PhD Dissertation 101: Key Ingredients

Here’s what your examiners want (and need) to see 🎓

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewer: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | October 2025

TL;DR – What makes a great PhD dissertation?

A successful PhD dissertation isn’t about changing the world – it’s about consistently hitting the right ingredients. Here are the essentials:

🎯 Make a unique and meaningful contribution that moves your field forward.

🧪 Use a rigorous, transparent methodology that others could replicate.

📚 Engage deeply with the literature and show how your work fills a gap.

🗣️ Write clearly, present data effectively, and tie everything together coherently.

Nail these basics and you’ll not only satisfy examiners but also produce research you can genuinely be proud of.

Writing a PhD dissertation is not for the faint-hearted. It’s a marathon, and you’ll need more than caffeine and late nights to cross the finish line. But here’s the good news: there are clearly defined, predictable ingredients that make the difference between a passable dissertation and one that really shines.

In this post, we’ll walk through those key ingredients step by step. Along the way, we’ll look at practical examples so you can see how these play out in the real world.

Before we dive in, a quick disclaimer. These pointers aren’t tied to any one discipline. Whether you’re in psychology, engineering, or education, the basics are similar – but each field and university may weigh them differently. Also, we’ll use “dissertation” and “thesis” interchangeably. Some countries prefer one term, others the opposite.

Alright, let’s get into it.

🎯 Ingredient 1: A Unique, Meaningful Contribution

At PhD level, you’re expected to add something genuinely new to your field. That doesn’t mean rewriting the laws of physics or discovering a new planet. But it does mean contributing in a way that moves the conversation forward.

The contribution might be theoretical (developing a new model), empirical (offering new data), or applied (solving a practical problem). What matters is that it’s original and meaningful.

Examples of meaningful contributions:

Developing a new framework to explain employee burnout in remote work environments.
Applying an existing theory (say, behavioural economics) in a new context (for example, sustainability decision-making).
Producing robust empirical data where little exists (e.g., long-term studies in under-researched regions).

A good test is to ask: Would other researchers, practitioners, or policymakers care about this finding? If the answer is no, you may need to tighten your focus.

🧪 Ingredient 2: Methodological Rigour

Your methodology is the engine room of your dissertation. A shiny research question means nothing if your method can’t deliver trustworthy answers.

Rigour isn’t about choosing the “best” method. It’s about choosing the right method for your question and applying it properly.

What rigour looks like in practice:

Clear justification for why you chose qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods.
A sample that’s appropriate in size and relevance.
Ethical considerations fully addressed (consent, anonymity, etc.).
A transparent description of how you collected and analysed your data, so another researcher could replicate it.

For example, if you’re studying leadership styles in SMEs, you can’t just interview two managers you know personally and call it a day. Rigour might mean purposively sampling leaders across multiple industries, using validated interview protocols, and demonstrating inter-rater reliability in coding.

A practical way to check yourself: write your methodology so clearly that if you handed it to another PhD student, they could replicate your study step by step. If they’d get lost, you’ve got more work to do.

❓ Ingredient 3: A Clear, Focused Research Question

Think of your research question as the compass. If it’s fuzzy, you’ll wander in circles. If it’s sharp and precise, it’ll guide every step.

Bad example: “How does education affect society?”

Better example: “How do online learning platforms affect student engagement in UK secondary schools?”

Notice how the second version narrows the scope: it specifies what (platforms), who (secondary school students), and where (UK). That level of focus not only makes the project doable, but also helps you decide what literature, data, and analysis techniques matter.

A focused question also prevents “scope creep”, where you keep adding side investigations until your study becomes unmanageable. Keep checking back: does this new idea serve my central research question, or is it a distraction?

📚 Ingredient 4: Solid Literature Engagement

Your dissertation doesn’t exist in a vacuum. You need to show you know the debates, gaps, and current thinking in your area. This isn’t about dumping 200 summaries into a chapter. It’s about weaving a story. A story with a clear conclusion.

Practical steps:

Map out the key themes and schools of thought.
Identify tensions or contradictions in the literature.
Show where your work plugs a gap.

