Theses - Checklist

Proposal Checklist

This checklist is intended as a practical guideline to help you cover the key elements of your proposal and increase the chances that your thesis will be approved and successfully supervised.

Research topic

• Is the topic theoretically and practically relevant?
• Is it specific enough to contribute to Information Systems theory and Information Systems practice?
• Do I have a clear idea of what is outside the scope of my study?

Title

• Does the title capture the core idea of my project in roughly 10–12 words in an engaging way?
• Is it a concise statement of the research challenge?
• Does the title reflect the intended outcome or focus of the thesis?
• Would a non‑specialist audience roughly understand what the thesis is about?
• Have I avoided abbreviations and acronyms where possible?

Motivation

• Do I provide a brief description of my proposed study and the phenomenon of interest?
• Do I explain why the reader should care about this topic?
• Do I clarify why the topic and the research question are of broader interest?
• Do I situate the topic in a clear context (relevant theories/constructs; what is not included; time frame; level of analysis such as individual, organizational, economic, technical, etc.)?
• Do I explain how the results of my study will advance our understanding of the topic?
• Do I explain how the results will help to close a specific knowledge gap?

Research Objective

• Do I provide a formal and clear statement of purpose for my study, including the overarching research objective and the associated research question(s)?
• Do I make a convincing case for why my proposed research and research questions matter?
• Have my research questions been derived from relevant, peer‑reviewed literature?
• Do I present and develop my research objective and questions with sufficient breadth and clarity so that reviewers who are not specialists in the topic can still understand their importance?
• Are my research objective and research questions logically connected, researchable, feasible, and ethically acceptable?
• Do my research questions build on one another in a coherent way?

Theoretical Framework / Methodology

• Have I identified a theoretical framework and a methodological approach that will guide my study?
• Do I explain the research design and approach I intend to use to address the research challenge in my thesis, and is this reasoning explicit and well thought through?
• Are both the theoretical framework and the chosen methods clearly linked to my research objective and questions?
• Do my framework and methodology demonstrate an understanding of the relevant peer‑reviewed literature?
• Are my procedures for data collection and analysis well structured and clearly described?

Expected Contribution

• Do I outline a meaningful expected contribution that indicates both micro‑level (e.g., for a specific organization or context) and macro‑level implications (e.g., for theory, practice, or policy)?
• Do I explain how the study is expected to address or narrow a concrete knowledge gap?

Timeline

• Does my timeline specify dates or time windows for key milestones and deliverables?
• Are these milestones clearly linked to the goals I have set for the study?
• Is the timeline manageable and realistic?
• Have I allocated sufficient time to complete each phase of the project?
• Is the overall sequence of activities logical and consistent?

References

• Do I provide a list of current and relevant references cited in the proposal?
• Do I use the correct citation style (e. g., APA, as required)?
• Do I cite all references accurately and consistently?
• Have I consulted the department’s guidelines for academic writing in Information Systems?
• Do I draw on literature of appropriate quality (e. g., peer‑reviewed journals, established conferences, reputable books)?

Format and Structure

• Do my research questions follow a clear internal logic and build on each other?
• Have I read, understood, and applied the department’s reader/guide on academic writing (structure, formatting, citation, etc.)?

Additional tips

• Have I avoided filler words and vague formulations (e. g., “also”, “very”, “quite”) where they do not add substance?
• Do I use precise statements (e. g., “8 out of 10 respondents”) instead of vague terms like “many”?
• Have I set the proposal aside for at least a day and re‑read it with fresh eyes before submitting it (a simple step that significantly reduces errors)?