Improving Public Hospital Order Fulfilment Processes and Hospital-Supplier Integration in Jordan

Assignment Requirements: Dissertation


I had this dissertation previously written by one of your writers back in January, I just recently got the universities feedback, where i wasnt awarded a passing grade, but was asked to edit and resubmit ! I have attached all the required changes that need to be done. I am hoping that we could stick to the time frame and that I would have the Introduction before the 20th of this month. since that is when i am required to submit the first chapter.

Feedback and Recommendations

For Resubmission of MSC Thesis by 30th September 2014


1)            It is suggested you reframe your main question to ‘how successfully is SCI functioning in Jordanian hospitals?’

2)            Look at the hypotheses again. They are more like common-sense propositions. It would be better to reframe them into questions rather than hypotheses asking the question ‘to what extent…’ This will then enable you to develop and make your analysis more meaningful.

3)            You provided four objectives. The first three are essentially sub-objectives of the fourth. This is why your resulting framework on p. 59 encapsulated all of them and seemed so thin.

Research Methods and Analysis

4)            The limitation of research methods to a purely quantitative method (despite the superficially impressive quantity of statistical analysis) weakened the project.

As a result the final framework was short on concrete exemplification to describe the current situation of the hospitals and what they might do next.

Please try and provide this. The table of barriers (p.86) in the appendix would have offered an excellent opportunity for further exploration and for a much more practical conclusion to the work. It is a shame that this is buried in the appendix.

5)            It was not particularly clear how the analyses were conducted exactly, and not very clear that you were able to really critically respond to the data that she had collected. Please be clearer about how the analysis was conducted, and provide further discussion of what the results indicated. This will be easier when you have changed the hypotheses into questions as indicated above.

6)            Although the project is about supply chain integration, there does not appear to be any research from the perspective of the supplier; I would suggest contacting the suppliers to get some of their perspectives on the processes, and the difficulties they face, so that there is a more balanced perspective, either through questionnaire or interview.

7)            We were surprised that all your data was lumped together. An obvious approach would be to compare the two hospitals and to compare the different perceptions of the stakeholders in the hospital organization explored. The existing data could presumably have been categorized to allow for this.


Hence, it is suggested that you:


8)            Review the use of the data and provide a comparison of the two hospitals, and identify any different perceptions that stakeholders might have.

9)            Add some qualitative data through, e.g. interviews, to provide some concrete exemplification, including data from the suppliers.

10)          Identify from the data, the key areas that require further attention and provide more concrete detail about how to develop them.

11) Please include the research ethics form in an appendix in the dissertation.

Two more notes

12) There are some issues about the questionnaire in the appendix. It was claimed that the questionnaire was designed by the researcher but there is no information how it was done (e.g., why certain items included) and whether it was piloted before the actual research to test its applicability

13) There is a contradiction between the sampling method used and the data collection process. Ghina used a non-probability snowball sampling technique which is based on identification of the potential respondent by the previous one (she never justified why other sampling methods disregarded) but on the other hand she reported that she sent the online link of the questionnaire to the whole sample in one go. She also did not discuss how non-probability sampling method would affect the quantitative analysis that was carried out. All these raise issues about the validity and reliability of the results.


Please now keep to the following schedule:


Deadline for resubmission of Chapter 1, Introduction: June 30th

Deadline for resubmission of Chapters 1-3:                        July 30th

Deadline for resubmission of complete first draft:              August 30th

Deadline for submission of complete final draft:September 15th


Order Now