| Course | MGMT 8920M Developing the Content Literature Review and Research Method and Design |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 6 |
| Paper type | Gap statement |
| Length | About 560 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | PhD in Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MGMT 8920M Week 6
A Gap That Repeating the Usual Study Would Not Close: A Gap Statement on Why Small Manufacturers Abandon the B Corp Assessment, Unpacked Into Its Three Parts, Tested by Asking Whether a Larger Survey of Certified Firms Would Fill It, and Placed Where Description Turns Into Argument
Student Name
Walden University
MGMT 8920M: Developing the Content Literature Review and Research Method and Design
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
A Gap That Repeating the Usual Study Would Not Close: A Gap Statement on Why Small Manufacturers Abandon the B Corp Assessment, Unpacked Into Its Three Parts, Tested by Asking Whether a Larger Survey of Certified Firms Would Fill It, and Placed Where Description Turns Into Argument
The Gap Sentence
Studies of B Corp certification have explained what certification means for firms that obtain it, drawing almost entirely on firms that completed certification, and so cannot show what leads small manufacturers that begin the B Impact Assessment to abandon it before certifying.
The Three Parts
The sentence has three parts, and each ties back to the synthesis drafted in Week 5.
What the literature has explained. Research on B Corps has examined what certification does for the firms that hold it. Gehman and Grimes (2017) studied why certified B Corporations promote their certification to differing degrees, and found that promotion depended on how distinctive certification was among a firm's peers. Parker et al. (2019) found that certification was associated with slower short-term growth for certifying firms, possibly because the process absorbed attention. Moroz et al. (2018) examined how a founding prosocial purpose shapes firms that go on to certify.
How it was studied. All three draw their evidence from firms that completed certification: their websites, their growth records or accounts of how they came to certify. The synthesis showed this pattern across the review, with surveys and interviews of certified firms the most common designs.
What it therefore cannot show. A body of evidence drawn from firms that finished the process cannot explain why other firms did not. Firms that begin the assessment and withdraw are absent from every data set the review found.
The Repetition Test
If the most common existing study, a survey of certified firms, were run again with a sample twice as large, would the gap close? It would not. A larger survey of certified firms would describe certified firms more precisely, but abandoners would still be absent, because the sampling frame, the B Lab directory of certified companies, does not include them. The same is true of a larger study of certified firms' growth or websites. The gap is a matter of who has been studied, not of how many.
The test also shows what kind of study would close the gap. It would need a sample of firms that began the assessment and stopped, and evidence about what happened between starting and stopping. Parker et al. (2019), who suggest that certification can disrupt firms internally, offer one possible explanation a study of abandoners could test: firms may withdraw when the effort of the assessment competes with running the business.
Where the Sentence Sits in the Review
This sentence marks the point where the review stops describing what is known and starts arguing for what should be studied. Everything before it summarizes and synthesizes; everything after it argues for a particular study. It belongs at the close of the synthesis chapter's final theme, after the section on certification outcomes, and before the transition to the method chapter.
The evidence a study would need is clear from the sentence itself: accounts from small manufacturers that started the B Impact Assessment and withdrew, ideally gathered with documents such as their partial assessment records, and compared with accounts from similar firms that completed it.
References
Gehman, J., & Grimes, M. (2017). Hidden badge of honor: How contextual distinctiveness affects category promotion among certified B Corporations. Academy of Management Journal, 60(6), 2294-2320. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0416
Moroz, P. W., Branzei, O., Parker, S. C., & Gamble, E. N. (2018). Imprinting with purpose: Prosocial opportunities and B Corp certification. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(2), 117-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.01.003
Parker, S. C., Gamble, E. N., Moroz, P. W., & Branzei, O. (2019). The impact of B Lab certification on firm growth. Academy of Management Discoveries, 5(1), 57-77. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2017.0068
The Walden MGMT 8920M Week 6 instructions
Week 6 asks for a gap statement of about two pages. Open with the gap sentence by itself. It should have three parts: what the literature has explained, how it was studied, and what it therefore cannot show. Beneath it, unpack each part and tie it to your synthesis draft, citing the studies that support it. Then run a repetition test: if the most common existing study were run again with a larger sample, would the gap close? Explain why or why not. Finish by saying where the sentence sits in your review, the point where description becomes argument, and name the evidence a study would need to close the gap. Avoid claiming a gap simply because a population or setting has not been studied.
