Assessment of Master Thesis – Opponent
Study programme:International Business – Central European Business Realities Academic year:2020/2021
Master Thesis Topic:Hospitals as place builders: economic and social impacts of hospital Author’s name:Jonathan Andrés Fernández Córdova
Ac. Consultant’s Name:doc. Ing. Zuzana Křečková Kroupová, M.A., Ph.D.
Opponent:Ing. Jitka Volfová, Ph.D.
Criterion Mark
(1–4)
1. Overall objective achievement 2
2. Logical structure 1
3. Using of literature, citations 1
4. Adequacy of methods used 2
5. Depth of analysis 2
6. Self-reliance of author 1
7. Formal requirements: text, graphs, tables 1
8. Language and stylistics 2
Comments and Questions:
The goal of the thesis, as stated in the text, is: ”to contribute with a deep understanding of the impact of Hospitals within the region where are established, considering the entire framework where this
organizations develop their activities”. Research questions are set in order to explore direct and indirect impact of hospitals as place builders. Two cities from different countries (Chile and Austria) are chosen to be examined more in detail and compared.
The diploma thesis is logically and very clearly divided into two main parts. The first part is the result of the author´s literature review on the topic of ”place builders”, healthcare systems, and chosen regional
realities. The second part introduces the methodology, secondary as well as primary research conclusions.
Limitations are also included. I highly appreciate beautiful visualisations.
The author provides the information on the secondary sources however detailed information on the quantitative primary research is missing. To be able to evaluate properly the objective achievement, adequacy of methods used and depth of analysis, more detailed information about the survey is needed.
Mentioned is the total number of received responses in the survey – 88, which in case it covers two samples seems rather low for quantitative research purposes. Interesting would be also the explanation on why in Chile the questionnaire was provided in their native language and in Austria in English?
Linguistic inaccuracies shell be eliminated (e.g.: ”some parameters that helps to explains”, pg. 14), interpunction by bullet points and text under all headlines shell be added (e.g. pg. 55,57). Dividing the sources within the references (e.g. separating the books and scientific articles) would make it easier to follow.
I highly appreciate the up-to date topic of the thesis which is connected to the sustainable development and reflects the real needs of chosen regions. It is a pleasure to see a thesis aiming at helping
policymakers within sustainable development and quality of life improvement.
My final suggested result ”2” reflects the above mentioned: mainly the need of providing closer information about the primary research, I see a potential to reach the best result ”1” based on the defence and
explaining all important details.
Questions to discuss:
1) Please, compare the two chosen countries according to the challenges for public health which are mentioned on page 31 (smoking rate, drugs, alcohol consumption etc.).
2) Please, explain more in detail the criteria according to which you considered your chosen cities to be comparable and relevant to be chosen for your research.
3) Please, explain more in detail the criteria according to which you created Figure 14 (how did you evaluate the power and interest).
Conclusion: The Master Thesis is recommended for the defence.
Suggested Grade: 2
Date: 20/08/2021 Ing. Jitka Volfová, Ph.D.
Opponent
