Response Assignment | Homework Help Websites

Post an evaluation of critical analysis within the context of a literature review, using your selected business research study as evidence for your assertions. Your evaluation should include the following:
• Briefly describe the study’s key components, such as purpose, problem, framework, and findings.
• Assess the study’s viability within a literature review, including characteristics like current knowledge, substantive data, and relevance. Be sure to include supportive examples.
• Explain how critical analysis of the literature on your topic (problem/phenomenon) can inform your view of the problem and your ultimate research philosophy. Be sure to include supportive examples.
Be sure to support your work with a minimum of two specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and at least one additional scholarly source.

Gregory

Continued operation of U.S. commercial nuclear power plants is dependent on the long-term viability of the reactors in operation and the ability of operators and manufacturers to construct new reactors. Construction costs and project schedule adherence is a critical element to maintain budget and prevent project delays. Lovering, Yip, and Nordhaus (2016) analyzed nuclear construction costs and related variables to determine the potential impact on future new construction reactor projects.
Key Components of the Study
Lovering et al. (2016) conducted a detailed analysis of global commercial nuclear construction projects from 1954 through 2015 through a quantitative methodology as described by Saunders, Lewis, and Thornhill (2015). The research included construction data from the United States, France, Canada, South Korea, Russia, and other European sources. The data analysis consisted of an evaluation of the overnight construction costs (OCC) of demonstration reactors, reactors before Three Mile Island (TMI), and reactors following TMI. Additionally, Lovering et al. (2016) normalized cost data to a 2010 reference point for consistency when comparing projects of various countries, and addressed long-term project financing impacts as well. The results of the study showed an increase in OCC for large-scale commercial reactors, especially within the United States. Lovering et al. (2017) proposed further study in areas such as schedule management.

Viability of the Study
The study is significant and has a broad scope, gathering information from construction projects to 1954, consolidating sufficient data to show cost trends. However, the conclusions of Lovering et al. (2016) have come into question through additional analysis conducted by Koomey, Hultman, and Grubler (2017). Koomey et al. (2017) submit that the data analysis techniques and comparisons between countries are inaccurate and data was utilized that substantiated Lovering et al. (2016) results. Additionally, Koomey et al. (2017) submit that Lovering et al. (2016) failed to provide the data sets used to base their research and conclusions, rendering those conclusions questionable. Further analysis of the raw data is justified. However, the trend results and the additional recommendations made by Lovering are worthy of consideration. Although I agree with a majority of the assertions of Koomey et al. (2017), Portugal-Pereira, Ferreira, Cunha, Szklo, Schaeffer, and Araujo (2018) validate the trends showing rising costs. Therefore, the Lovering et al. (2016) study is worthy of consideration.
Critical Analysis of the Literature
My proposed doctoral study problem will evaluate construction and operating costs and the lack of effective management interventions to maintain control of those costs. I submit that the initial burden of proof has to be that nuclear costs are out of line with similar large-scale projects. The Lovering et al. (2016) study consolidates global data and demonstrates rising costs, which is one segment of the argument. Critical analysis, as described by Saunders et al. (2015, p. 75), occurs through a comparison of the Koomey et al. (2017) rebuttal, and the complementary research provided by Portugal-Pereira et al. (2019). The three studies collaborate in a trending sense and support my assertions that costs are rising. Additionally, alignment exists between the research results and my practical philosophies, as cost competitiveness is a growing concern for nuclear power operators (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2018).
Conclusion
A literature review is a detailed analysis of the reference material associated with a specific topic of study and a synthesis of the conclusions and projections of the authors. The independent scholar utilizes the information in the reference material to gain an understanding of the topic through the knowledge and efforts of previous scholars and subject experts (Center for Research Quality, 2015). The literature review demonstrates the independent scholar’s mastery of the subject material and assures the evaluators the scholar can proceed with additional research and data analysis.
Greg Lindamood
References
Center for Research Quality (Producer). (2015). Literature reviews: Common errors made when conducting a literature review [Video file]. Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=NiDHOr3NHRA
Koomey, J., Hultman, N. E., &Grubler, A. (2017). A reply to historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors. Energy Policy, 102, 640-643. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2016.03.052
Lovering, J. R., Yip, A., & Nordhaus, T. (2016). Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors. Energy Policy, 91, 371-382. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.011
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (2018). The future of nuclear energy in a carbon-constrained world. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved from https://energy.mit.edu
Portugal-Pereira, J., Ferreira, P., Cunha, J., Szklo, A., Schaeffer, R., & Araujo, M. (2018). Better late than never, but never late is better: Risk assessment of nuclear power construction projects. Energy Policy, 120, 158-166. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.05.041
Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2015). Research methods for business students (7th ed.). Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Joshua

Components of the Study
The purpose of my doctoral research is to analyze the effect of leadership styles on employee engagement and retention in the United States Air Force. As defined last week, the target population for my Doctoral Study will be Active Duty and Reserve members of aviation units supporting combat coded fighter units. The critical components of the study will be an analysis of multiple organizations (primarily focused in Air Combat Command) and numerous subgroups to include senior leadership, front line managers and entry-level technicians. The problem will focus on leadership styles used and their effectiveness in employee engagement along with a focus on job satisfaction and leadership’s impact on retention.
After a search of the Walden database, I was able to locate numerous studies on leadership styles and its effect on employee engagement. Mula (2013), focused on the impact of transformational leadership, emotional intelligence and their ability to improve command climates, improve productivity and make a discernable impact on the effort to increase retention. This study provides a viable and substantive enough to include in my literature review.
Viability of the study
Doctoral students use a literature review to examine published research on a topic that applies to their focal area in their doctoral research (Walden University Academic Skills, 2015). Furthermore, Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill (2015), identified that scholars must cover a significant amount of literature to help develop an understanding of previous research.
When analyzing the study by Mula (2013), I have found significant parallels between the topic, problem statement, and framework of the study. The most significant area that the study emphasizes is the impact of transformational leadership on subordinates and the negative impacts of toxic leadership on employee retention in the military (Mula, 2013).
Critical Analysis of the Literature
The focus of critically analyzing literature is to constructively and critically develop an understanding of a subject and develop a clear argument about the published literature that could support your research question (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2015). A critical review of the study showed that the author found a correlation between poor leadership and members departing the service. This quantitative analysis provided insight into the techniques that could apply to my proposed research.

References
Mula, D. M. (2013). Examining emotional intelligence and transformational leadership within U.S. army national guard leaders (Order No. 3566508). Available from Dissertations & Theses @ Walden University. (1416422122). Retrieved from https://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/docview/1416422122?accountid=14872
Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2015). Research methods for business students (7th ed.). Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited.
Walden University Academic Skills Center. (2015). ASC success strategies: Critical reading. Retrieved from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/ASCsuccess/ASCcriticalreading