THE DOCTORATE SERIES (7 OF 7) – THE VIVA

“…viva voce' (Latin for ‘by live voice') or oral examination.' Vitae.ac.uk.

"The goal of the Viva is to do two things: first to make sure you actually did the work; second, to clarify any points the examiners believe were unclear or missing from your thesis.’ Cranfield Faculty 

 

Welcome to my final blog in this informal guide to pursuing a doctorate in social research. I hope they have been useful. I have found them cathartic to write. I genuinely believe if I had read these before I did my DBA I would have avoided many mistakes. Now….. I may have found new mistakes instead…but that I will never know. 

In this last blog, I will focus on the mysterious and fear-inducing Viva. It is interesting that while the prospect of a Viva was ever present, I really only took a keen interest in what it was and how it worked in the last 6 months of my studies. My mentality, I suppose, was that there was no point worrying about something that might never happen! I had to get a thesis passed my University before I could face an external examiner. Happily, that day did come and so in the summer of 2017 I began to think about facing the Viva.

Let me share my thoughts on this in the following order: (1) What is a Viva and what role does it play in a DBA?; (2) How are examiners selected?; (3) How do you prepare for it?; (4) What to expect on the day, and; (5) What happens afterwards.

What is a Viva

The origins go back some time to the medieval clergy system of education which concluded with the master testing the apprentice to see whether they were worthy of standing on their own. In the current evolution, the Viva is different around the world. In the UK (where I did my doctorate), this remains a genuine hurdle and a real test.

There is a good deal written about the Viva. I found the Vitae.ac.uk website helpful.  I did not find the various newspaper articles (see these) about terrible Viva experiences at all helpful (and in reality that isn’t how it happened for me). I do think the experience will vary between executives doing a DBA and younger students doing PhD’s straight from undergrad. In particular, I suspect there will be differences between the natural sciences and social research. 

For me, the Viva is simply an oral examination to support your written thesis. Fundamentally, you get to go and talk to two examiners who have read every word of your thesis and have been paid to discuss it with you for 2-3 hours. As the expert on your thesis, this is actually quite fun if you can get past the natural anxiety which comes with there ultimately being a pass/revise/fail outcome. I would also say you should be confident…after all your school has passed you through their last stage gate…they wouldn’t do so if they didn’t think you have at least a fighting chance of getting a doctorate.

How are Examiners Selected

Well…this is blurry. Theoretically, you don’t have much say in this. Your school (in particular your supervisor(s)) should select these for you. There are two, an internal school examiner who has not previously seen your work, and an external examiner from a different school. Most people seem to worry most about the external examiner.

My experience was that I was asked if I had any ideas about external examiners. I didn’t really…but because of who I am I made it my business to try to find out. Here is what I did:

1 – Geography: I made an assumption Cranfield would only approve a UK situated examiner

2 – Criteria: I came up with the following criteria:

(a)  Methodology: Have they undertaken qualitative research (ideally ethnographic)

(b)  Family Business: Have they published on family business matters

(c)  Change: Have they published on organisational change

(d)  DBA: Have they supervised or examined other DBA students

(e)  India: Have they any exposure to India as a researcher or more personally

3 – Google Search: I then did a search as follows:

(a)  Targeted Universities: I searched about a dozen universities in the UK that I knew had DBA programs

(b)  Boolean Search: I did a standard search based on the key words in 2 (above) and a UK geography

4 – Rated and Sorted: I plugged the names from above into a spreadsheet and did a rating based on what I could read on their websites.

Here is my reflection…..DON’T do what I did!

I would say forget most of my criteria. You really want an experienced DBA examiner regardless of whether they have knowledge of your field. What you don’t want is someone who is an extreme opposite in philosophical method, who may also have strong opinions about your field of research. The problem with my search was I didn’t know these people. I had no idea whether they were experienced examiners or not. My advice is push your school to suggest examiners who they believe are familiar with your program and have conducted many Vivas. 

How to Prepare for the Viva

All I can do here is tell you what I did. I am not sure if this was the best approach or not. However, it largely worked for me. Here is what I did:

(1)  PowerPoint: You will be expected to do a 15 min ‘ice-breaker’ presentation. Challenge yourself to reduce your thesis to 4 PowerPoint slides. This exercise is incredibly helpful in sharpening what you think are you main points.

(2)  Remember the core criteria: In preparing your PowerPoint stick with the critical questions:

a.    What was the phenomenon you investigated?

b.    Why is it important?

c.     How did you investigate it?

d.    What did you find?

e.    Why and for who is it important?

f.     How does it make a contribution?

(3)  Read your thesis: I read my complete thesis about 10 times between submission and Viva. In the process, I found myself asking the following questions:

a.    What questions would I ask myself?

b.    How would I answer those questions?

(4)  Create a summary FAQ: These used to be all the rage 10 years ago…but if you reduce each chapter of your thesis to 3 or 4 Q&A’s what would they be?

(5)  Erratum: I made a list of the 40 typo’s I found during this period. They were mercifully minor but errors nonetheless. I had this with me just in case.

A good question might be, having now navigated to the other side of the Viva, would I change or add to the above? The answer is probably. What I found in my Viva was that we spent the majority of our time on:

(a)  The literature review: Why that literature, why not a wider search, was my conclusion of a gap reasonable and persuasive?

(b)  Definition of terms: Had I defined all my terms and concepts within the first 2 chapters rather than sprinkle them throughout the thesis.

(c)  Methodology: Had I covered everything in the methods section…in particular things like possible bias of respondents and researcher.

(d)  Contribution: Could I have made more of my data than I did.

So….if I had my time over again, I might go back and bolster my preparation on those aspects. 

