MGMT 8003M Week 2 Search Strategy Memo Example

Gateway to Doctoral Management Studies Walden University Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

This MGMT 8003M Week 2 search strategy memo example plans a literature search on whether corporate social responsibility pays, built so that the dissenting studies cannot hide. Walden MGMT 8003M asks new PhD in Management students to search like scholars, and the memo starts from a seed set of four cited works, two per camp, including the Orlitzky, Schmidt and Rynes meta-analysis and Jensen's argument for value maximization. A vocabulary table lists each camp's own terms, from stakeholder management to agency costs. The search log reports what each column returned in Business Source Complete and Web of Science, where the dissent surfaced, and why Margolis and Walsh appeared only once both vocabularies were combined. A rerun rule closes the memo, triggered by new terms or six months.

CourseMGMT 8003M Gateway to Doctoral Management Studies
WeekWeek 2
Paper typeSearch strategy memo
LengthAbout 520 words, 4 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolWalden University
ProgramPhD in Management
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for MGMT 8003M Week 2

1

Searching Both Camps: A Search Strategy Memo on Whether Corporate Social Responsibility Pays, Built From Each Side's Own Vocabulary, With a Log of Where the Dissenting Studies Turned Up and a Rule for When to Rerun the Search

Student Name

Walden University

MGMT 8003M: Gateway to Doctoral Management Studies

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title names the question, the memo's two-vocabulary method and the rerun rule that keeps the search honest.
2

Searching Both Camps: A Search Strategy Memo on Whether Corporate Social Responsibility Pays, Built From Each Side's Own Vocabulary, With a Log of Where the Dissenting Studies Turned Up and a Rule for When to Rerun the Search

The Question

Does corporate social responsibility improve financial performance, and for which firms? A search built from one camp's vocabulary finds mostly that camp's studies. This memo builds the search from both.

What this page is doingThe memo opens with the question so every search term can be judged against it.
3

Vocabulary Table

[after]

Terms were taken from the abstracts of a seed set: four highly cited studies, two from each camp, including the meta-analysis by Orlitzky et al. (2003), which found a positive association between social and financial performance, and Jensen (2002), who argued that firms should maximize long-run value and that stakeholder theory, by giving managers multiple objectives, leaves them unaccountable.

Table 1

How Each Camp Names the Same Subject

Proponents' termsSkeptics' terms |
Corporate social performanceShareholder value |
Stakeholder managementAgency costs |
Environmental, social and governance ratingsManagerial discretion |
Shared valueValue maximization |
Responsible investmentCorporate objective function |

Search Log

I searched Business Source Complete and Web of Science using each column separately, then combined. The proponents' column, limited to the past twenty years, returned several hundred records, and when I screened the first hundred titles and abstracts, a large majority reported positive or mixed-positive results. The skeptics' column returned fewer records, and a clear share of its first hundred argued that social initiatives divert resources from shareholders or reflect the preferences of managers rather than owners. I kept the screening sheet so a reader can audit how each abstract was classed. Combining both vocabularies with "financial performance" surfaced studies the single-camp searches missed, including Margolis and Walsh (2003), who reviewed the empirical literature and argued that the search for a link between social and financial performance had overshadowed the more important question of how firms should respond to social problems.

Where the Dissent Turned Up

Dissenting studies appeared mainly in finance and economics journals and in work on agency theory, which management databases index less heavily. They also appeared through citation searching: tracing who cited Orlitzky and colleagues critically surfaced methodological objections about measurement of social performance that keyword searches did not.

What this page is doingThe log records where dissenting studies appeared and what it took to find them, which is the habit the memo builds.
4

Rerun Rule

I will rerun the combined search whenever a new term appears in three or more abstracts I read that is in neither column, and every six months during the program. The rule exists because vocabularies drift; terms such as impact investing were rare a decade ago.

What I Would Have Missed

Had I searched only with proponents' terms, the literature would have looked nearly settled in favor of a positive link. The skeptics' vocabulary surfaced a different set of questions: whether social initiatives reflect managers' preferences rather than owners' interests, and whether positive associations reflect profitable firms spending more on social causes rather than social causes making firms profitable.