For example, maybe past studies on hybrid work focused on productivity metrics but ignored employee well-being. Highlight that gap, then position your study as filling it.

A strong literature review doesn’t just prove you’ve read widely. It convinces your reader that your project is necessary. If you can’t clearly show why your study adds something new, you’ll struggle to defend its value later.

🧩 Ingredient 5: Coherence Across Chapters

A good dissertation isn’t just a pile of chapters. It’s a coherent narrative. Your introduction sets the stage, your literature review builds context, your methods explain your approach, your findings deliver results, and your discussion ties it all together.

Ask yourself at each step: Does this flow logically into what comes next?

An example of misalignment would be promising in your introduction to study leadership in the tech industry, then presenting findings mostly from manufacturing. That raises red flags because it suggests the project drifted without acknowledgement.

One practical trick: write a one-sentence “thread” for each chapter that explains how it links to the next. If you can’t do this smoothly, you may need to tighten the connections.

🔍 Ingredient 6: Critical Thinking & Writing

PhDs are not about “what happened” but “why it matters”. Description is easy. Analysis is where you earn your stripes.

Instead of: “Most respondents agreed that remote work is stressful.”

Go further: “This suggests that current models of occupational stress may not fully capture the digital dimension of remote work. Here’s how my findings expand on existing frameworks…”

Critical thinking shows you can weigh up evidence, question assumptions, and make reasoned judgements. Don’t be afraid to highlight the limitations of your study or acknowledge contradictory findings in the literature. Examiners respect honesty more than blind confidence.

📊 Ingredient 7: Robust Data Presentation

Data is only as useful as it is understandable. If your findings chapter is a jumble of stats, tables, and quotes without structure, you’ll lose your reader.

Some practical tips:

Use tables and figures strategically, not excessively.
Provide commentary for every table or graph. Don’t just paste it and move on.
In qualitative studies, use direct quotes to illustrate themes, but balance them with your own analysis.

Think of yourself as a translator. Your job is to take messy data and turn it into a clear, persuasive story. A figure on its own won’t impress; the value lies in your interpretation.

🗣️ Ingredient 8: Clear, Concise Writing

We can’t ignore this one. A brilliant idea, poorly communicated, won’t land. Writing at PhD level doesn’t mean stuffing sentences with jargon. It means clarity, precision, and flow.

Practical writing checks:

Each paragraph should address one main idea.
Sentences should be as short as possible without losing meaning.
Define technical terms the first time you use them.
Avoid filler words (“very,” “really,” “quite”).

For example, instead of:

“It is important to note that the findings of this study indicate a potentially significant relationship between the constructs under consideration.”

Say:

“The findings suggest a strong relationship between X and Y.”

Don’t underestimate this ingredient. Many otherwise solid dissertations lose marks simply because examiners struggle to follow the argument.

🧭 Ingredient 9: Practical & Theoretical Implications

Examiners will ask: So what? Don’t leave them hanging. Show how your work matters – both in practice and in theory.

Here are some examples:

Theoretical: Expanding an existing model, proposing a new framework, or challenging assumptions.

Practical: Offering recommendations for managers, policymakers, or practitioners.

If your research on AI in healthcare reveals that doctors trust diagnostic tools only when paired with human oversight, the implication could shape both theory (human-AI interaction models) and practice (training programs for clinicians).

A simple structure for this section is to spell out three layers:

What my results mean for the theory
What they mean for practice
What they mean for future research

Detail these three bases clearly and you’ll be well set.

📑 Ingredient 10: Solid Formatting and Referencing

It might feel trivial after years of research, but sloppy formatting or inconsistent referencing can undermine confidence in your work.

Here’s a basic checklist to get you started:

Follow your university’s style guide religiously.
Keep a consistent referencing system (e.g., APA 7th).
Use reference management tools like Zotero or EndNote to reduce errors.

Remember: examiners are human. Typos and misaligned tables distract them from your actual contribution. Paying attention to detail here signals professionalism and respect for academic standards.