How the MGMT 8920M Week 6 example is put together
The B Corp statement opens with its highlighted gap sentence. The section on the three parts summarizes what Gehman and Grimes found about promoting certification, what Parker and colleagues found about growth and what Moroz and colleagues examined about founding purpose, then notes that all three draw on certified firms. The repetition test explains that a larger survey drawn from the certified-company directory would still miss abandoners, so the gap concerns who was studied, not how many, and it links Parker and colleagues' disruption finding to a possible explanation. A final section places the sentence at the close of the synthesis and names partial assessment records and accounts from withdrawn firms as the evidence needed.
MGMT 8920M Week 6 rubric: what earns full marks
Most of the grade rides on the gap sentence itself, which needs all three parts, with the third following logically from the second. Unpacking each part with accurate citations shows the gap rests on the review. The repetition test earns substantial credit because it distinguishes a real gap from a call for a bigger sample. Placing the sentence correctly in the review shows understanding of how a review's argument works. Naming the evidence a study would need connects the gap to the method chapter. Statements that announce a gap without the "how it was studied" part, that rest on a single study or that fail the repetition test without noticing fall into the middle band.
Common MGMT 8920M Week 6 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Write the gap sentence in three clauses and check each against your synthesis. The middle clause, how the literature was studied, is the one students most often skip, and it is what makes the third clause convincing. Then do the repetition test honestly: imagine the most common study run bigger and ask whether it would answer your question. If it would, your gap is about sample size, which is weaker. If it would not, explain why in terms of who or what the existing studies could not reach. Two pages is enough. For a second test of your gap sentence, book time with a tutor, and the B Corp statement printed above runs the full test.
Get a MGMT 8920M Week 6 example written to your instructions
The gap statement is built from your Week 5 synthesis, so send that along with the Week 6 prompt and rubric. A three-part gap sentence for a parallel review, traced to its synthesis and put through the repetition test, arrives inside 24-48h and costs nothing the first time. What your own review leaves unreached can only be read off your synthesis.
More MGMT 8920M papers and PhD in Management samples
- MGMT 8920M Week 1: Discussion Post
- MGMT 8920M Week 2: Search Strategy
- MGMT 8920M Week 3: Literature Matrix
- MGMT 8920M Week 4: Theme Paragraph
- MGMT 8920M Week 5: Synthesis Draft
- MGMT 8920M Week 7: Method Fit
- MGMT 8920M Week 8: Sampling Plan
- MGMT 8920M Week 9: Data Collection Plan
- MGMT 8920M Week 10: Analysis Plan
- MGMT 8920M Week 11: Chapter Assembly
- MGMT 8910M Week 6: Feedback Log
- MGMT 8003M Week 6: Scholarly Argument
- MGMT 8900M Week 6: Alignment Check
- MGMT 8009M Week 6: Group Process Case
MGMT 8920M Week 6 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MGMT 8920M Week 6 sample paper?
Read the full B Corp gap statement above, from its highlighted sentence to the evidence it calls for.
What gap does the MGMT 8920M Week 6 sample identify?
Why small manufacturers that begin the B Impact Assessment abandon it before certifying.
What is the repetition test?
Asking whether running the most common existing study again, with a larger sample, would close the gap.
Why would a larger survey not close this gap?
Its frame, the directory of certified companies, does not include firms that abandoned the assessment.
What evidence would close the gap?
Accounts from small manufacturers that started the assessment and withdrew, with their partial records.