Next Step

The combined results will be screened by title and abstract against inclusion criteria, with excluded studies logged by reason.

Limits

Counting results by camp from the first 100 abstracts is rough, and some studies fit neither camp.

References

Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235-256. https://doi.org/10.2307/3857812

Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268-305. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556659

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403-441. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840603024003910

What the MGMT 8003M Week 2 instructions ask for

For the second week the course moves from self-assessment to searching. You are typically asked to choose a question in your area, design a search strategy for it, run it in at least two scholarly databases and document what happened. That means naming your keywords and their synonyms, the databases and why you chose them, the limits you applied and the number of records found. A strong submission also explains how you looked for work that disagrees with your expectation, since a one-sided search produces a one-sided review. Expect a memo or short report, often around two pages, with a table or log. Note anything you would change next time and when you would run the search again.

How the MGMT 8003M Week 2 example is put together

The memo states its question in two sentences, then sets out a two-column table of proponents' and skeptics' vocabulary taken from the abstracts of the seed studies. A search log describes running each column separately in two databases, screening the first hundred records of each and keeping a screening sheet so the classing of abstracts can be audited. A separate section reports where the dissent turned up: in finance and economics journals and through citation searching around the Orlitzky meta-analysis. The memo then explains what a single-camp search would have hidden, including the reverse-causation worry that profitable firms simply spend more on social causes. A rerun rule, a screening step and a short limits paragraph complete the document. Margin notes explain why each part is there.

Reading the MGMT 8003M Week 2 rubric

Points in the search memo follow transparency. A reader should be able to repeat your search from the memo alone, so missing databases, dates or terms cost the most. The strategy section is weighed for whether the synonyms reach beyond one school of thought; graders reward a deliberate attempt to find disconfirming work. The log is valued when it records counts and what was done with them, not just the final list of articles. Reflection on gaps, such as journals a management database indexes poorly, shows judgment. Precise, plain prose and correct APA references for every seed study carry the rest. Memos that list fifteen keywords without explaining how they were combined tend to fall to the middle of the scale for MGMT 8003M Week 2.

Common MGMT 8003M Week 2 mistakes, and how to avoid them

Students frequently search only the words they already use and then report that the literature agrees with them. Read the abstracts of two sources that oppose your view and copy their terms into a separate list. Record each run as you go, with the date, database, string and count, because reconstructing a log later rarely works. Try one citation search, following who cited a key study critically, alongside keyword searches. Keep the memo short and factual; the log does the persuading. If the databases feel unfamiliar, the Walden library's subject guides and a librarian consultation are worth an hour. For a model of the full memo, read the sample above, or ask a tutor to review your search strings before you run them.

Get a MGMT 8003M Week 2 example written to your instructions

Name your research area in a sentence and send the Week 2 memo prompt and rubric, plus the databases you can reach. A search memo with a two-camp vocabulary table, a logged search and a stopping rule arrives within 24-48h, and the first one is free. Every string is shown as typed, but the log you submit has to record searches you actually ran.

Request this week free All MGMT 8003M weeks Finished samples

More MGMT 8003M papers and PhD in Management samples

MGMT 8003M Week 2 questions, answered

Where can I find a free MGMT 8003M Week 2 sample paper?

A complete Week 2 search strategy memo on corporate social responsibility and financial performance is posted above with margin notes.

How many databases should the MGMT 8003M search use?

At least two scholarly databases is a common expectation; the sample uses Business Source Complete and Web of Science and explains the choice.

How do I find studies that disagree with my topic?

Build a second keyword list from the abstracts of opposing studies and use citation searching on a key article's critics.

What is a rerun rule in a search strategy?

A stated trigger for repeating the search, such as a new term in several abstracts or a fixed interval of six months.

Which seed studies does the corporate social responsibility memo use?

Orlitzky, Schmidt and Rynes's 2003 meta-analysis, Jensen's 2002 article on value maximization and later Margolis and Walsh's 2003 review.