What to Expect on the Day

So let’s start with a few logistical points:

(1)  My Viva started at 11am

(2)  The pieces I attended went for about 3 hours

(3)  It essentially had 6 parts:

a.    The examiners have a pre-meeting (about 30 mins)

b.    The chairman opened the meeting and asked me to do my presentation

c.    The examiners then questioned me chapter by chapter (this was 2.5 hours)

d.    I was asked to make a closing argument/summary

e.    I was then asked to leave the room while they discussed their decision

f.    I was invited back in to hear the outcome

This was all done in a meeting room on campus. It was however a very different vibe to the previous internal panel meetings. The introduction of an external examiner really did make the whole experience very different…quite formal.

In advance of the Viva, I was asked if I wanted my supervisors to attend. They are apparently, with examiner permission, allowed to sit in but not contribute. I chose to invite them and was happy I did. Even though they didn’t speak, their presence made me feel like I had support. Equally, they were fantastic in explaining what happened afterward. They could decode things.

Finally, let’s talk about 3(c) (from above) in more detail. This is where the examiners were getting their shots in and my/your job was to defend/explain. There were aspects of this that were a bit comical (I thought) and others that perhaps might be valuable lessons for others. Let me explain:

(1)  The serious bits: The examiners go through their questions largely based on their belief you may have missed something, or not been clear. They really weren’t concerned with minutiae. This is big ticket stuff. They read off notes they had made in the copies of the thesis my school had sent them. They had sticky labels highlighting their notes. They are signalling here, where having read your work, they believe you have left some holes.

My advice on these is to: (a) listen and don’t jump in. Its critical you let them explain and don’t assume you know what they mean. (b) Try in every case to ask them to clarify before you respond. (c) Be robust if you think you have covered the point or genuinely considered the point at some stage and rejected it. (d) In the event they raise a point that you hadn’t previously thought about and it does appear a gap…be careful. Think twice before accepting it. Remember, you’ve spent 3 plus years on this. Are you certain it is something that would have impact/influence? You can’t stop them from requesting a change but you can try to persuade them that their point, while legitimate, would not have any bearing on the findings.

(2)  The comical bits: My favourite comedy moment was  the following exchange:

“David…let’s have a discussion about your thesis. Yes? A conversation?....Now the reason I say this is…….”

This sentence was then followed by a 20 minute monologue on previous examinations and stories which did resemble a speech. I wasn’t sure what to do here but concluded that this would be less time for them to ask me difficult questions…so I listened dutifully.

(3)  The existential bits: I have not yet figured out whether this was a cunning test of my critical thinking skills or not but at one stage I was asked about dependent and independent variables. Bear in mind I conducted ethnographic research in a social constructionist tradition. Consequently, the points about variables were a red herring. I got flustered a bit on this but finally realised the right answer is that variables did not exist in my research as it was not deductive research. However for a few seconds I felt dizzy.

(4)  The frustrating bits: At one stage I was accused of being defensive…so I backed off a bit and let the examiner talk. Afterwards the chair of the panel said I was too passive and should have argued some of my points more vigorously. 

Overall, despite the above, I was fortunate. My Viva examiners were reasonable and, while like all good British academics somewhat eccentric, on the whole the discussion was fair and actually at times really interesting. You can’t help but to be on guard at Viva. It is an exam. The questions and answers have consequences. However, on several occasions I felt hearing from them on my research was genuinely insightful and fresh.

What Happens Afterwards

The Viva essentially has 4 outcomes. The first 2 are different forms of a successful defence. The thesis is either accepted as is, or with some minor changes. The third outcome is a revise and resubmit requiring a more formal secondary review with no guarantee of a pass. The fourth outcome…we don’t talk about.

My experience was a successful defence with some minor corrections. About 4 days after the Viva, I received a one page summary from the internal examiner of the agreed list of 5 corrections. It took me about a week to make those changes (and correct my silly typos) before sending it back in. For their ease of reference, I sent them two documents:

(1)  An Exec summary of the changes: Here I listed their suggested corrections, explained what changes I made, and gave them specific page references.

(2)  The updated Thesis: The full pdf of the new thesis.

A week later, I heard from the school that both examiners had signed off my doctorate. It was the first official email I had received that started…Dear Dr Oxley!

In Conclusion

In this blog I have focused on the Viva. Of all aspects of my doctorate, while the Viva was the big finale, it was not actually the toughest assignment I had to complete. By this stage, you are most likely ready and need to perform but you should know your stuff. The Viva did induce anxiety. I was nervous for the first 10 mins. But this, for me, was a matter of the thought of it being far worse than the reality.

Consequently, my main thoughts here are:

(1)  Examiner selection: Focus on getting your school to supply a list of examiners they have used before who they recommend who have a methodological fit with your research. Your supervisor should lead this for you.

(2)  Prepare a short PowerPoint: Stick to the basic questions. 

(3)  Don’t let your thesis get cold: Read it several times and make sure you know about any new literature published between thesis submission and Viva that could be relevant. 

(4)  Be reticent in jumping in: Be careful to get clarity about questions before jumping to an answer.

(5)  Try to relax: By now….you’ve got this!

And So Here the Series Ends

I hope you’ve enjoyed/got something from this informal guide to doing a doctorate. Thanks for taking the ride along with me. These blog posts were constructed from my DBA journal. In writing them they have taken me down  memory lane and allowed me to find some new ways to describe how it all felt. 

All that remains is for me to wish you the best of luck with your studies. We may never stop learning but they call a doctorate a terminal degree for good reason!

If you enjoyed this blog...why not check out my other musings by clicking here to visit my website.