Ph.D. in Management

• A candidate desirous of pursuing a Ph.D. programme under ASBM University shall apply in the prescribed form and pay the prescribed fee.
• Selection for admission shall be made through a two-stage process, namely. written test and interview.
• A candidate has to qualify in any one of the following written tests for being eligible to be called for an interview:
• Qualified for fellowship/ scholarship in UGC-NET, UGC-CSIR NET, GATE, CEED or similar national-level tests;
• Qualified in the ASBM University Research Aptitude Test (ASBM-RAT) by securing at least 50% marks, provided that a relaxation of 5% of marks (from 50% to 45%) shall be allowed for the candidates belonging to SC/ ST/ OBC (non-creamy layers), Differently-abled, Economically Weaker Section (EWS) and other categories of candidates as per the decision of the UGC from time to time.

50% of the questions in the ASBM-RAT will be from research methodology and the rest will be subject-specific.

• Candidates qualifying in either of the above-said tests shall have to appear for an interview to discuss their research interest/ area through a presentation before the SRC. The number of candidates to be called for the interview shall be decided by the University depending on the number of Ph.D. seats available.
• Such interview shall consider the following aspects:
• whether the candidate possesses the competence for the proposed research;
• whether the proposed area of research can contribute to new/ additional knowledge; and
• whether the research work can be undertaken at the University.
• Performance in the written test [including UGC-NET and such other tests specified in sub-clause 3 (a) above], and interview shall carry weightage of 70% and 30% respectively. The candidates, who have qualified for fellowship/ scholarship in UGC-NET and such other tests specified above, shall be deemed to have secured 100% marks in the written test.
• A combined merit list will be prepared accordingly and will be notified after approval by the Vice-Chancellor.

• After successful completion of the course-work, Supervisors/ Co-supervisors shall be allotted to the successful candidates by the Vice-Chancellor on the recommendation of the SRC depending on the research interests of the candidates as indicated by them at the time of interview, the specialisation of the Supervisors, and the existing number of scholars with them.
• Only permanent full-time faculty members of ASBM University with Ph.D. degree can act as Supervisors. However, Co-Supervisors may be allowed from outside the University in inter-disciplinary/ multi-disciplinary areas on the recommendation of the SRC.
• A regular Professor or Associate Professor of the University with at least five research publications in peer-reviewed or refereed journals or a regular Assistant Professor of the University with at least three research publications in peer-reviewed or refereed journals may be recognised as Research Supervisor. The adjunct faculty members can act only as Co-supervisors, but not as research Supervisors.
• An eligible Professor, Associate Professor or Assistant Professor can guide at any given point of time up to a maximum of eight (8), six (6) or four (4) Ph.D. research scholars respectively as either Supervisor or Co-supervisor.
• Faculty members with less than three years of service before superannuation shall not be allowed to take new research scholars under their supervision. However, such faculty members can continue to supervise the research scholars, who are already registered, until superannuation as Supervisor, and thereafter as Co-supervisor, but not after attaining the age of 70 years.
• In case of relocation of a woman research scholar due to marriage or otherwise, the research data shall be allowed to be transferred to the university to which she intends to relocate provided all the other conditions in these regulations are followed and the research work does not pertain to a project sanctioned to ASBM University or to the Supervisor by any funding agency. Such scholar will give due credit to ASBM University and the parent Supervisor for that part of research already undertaken at the University.
• In case of any disability or death of a Supervisor/ Co-Supervisor, a suitable replacement shall be allotted by the University.
• If a research scholar desires to change the Supervisor/ Co-Supervisor or include a Co-Supervisor after allocation by the University, she/ he shall apply to the Controller of Examinations along with a consent letter of the proposed Supervisor/ Co-Supervisor and a “No Objection Certificate” from the existing Supervisor/ Co-Supervisor, and pay the requisite fee. Such change/ addition may be allowed by the Vice-Chancellor on a case to case basis and with the recommendation of the SRC.

• There shall be a Research Advisory Committee (RAC) for each research scholar with the following members, namely,

1. The Supervisor of the research scholar, who shall be the Convenor;
2. The Co-Supervisor, if any;
3. Two faculty members of the School (One, if there is a Co-Supervisor) having doctorate degree to be nominated by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor.

