
• Explain why the reviewer and/or the sponsor should care about the
problem, and about your contribution. Be specific and explicit.
Problem Definition and Significance (ctd.)
• Problem definition and motivation should state in your own words
your understanding of the problem; may be an opportunity to
enlarge the scope or definition of the problem
• Motivation and significance should confirm and reinforce discipline’s

sense of “need” and importance of topic; preferably identify even
more reasons for doing the research
• Include cogent discussion on the key issues and challenges in

addressing the topic/solving the problem– preferably leading to how
your approach can then resolve these issues
• Describe approach, why it is unique, why you are uniquely qualified

(previous work, terrific combination of skills and expertise…)
PROPOSAL ELEMENTS:
OBJECTIVES
• Typically comes after problem definition, motivation and
significance.
• Should be a natural conclusion of the problem definition
• Start with overall objective (or aim of the research), and

then state two to four specific objectives
• May be incorporated within problem

definition/significance, or form a separate section
PROPOSAL ELEMENTS:
BACKGROUND REVIEW
• Extent and depth varies by target audience (sponsor) and type of
proposal, and by page limits
• Should be concise, and convey the major relevant classes of

previous approaches to problem addressed.
– Highlight their features, and limitations (as a way of motivating
proposed approach)
• Classification of previous approaches, and of relevant body of work

is essential– more so than detailed description of any one approach
• Should demonstrate:
(1) your knowledge (mastery) of relevant prior work;
(2) your ability to see the forest from the trees
• May be incorporated within problem definition/significance, though

generally must form separate section for scientific research
proposals
RESEARCH PARADIGM
• Use specific language to name and describe your research paradigm (e.g.,
positivism, interpretivism, critical)
– Paradigm represents the ontological, epistemological, conceptual foundation for
research.
• Describe the philosophical correlates of your research paradigm

– Phenomenology, hermeneutics, etc.
• Cite authors who have defined your research paradigm in Information

Systems and Computing and suggested its implication to your field of study
and/or your specific topic of study.
• Explain the assumptions of your research paradigm

– Describe what you intend to accomplish through this research
– Explain the assumptions about the nature of knowledge and reality that underlie
your research paradigm. Discuss how literature review will be used.
– Discuss the major tasks of the researcher in this paradigm
– Explain the type of relationship that the researcher has with the informants
Underpinning Theories
• A concept is a new idea or notion that emerges from the
analysis, and which sometimes may even require a new
word to be added to the vocabulary of the research
discipline
• A theory is a coherent collection of concepts and

propositions with an underlying world view. This might be
expressed as a ‘conceptual framework’ and is often
presented via a diagrammatic model.
– Activity theory
– Actor Network theory
– Organizational Culture theory
– Contingency theory
PROPOSAL ELEMENTS:
Research Approach
• Give a sense of both the challenging aspects of the
problem (why it is difficult, and the specific reasons or
issues that make it difficult), and why you have a good
chance of succeeding when others may have failed.
• Describe the general aspects and features of the

approach first. Do not bog down in detail initially. There
must be a clear statement, understandable by a non-
specialist.
Research Approach (ctd.)
• After stating key features/assumptions of your
approach, describe the principal steps of the
methodology– again, this is not yet the detailed
work plan.
It is a description of whether you intend to rely on analytical derivation or
use numerical methods to solve a set of equations, whether you intend to
carry physical experiments, or obtain measurements through field
investigation or survey methods, or whether you intend to use Monte Carlo
simulation methods to investigate the performance of your system under a
wide variety of experimental conditions.
• Remember: you have not done the research yet, and not
every detail needs to be specified…
PROPOSAL ELEMENTS:
WORK PLAN
• List and description of tasks to be followed in conducting the
research, to meet stated objectives.
• Degree of specificity and level of detail vary greatly by type of

research, and target audience
• Often less important than general approach, though in some

