Oponentura71511_francovt.pdf, 527.1 kB Stáhnout

Master´s Thesis Evaluation by the Opponent

Title of the Master´s Thesis:

Burnout Syndrome and its prevention among managers of LLC Dentsply Sirona Russia & CIS Author of the Master´s Thesis:

Bc. Alexandra Levina

Goals of the Master´s Thesis:

To analyse whether the top managers of a given company experience any symptoms of burnout syndrome and based on the outcomes of the analysis provide the company with relevant recommendations. (p.3)

Evaluation:

Criteria Description Max.

points

Points

Content 70%

Output Quality Results are well presented, discussed - substantiated, relevant and original.

They are of good practical relevance. The recommendatins could be more

specific. 20 18

Goals The goals of the thesis are evident and fully accomplished.

10 10

Methodology: Methods are adequate and used correctly in relation to pre-set goals. Would be useful to elaborate the questionnaire results statistically, present then

better, in complexity. 20 19

Theory/

Conceptualization: Demonstration of an in-depth understanding of the topic area (state-of-the- art) including key concepts, terminology, theories, definitions, etc. based on

a literature survey. Literature review. 20 20

Formal requirements 15%

Structure: The thesis is a consistent, well-organised logical whole. The introduction does not present the structure of the work, just the topic and goal,

mentioning the methods. 3 2

Terminology: Linguistic and terminological level si very good. 4 4

Formalities: Formal layout and requirements, extent, abstract presents only topic and

goal, not the steps and results, each appendix could start on new page. 4 3 Citing: Work with sources is very good, form of citations could be sometimes better.

4 3

Deliv ery 15 % Presentation

document: Is the presentation itself structured in a clear way? Is it appealing and easy to

follow? Does it convey the message efficiently? 5

Presentation skills:

Are you conveying the message efficiently and timely? Do you use

appropriate words, speed, tone of voice, gestures, movement etc. to express

your thoughts in a clear manner? 5

Argumentation: Are you able to readily and briskly react to questions or comments? Are you able to explain unclear parts and connect comments to relevant places in your presentation or parts of particular analyses? How well are you able to

defend to your ideas and recommendations? 5

100 0

Other comments:

Quality master thesis with actual topic. I appreciate the quality of theoretical part, its structure, the quality and detail information involved. The structure of empirical part could be explained at the beginning, linked to the goal, research questions etc. The number of the respondents is not clear – see the text and Tab12 (p.38), later it is ok ofcourse. Discussion could be deeper and the recommendations more specific. In general there are no essential critical remark. Formal shortcomings are mentioned in the table, to be more specific regarding the citations – citations with the title of original article (p.9) or literal citations without page of the original source (p. 5, 7). I do appreciate the language of the paper.

Questions or comments to be discussed during the thesis defence:

Could you elaborate some of the recommendation you have made, e.g. mindfulness. What recommendation is essential, where should the compady start and what should be next?

The name of the Opponent:

Mgr. Tereza Králová, Ph.D.

The employer of the Opponent:

KMPS, FPH, VŠE Date 12. 6. 2021

Signature of the Supervisor:

---