• The RAC shall have the following responsibilities –

1. To review the research proposal and finalise the topic of research;
2. To guide the research scholar to develop the study design and methodology of research and identify the course(s) that he/she may have to do;
3. To periodically review the progress of the research work of the research scholar and assist her/ him in the matter.

• After registration into the Ph.D. Programme, every research scholar shall undertake research work under the guidance and monitoring of her/ his Supervisor(s).
• All the research scholars, irrespective of discipline, shall be trained in teaching/ education/ pedagogy/ writing related to their chosen Ph.D. subject during their doctoral period. They may also be assigned 4 to 6 hours of teaching/ research assistantship per week for conducting tutorial or laboratory work and evaluations.
• Every research scholar shall submit half-yearly progress reports to the RAC and shall appear before it to make presentation of the progress in her/ his research work for evaluation and further guidance. The RAC shall review such report and then submit it, with its comments, if any, to the SRC for consideration.
• In case the research scholar’s progress is not satisfactory, the RAC shall record the reasons for the same and suggest corrective measures. If the scholar fails to implement these corrective measures, the RAC may recommend to the SRC, with specific reasons, for the cancellation of her/ his registration as a research scholar.
• The research scholar shall present a seminar in the School on her/ his research at the completion of each year after her/ his registration till submission of the dissertation.

• The Supervisor shall submit to the COE a list of eight external examiners, who are experts in the field and are not in the employment of the University. Such examiners should be academics with a good record of scholarly publications in the field. Such list shall be presented before the Board of Studies for consideration and recommendation to the Vice-Chancellor.
• The Vice-Chancellor shall appoint two external examiners out of such panel for evaluation of the dissertation, provided that she/ he may at her/ his discretion add any name to the panel or reject the entire panel and return it to the Board of Studies for re-submission. Wherever possible, one of the external examiners should be chosen from outside India.
• The dissertation shall be sent by the COE to all the examiners, including the Supervisor(s), after obtaining consent from the external examiners.
• Each Examiner, after examining the dissertation, shall submit a report to the COE in the prescribed format containing a clear recommendation whether in her/ his opinion:

1. The dissertation as such is acceptable and the viva-voce examination of the candidate may be held; or
2. the dissertation should be referred back to the research scholar for revision and resubmission; or
3. the dissertation should be rejected.

• The examiner shall not recommend conducting the viva-voce examination unless she/ he is satisfied:

1. that the methodology pursued by the research scholar is sound,
2. that the dissertation constitutes a contribution to the discipline
   characterised either by the development of new knowledge/ techniques or by re-interpretation of known facts, and
3. that its literary presentation is satisfactory.

• The COE shall act as per the recommendation of the external examiners. If the recommendation of one external examiner is positive and that of the other one is negative, the COE may recommend to the Vice-Chancellor for appointment of a third external examiner and act according to the recommendation of such third examiner;
• Provided that a recommendation is not to be considered negative if a revision is recommended and the revised dissertation is accepted by the concerned examiner;
• Provided further that if the revised dissertation is not accepted by the concerned examiner, the original and the revised versions of the dissertation shall be sent to a third external examiner and the opinion given by such third examiner shall be considered to be final.
• If the external examiners unanimously recommend that the viva-voce examination of the candidate be held, the COE shall, with the approval of the Vice-Chancellor, constitute the Board for Viva-Voce examination comprising the following members, viz.,

1. The Research Supervisor, who shall be the Chairperson;
2. At least one of the external examiners to be nominated by the Vice- Chancellor;
3. The Co-Supervisor, if any.

• A public viva-voce examination shall be conducted on a date suggested by the Supervisor in consultation with the other member(s) of the Viva-voce Board. It shall be open to the other members of the RAC, faculty members, research scholars, and students. It may also be conducted online. The COE shall issue the necessary notification in this regard.
• At the viva-voce, the Board shall satisfy itself –

1. that the dissertation submitted by the candidate is her/ his own work,
2. that her/ his grasp on the field of her/ his study is satisfactory, and
3. that the critiques, if any, given in the evaluation report by any
   external examiner are satisfactorily explained by her/ him.

• If the Board recommends that the candidate be awarded the Ph.D. degree, the COE shall place such recommendation before the President throughthe Vice-Chancellor for approval, and the result shall be declared thereafter.
• The entire process of evaluation of a Ph.D. dissertation/ thesis, including the declaration of the viva-voce result, shall be completed within a period of six (6) months from the date of submission of the dissertation/ thesis.