Overview
I have returned your submitted proposal with two attached files. One is the document attached here, and the other is the information on the SBP, purpose, and RQ, which is copied below. I am afraid that the Program Director has come up with a few more revisions she suggests you make to the prospectus. She suggests revising the SBP, Purpose, and RQ to ensure they are better aligned and the words match: (1) Specific business problem: Current: The specific business problem is that some small and medium-sized enterprise HR managers in the financial services sector lack effective human resources management skills, which can lead to potential declines in employee performance and overall organizational productivity. Revised: The specific business problem is that some small and medium-sized enterprise HR managers in the financial services sector lack effective human resources management strategies to improve employee performance and enhance organizational productivity. (2) Purpose: Current: To explore the effects of employee management practices on employee performance and overall organizational productivity in small and medium-sized organizations in the financial services sector. Revised: To identify the human resources management strategies that small and medium-sized enterprise HR managers in the financial services sector use to improve employee performance and organizational productivity. Research question: Current: What strategies do HR managers in small and medium-sized financial service enterprises need to develop to improve employee performance and overall organizational productivity? Revised: What human resources management strategies do small and medium-sized enterprise HR managers in the financial services sector use to improve employee performance and organizational productivity? You will also have to amend the alignment table. Other comments include checking Item 4 of ALL the summaries to ensure the wording matches what you have in the research purpose, SBP, and the RQ, which is employee performance and organizational productivity. For example, in the first summary (Alfes et al), you use the words 'organizational performance', but there is no 'organizational performance' in the Purpose, SBP, or RQ, which is not the same thing. There are a few other minor points to note. Please make the changes and resubmit. I know this must be frustrating. However, this is why we have an SCM - to have another pair of eyes on the prospectus, as there are things the Chair may miss. Getting it right now will help considerably with the proposal and the rest of the study, so it's a good thing!
I forgot to include her exact comments, which are listed below. As you can see, aside from the changes she's suggested, it looks great. So, make the changes, and we should get it approved on the next submission. (1) Walden requires that the specific business problem, purpose statement and research question all be directly aligned. His are similar but not directly aligned. I offered a suggestion to align them. (2) In the (d) sections of the literature review, Walden usually requires students to directly tie back to either the purpose statement or conceptual framework. For the ones where he is not tying back to the conceptual framework, I would recommend he specifically mention employee productivity or organizational performance or human resources management somewhere in each (d) statement. This can be in addition to what he has now, if he doesn’t want to take anything out. He talks about similar topics, but Walden usually expects that direct connection. He has it in several of them, but not all. Other than that, it looks great to me.