How to Write a DBA Problem Statement
The problem statement is where most doctoral candidates stall out — not because they can’t identify a real problem, but because the program has exact structural requirements that aren’t obvious until you’ve already been rejected once. This guide breaks it down: the three-part structure, the required sentence formats, how to find supporting sources, and the specific mistakes that trigger committee pushback.
A problem statement isn’t just an introduction to your research. In the DBA and DSL programs, it’s a structured document with required sentence openings, specific parts in a specific order, and a literature support requirement that has hard rules about source recency. Miss any one of those elements and the whole thing comes back. Not with minor tweaks — with a request to restructure.
That’s the version most candidates find out the hard way. This guide is the version that helps you avoid that cycle.
What This Guide Covers
Why the Problem Statement Is So High-Stakes
Every other part of your concept paper — the research questions, the methodology, the research framework — is built directly on the problem statement. If the problem statement is vague, the research questions have nothing specific to answer. If the general problem is too broad, the specific problem can’t be defined. If the consequences are missing, the methodology can’t justify why a study is needed.
This isn’t just about formatting. It’s about logic. A well-built problem statement makes the rest of the concept paper almost write itself. A poorly built one creates a chain of misalignment that follows you all the way to Task 4.
The ADRP concept paper requires Task 1 approval before you can submit Task 2. If your problem statement has alignment issues, structural errors, or outdated sources, those problems don’t stay in Task 1. They ripple forward. Getting the problem statement right the first time — or fixing it cleanly in the first revision cycle — is the single most time-efficient thing you can do in the entire course. Read the program’s problem statement guide before you write a single sentence. Not after.
The Three-Part Structure You Must Follow
The problem statement is a single paragraph — under 250 words — but it has three structurally distinct parts. Think of it as an argument that moves from broad to narrow. Each sentence has a job. Swapping the order, combining parts, or skipping one will get the paragraph rejected.
That’s it. Three parts, one paragraph. The challenge is in the details of each one.
Writing the General Problem Sentence
The general problem sentence is the most controlled piece of writing in the entire concept paper. There is a required format. You fill in your content; you don’t invent your own structure.
“The general problem to be addressed is [problem description] resulting in [consequences].”
The problem description must name an overarching organizational leadership issue (DSL programs) or a cognate-related business problem (DBA programs). It cannot be phrased as a question. The “resulting in” clause must identify at least one specific, real consequence — not a vague claim like “negative outcomes.” Deviation from this structure, even minor rewording of the opener, is a common cause of rejection.
The Problem Has to Fit the Program’s Scope — Not Just Be a Real-World Problem
DBA programs require the general problem to be a business or cognate-related issue — think leadership effectiveness, change management, talent retention, operational strategy, financial decision-making. DSL programs require an organizational leadership focus. The problem also has to be something that exists at a problematic level in the current literature — meaning you need three peer-reviewed sources that confirm it’s happening, not just that the topic is studied.
A problem that’s real but not documented in recent peer-reviewed literature is not usable. The three supporting sources in Part 2 must exist and must be current. So before you write your general problem sentence, confirm that you can find three qualifying sources. If you can’t, change the problem framing until you can. This sounds backwards but it prevents you from building a problem statement on a claim you can’t prove.“The general problem to be addressed is the insufficient communication of change initiatives by organizational leaders resulting in decreased employee engagement, increased resistance to change, and higher voluntary turnover rates among frontline staff.”
Note the structure: specific problem description → “resulting in” → multiple concrete consequences. The consequences are measurable and specific — not vague. This is the level of specificity your general problem sentence needs.One more thing: the general problem has to be an overarching problem — meaning it exists broadly, not just in one specific company. That broadness is what the three supporting sources prove. The narrowing to one specific organization happens in the specific problem sentence, not here.
Writing the Specific Problem Sentence
The specific problem sentence is the last sentence of the paragraph. It takes the general problem — which exists broadly across organizations — and narrows it to the setting of your study. Same type of problem. Narrower scope.
“The specific problem to be addressed is the possible [narrowly focused problem] within the selected single case study organization possibly resulting in [potential consequences].”
The words “possible” and “possibly” (or “potential” / “potentially”) are required. The reason: you haven’t studied this specific organization yet. You’re asserting that the general problem may exist there — not that you’ve proven it does. Removing the hedging language changes the epistemological claim and will be flagged. The specific problem must also be a subset of the general problem — not a variation of it and not a different topic.
