Use IBRING: central Idea, Basic ideas related to central Idea, what is Releated to Basic ideas, Important ideas for you, New ideas, and research Goals

Perhaps assign 5–10 papers (the best ones) to each letter of IBRING :-)

You must start with an outline.  Ask yourself "what are the things that a reader needs to know to understand the methodology, findings and conclusions of this study?"

Then organize then in a logical flow, with sub-points.

Then fill in the details with narrative test.

The attached document is intended for a journal publication, not a dissertation, but it may still have good advice for you.

Method Research Study Manuscript Outline

Dear Beverly,

your experience is quite similar to mine. My suggestion is along the line of previous comments:

What do you want to say/What is your research question?

What is the current situation in the field?

How do you get (in literature) from status quo to question? What steps are to be taken to take the reader on this journey?

Has anyone argued otherwise?

How can dissent be explained and (with references) put into question?

Kind Regards

Roland

Thank you,  Michael Marek,

This is similar to an outline that I submitted to my committee. However, it was never approved for me to move forward. Your reply at least shows me I am on the right path. I appreciate this.     Beverlyn

Dear Beverlyn,

first of all you may be aware about the correlation of your work and the literature review.

When starting with a scientific project, you should be able to describe your project with the following three topisc (p.e. as an OnePager). It is important to keep the sentences short bringing everything on-the-point.

Specific Challenge:

• What new findings you will get with your work?
• What is known, what is still necessary to find. 

Scope:

• What you will do to get the new findings?
• Which are the resources you will use?

Impact:

• Who as a benefit from your results?
• How you can quantify the benefits?

This description allows to check all the time if the title of your project fits the content.

Furthermore you have a clear guidance what you have to describe in your literature review (or better "Description of the State-of-the-Art"). Following your OnePager, everything what is common knowledge you have to describe. No more and no less.

Everything you create as "new knowledge" than has to be pointed out within your conclusion.

With best regards

Michael

Thank you Michael Hein,

As you have described this as a one-page narrative with concise components, I understand. However, this approach was submitted as my preliminary prospectus. Now I am preparing to write the literature review. However, this is good information to expound on for exhausting the literature. At this point, I realize a good content specialist would be good for starting to collect the journal articles relative to my research proposal.  You have been very helpful ... Thank you.

Dear Baverly,

my suggestion is following a systematic approach. A Systematic Literature Review (SRL) aims to present a fair evaluation of a research topic by using a trustworthy, rigorous, and auditable methodology.

Kitchenham B (2007) Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Re- views in Software Engineering. Tech. rep., Keele University.

Kitchenham has been conceived with a particular emphasis on SLR conducted within

the software engineering domain. Nevertheless we consider it also suitable to get a credible evaluation of the research works in different topics. Kitchenham's methodology is structured according to the following three steps, that have to be performed one after the other.

Planning  - This phase aims at understanding

needs and objectives for the review. To do that a set of research

questions have to be defined and the review protocol (the strategy

of work) must be established.

Conducting  - This phase aims at defining a search strategy to select the wider set of relevant research works. The search is done according to the protocol defined in the

planning phase, and it can be applied both in an automatic and manual way. As soon as the search has been concluded relevant research works are included or excluded from the review. This refinement step is quite critical since it can strongly impact on

the goodness of the results. To guarantee the quality of the results it is important to apply quality checks on the included research works, so to avoid results biased by works that cannot be considered solid. Finally, for each selected research work data extraction is performed and classified according to its relevant characteristics.

Reporting - This phase aims at effectively communicating the results illustrating the answer to the research questions.

I used it in one of my review paper - R. Cognini, F. Corradini, S. Gnesi, A. Polini, B. Re. Business Process Flexibility - A Systematic Literature Review with a Software Systems Perspective. Information systems frontiers. In press. - and it helped a lot to better understand the state of the art. 

Regards,

Barbara 

Hope this post will help...

Literature review is conducted to identify what research has been done (including the most recent), what researchers investigating, and what methodologies are used to achieve the results. The main aim of this is to help identify the researcher's contribution to knowledge.

With this in mind and having read your research topic you need to search the following:

- Employees engagement in public sector

- Leadership behavioral support in relation to employees engagement

- Reasons for break down in the enthusiasm of employee commitment

- Associated cost with employees disengagement

- Available tools and techniques to increase employees engagement in public sector

Good luck

Adnan

Thank you, Adan, for your reply to my question… this will be very helpful, as I proceed to complete my proposal.

However, please note this in my problem introduction statement; based on a 2013 Gallup Poll survey study, “American corporations are losing more than 400 billion dollars annually because of low productivity. Including the problem of over 70% of American worker's exhibited disengaged attitudes toward their work tasks. Research shows there are many reasons for this attitude (e.g., underutilization, job fit issues, and boredom).

Therefore, my attention started to focus on management. The literature shows the problem of detachment is due to a lack of effort by management to motivate employees to do their best in their work tasks (Galagan, 2015; Miller, 2014; Molinaro, 2015; Volsloban, 2013).

Rather than looking at one phenomenon, I decided to look at the two variables, the highly engaged and the disengaged to examine the employee’s perspectives on engagement/disengagement phenomena. By looking at it from their views as opposed to the organization, views, which is to increase profits through production.  Since seventy percent of the country’s workforce is causing this much loss in the economy, it shows a dire need to look at the problem from the angle of the employees. So, I want to discuss both sides of the issue…. What do you think? Is this feasible?