instances critical in conveying realism of proposed approach, and
justifying resources required (budget).
• Particularly important are tasks that involve data collection, field work
and/or experimental procedures, where the success of the work
depends on ability to complete measurement tasks in a timely
manner
DO’s and DON’T’s
1. Be constructive (diplomatic) in reviewing others’ work;
don’t blast all previous work, don’t be dismissive and
definitely don’t single out anyone with scorn.
BAD: All previous studies are worthless because they failed to recognize the
effect of X on Y. Chen and Smith (1998) tried but their approach was
simply wrong. Ours is the first study to address this question correctly.
BETTER: Previous studies have made important contributions to this

challenging problem, however none of the published studies appear to
have completely accounted for the effect of X on Y. A pioneering effort in
this direction is described by Chen and Smith (1998), highlighting the
need for additional investigation of the system properties when the full set
of interacting factors are incorporated in the model.
DO’s and DON’T’s (ctd.)
2. Avoid vacuous generalities (and clichés). Use specific
language to the extent possible. Ask yourself: Is any
meaning lost if this sentence/paragraph is removed?
Read critically, play devil’s advocate.
BAD: Transportation is a very important need for human society, and traffic
congestion is very big problem everywhere, especially in recent times.
BETTER: Transportation expenditures account for over 5% of domestic GDP,

according to an estimate prepared by the General Accounting Office
(1997). Delays associated with peak-period traffic congestion in the
Houston area account for….
DO’s and DON’T’s (ctd.)
3. Do not assume that your reader/reviewer knows the problem you
are addressing as well as you do, or that they are equally familiar
with your perspective or methodology. Do not take a shared view
of the problem and its challenges for granted.
4. Try not to be flippant or arrogant…DO NOT use language like:

“It is well known…”, “it is obvious”… or “it is trivial to show…”.
It is like telling the reviewer “Anyone with half a brain could tell
you that…” If it is that obvious then you may not need to dwell on
it, and if it is not (more likely), then just state and explain.
BETTER: “It is generally accepted in the literature…”

“Most standard textbooks (e.g. Topak and Srinivasan, 1975)
include a proof of…”
Reviewing Proposals
Best way to learn about good proposal writing is to see what others are
doing, and to participate in review panels
A proposal is not a journal article!! Do not be overly harsh! Respond to

the review criteria of the agency (intrinsic merit, extrinsic merit,
impact on science and engineering in SA…)
Remember: the work is not done yet! Look for the author’s awareness
of previous and related work, understanding of the difficulties,
significance of the problem, and likelihood of success
Thoughtful and constructive reviews promote scholarly behavior all

around. Nastiness begets nastiness.

Research Proposal Elements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Proposal Elements

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Proposal Elements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEVELOPING

Ray M Kekwaletswe, PhD.

Additional notes to the May 4th lecture

1. Research you really want to do:

2. Topics your dept wants to see done:

1. FOR SCIENTIFIC AGENCIES:

2. FOR SPECIFIC TOPIC RFP’s:

• Clearly explain why it is important:

(1) intrinsically, within the discipline, for its scientific or technical

(2) from a broader standpoint, to society or in economic terms.

– a new theory, a new methodology to solve a certain problem,

• Motivation and significance should confirm and reinforce discipline’s

• Include cogent discussion on the key issues and challenges in

• Describe approach, why it is unique, why you are uniquely qualified

• Should be a natural conclusion of the problem definition

• Start with overall objective (or aim of the research), and

• May be incorporated within problem

• Should be concise, and convey the major relevant classes of

• Classification of previous approaches, and of relevant body of work

• May be incorporated within problem definition/significance, though

• Describe the philosophical correlates of your research paradigm

• Cite authors who have defined your research paradigm in Information

• Explain the assumptions of your research paradigm

• A theory is a coherent collection of concepts and

• Describe the general aspects and features of the

• Degree of specificity and level of detail vary greatly by type of

• Often less important than general approach, though in some

BETTER: Previous studies have made important contributions to this

BETTER: Transportation expenditures account for over 5% of domestic GDP,

4. Try not to be flippant or arrogant…DO NOT use language like:

BETTER: “It is generally accepted in the literature…”

A proposal is not a journal article!! Do not be overly harsh! Respond to

Thoughtful and constructive reviews promote scholarly behavior all

You might also like