91ÇàÇà²Ý

Preliminary examination

Request for preliminary examination

To initiate the preliminary examination of their doctoral thesis, the candidate must submit a preliminary examination request to the DPC via an online form. The request must be accompanied by an electronic copy of the thesis manuscript and a preliminary examination application form, completed and signed by both the candidate and the supervising professor. The request and all required materials must be submitted at least nine days prior to the DPC meeting at which the request is to be decided on.

A doctoral thesis that is based on a compilation of research papers must include a list of all the papers proposed to be included in the thesis and at least the names of the authors, titles and possible publication details of the papers. Papers that have not been published must be indicated as such.

If the thesis contains co-authored papers, the doctoral candidate is required to provide a written statement detailing their own contributions and the contributions of their co-author(s) to the co-authored papers. This statement will be made available to the preliminary examiners.

It is the doctoral candidate’s responsibility to ensure that all requirements for the doctoral degree, including any supplementary studies, have been fulfilled before submitting the thesis for preliminary examination. The candidate is also responsible for ensuring that their studies have been properly registered.

Preliminary examiners

In the pre-examination form, the supervising professor of the doctoral candidate proposes that the doctoral thesis manuscript of the candidate be accepted for preliminary examination and proposes two preliminary examiners for the thesis. The proposal also includes justifications for the selection of the examiners.

The preliminary examiners must hold a doctoral degree and have substantial scientific expertise and authority in the research area(s) relevant to the thesis. They should also be active researchers, with recent publications in the field of the thesis.

Individuals employed by the Aalto University School of Business and co-authors of the doctoral candidate’s research papers are ineligible to serve as preliminary examiners. Aalto University academic affairs disqualification guidelines in academic affairs apply.

The doctoral candidate must be given the opportunity to express their opinion regarding the potential ineligibility or lack of competence of the proposed examiners in the field of the doctoral thesis prior to the DPC meeting at which the proposal is acted on.

Upon receipt of the doctoral candidate’s preliminary examination request, the DPC will decide whether the manuscript is ready for preliminary examination. If so, the DPC will appoint preliminary examiners based on the proposal of the supervising professor.

The department secretary sends the preliminary examiners the doctoral thesis manuscript, a description of their duties as preliminary examiners and the schedule for the examination procedure. 

The preliminary examination process should not exceed three months from the date the preliminary examiners are appointed unless the examiners require significant revisions to the doctoral thesis manuscript during the process.

Preliminary examiners’ statements

The preliminary examiners are requested to submit a written and signed statement to the DPC as to whether the thesis manuscript meets the minimum requirements for a doctoral thesis. If so, the examiners must clearly conclude at the end of the statement that it is their recommendation that permission for the public defence of the thesis be granted. 

Preliminary examiners are expected to submit their statements within six weeks of receiving the preliminary examination materials

The preliminary examiners are permitted to propose changes or corrections to the thesis and to discuss them with the doctoral candidate during the preliminary examination. It should be noted, however, that the role of the preliminary examiners is not to serve as thesis advisors in the preliminary examination process. The supervising professor is responsible for mediating all communications between the preliminary examiners and the candidate. However, the preliminary examiners’ final statements submitted to the DPC cannot be conditional on the suggested changes or corrections to be made.

After the preliminary examiners have submitted their statements, the planning officer of the doctoral programme sends copies of the statements to the doctoral candidate, their supervising professors and thesis advisors.

The doctoral candidate must be given the opportunity to comment on the preliminary examiners’ statements prior to the DPC meeting at which permission for a public defence is to be decided.

Permission for public defence

The DPC grants permission for a public defence of the thesis based on the preliminary examiners’ statements.

After receiving approval for the public defence, the doctoral candidate submits the thesis for publication in the Aalto University Publication Series and arranges with the School of Business for public examination of the thesis.

The doctoral thesis shall be on public display at the School of Business for a minimum of ten days before the public defence occurs.

Preliminary examiners will be paid for their work by the doctoral candidate’s major subject unit or department after the planning officer of the doctoral programme receives the signed statements.

Appointment of opponent(s) and chairperson 

The DPC appoints the opponent(s) and the chairperson (custos) for the public defence and confirms the details of the public defence based on an ‘opponent proposal’ form (‘proposal for appointing the opponent and confirming the details of the public defence’) completed and signed by the doctoral candidate and their supervising professor. The form must be submitted to the DPC at least nine days before the DPC meeting at which the proposal is acted on.

In the proposal form, the supervising professor proposes the opponent and the details of the public defence (date, time, language, custos). DPC recommends that only one opponent is proposed, and normally, the supervising professor proposes one of the preliminary examiners to act as the opponent. However, in cases where the dissertation is particularly complex or interdisciplinary, two opponents may be appointed.

Serving as the chairperson at a public defence is considered a special honour. The chairperson oversees the proceedings and acts as host to the opponent(s). The doctoral candidate typically suggests that their supervising professor or another member of their advisory committee serve in this role. The chairperson must be employed by Aalto University.

The doctoral candidate is given the opportunity to express their opinion about the selection of the opponent(s) in the ‘opponent proposal’ form submitted with the supervising professor.

The doctoral candidate’s department is responsible for remunerating the opponent(s) and covering their travel costs. 

The public defence

Arrangements for public defence

The doctoral candidate should start preparations for the public defence as soon as they have permission from the DPC to defend their thesis. 

The doctoral candidate is responsible for ensuring that a person in the department will make travel and other arrangements for the opponent(s). 

The department secretary will send instructions regarding the proceedings at the public defence of the thesis to the doctoral candidate, the opponent(s) and the chairperson as soon as the DPC has granted permission for the public defence.

Proceedings at the public defence 

Doctoral candidates, the chairperson and the opponent(s) are usually expected to wear formal attire. Traditionally, this may include a tailcoat with a black waistcoat, a black suit, a long-sleeved black dress with a modest neckline or full academic regalia. Military uniforms may also be worn, though without decorations. However, all participants may choose to wear black or the dark attire of their choice that aligns with the occasion. The chairperson and opponent(s) may carry their doctoral hats when entering and exiting the auditorium. For the duration of the event, they place the doctoral hats on the table in front of them, with the lyre emblem facing the audience.

The audience enters the room and takes their seats before the public defence begins. The audience stands up when the doctoral candidate, chairperson and opponent(s) enter the room. The order of entry is as follows: first the candidate, then the chairperson and finally the opponent(s).

When the procession has arrived and the audience is still standing, the chairperson opens the public defence by saying, ‘As the chairperson appointed by the Doctoral Programme Committee of Aalto University School of Business, I hereby declare the public examination open’. The audience is then seated, and the chairperson introduces the doctoral candidate, the thesis and the opponent(s). 

The public defence begins with the doctoral candidate standing and delivering their lectio praecursoria. This presentation, which is limited to a maximum of twenty minutes, begins as follows: ‘Honoured chairperson, honoured opponent(s), esteemed colleagues and valued guests’.

The doctoral candidate concludes the presentation by stating the following: ‘I now respectfully invite you, Professor/Dr. [Name(s)], as the opponent(s) appointed by the Doctoral Programme Committee of the Aalto University School of Business, to present your comments on my thesis’.

With the doctoral candidate still standing, the opponent(s) rises/rise to deliver a brief opening statement, introducing the thesis and its significance within the field of research. After this statement, both the opponent(s) and the candidate take their seats, and the formal public defence begins.

In examining the thesis, the opponent(s) typically ask questions about the theoretical positioning, methodology and findings and about the specific contributions of the thesis to the field of research. They challenge the doctoral candidate to clarify and justify their choices, demonstrating the rigour and scholarship expected at the doctoral level.

Once the opponent(s) has/have examined the thesis, they rise to give a brief closing statement, with the doctoral candidate standing to listen. In the closing statement, opponents typically summarise the contributions, strengths and weaknesses of the thesis, and if they conclude that the candidate has successfully defended their thesis, they recommend that the DPC of Aalto University School of Business accept the dissertation.

While still standing, the doctoral candidate then thanks the opponent(s) for their comments, turns to the audience and states the following: ‘I now invite any members of the audience who have comments on my doctoral thesis to request the floor from the honourable chairperson’.

The chairperson presides. Their role is to keep audience comments reasonably brief and to the point and to guide the discussion between the audience and the doctoral candidate.

After the questions from the audience, the chairperson rises and concludes the public defence by declaring the following: ‘The public examination is hereby concluded’. The doctoral candidate, the chairperson and the opponent(s) then leave the auditorium in the same order and manner in which they entered.

Typically, the public defence will last between two and three hours, with the possibility of a short break if the chairperson deems it necessary.

Congratulations take place outside the auditorium.

Statement of the opponent 

The opponent(s) must submit a written statement on the thesis and the doctoral candidate’s performance in the public defence to the DPC within two weeks of the public defence. In this statement, the opponent(s) must evaluate the scientific merits of the dissertation and explicitly conclude whether they recommend that the dissertation be accepted by the DPC.

The doctoral candidate is given the opportunity to respond in writing to the opponent’s statement(s) within a time frame established by the School of Business.

Approval of the doctoral thesis

The DPC decides whether to accept or reject the doctoral thesis after receiving the written statement of the opponent(s).