What “Subset of the General Problem” Means
If your general problem is about leader communication during change initiatives, your specific problem must also be about leader communication during change initiatives — just narrowed by industry, geography, or organizational type. It cannot shift to a different dimension of the same broad topic (like suddenly focusing on employee resilience instead of leader communication). The specific must be a smaller version of the general, not a cousin of it.
How Specific Is Specific Enough?
Add at least two of these: industry, geographic region, organization size, or the type of initiative or problem. “Leaders in mid-sized retail organizations in the southeastern United States” is specific. “Leaders in organizations” is not. The specificity is what makes the single case study design defensible — you need a scoped-down setting that one organization can represent.
“The specific problem to be addressed is the possible insufficient communication of change initiatives by leaders within the selected single case study retail organization, possibly resulting in decreased employee engagement and increased voluntary turnover among frontline staff.”
Same problem. Same consequences. Narrowed context (retail organization). Hedging language present. This is what the relationship between general and specific should look like.Writing the Purpose Statement
The purpose statement comes right after the problem statement paragraph. It’s technically a separate section in the concept paper template, but it has to align so tightly with the specific problem that they should feel like they’re answering each other.
“The purpose of this qualitative single case study is to [explore/understand] [specific problem in context].”
Use “explore” or “understand” — not “measure,” “evaluate,” “test,” or “analyze.” Those verbs belong to quantitative studies. The purpose must also name the design explicitly: “qualitative single case study.” This is the only methodology permitted in the ADRP program, and it must be stated here. Keep the purpose statement under 250 words. One paragraph. No introduction — just the purpose itself.
Read your specific problem sentence, then read your purpose statement. The purpose should describe studying exactly what the specific problem describes as a problem. If the specific problem is about leader communication, the purpose should be about exploring how leader communication affects [outcome] in the study context. If you find yourself writing a purpose that feels only loosely connected to the specific problem, alignment is already breaking. Fix it here before it compounds in the research questions.
Finding and Using Supporting Sources
Three peer-reviewed sources. Published within five years of your anticipated graduation date. That means you calculate the window before you search — not after you find sources you like.
Each Source Gets One Sentence in Part 2 — Not a Block Quote
The three supporting sentences in Part 2 are active-voice declarative statements in your own words. You report what each source found or argued as it relates to the existence of your general problem. You’re not summarizing the entire article. You’re pulling one finding or claim that directly supports the assertion that your general problem exists and has real consequences.
Avoid this pattern: “Smith (2023) studied leadership communication in healthcare organizations.” That tells us what the study was about — not what it found that proves your problem exists.Use this pattern instead: “Smith (2023) found that leaders in healthcare organizations who failed to communicate change rationale clearly experienced 34% higher staff resistance rates during restructuring initiatives.” That’s a finding that proves the problem exists and has a measurable consequence. That’s what Part 2 needs.
If your anticipated graduation is 2027, your sources must be from 2022 or later. If it’s 2026, they must be from 2021 or later. Articles published at the edge of the window (within a few months of the cutoff) may still be flagged by some reviewers. When in doubt, go newer. If you find an older article with the exact finding you need, search for more recent articles that cite it — there’s usually a newer study that builds on the same finding and falls within the window.
One practical search strategy: use Google Scholar with a custom date range, or your institution’s database with a “published after [year]” filter. Search for your specific problem keywords — “leadership communication change management employee engagement” — filtered to the last four years. Read abstracts before downloading. You want empirical studies with findings, not theoretical essays alone.
For methodology validation later in the concept paper, peer-reviewed articles on qualitative research and case study design are needed too. A good starting point: John Wiley & Sons publishes Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management — a peer-reviewed journal with empirical case study research that’s often directly citable for both methodology and substantive problem areas in business and leadership research. Use your library database to access it, not the full journal website.
Concept Alignment — The Test Every Sentence Must Pass
Concept alignment is the program’s term for logical consistency across all the major elements of the concept paper. But at the problem statement level, it’s simpler: every part of the problem statement paragraph must be about the same problem. And the purpose statement must describe studying that exact problem.
A fast alignment check: cover everything except the general problem sentence and the purpose statement. Read them back to back. Do they clearly refer to the same research focus? If yes — good sign. If the purpose statement could belong to a different study on a loosely related topic, alignment is off.
The Annotated Bibliography Requirement
Every source cited in your problem statement needs an annotation in Appendix A. Each annotation is 200 words. Most candidates write 200-word summaries and miss the point entirely. There are three required components — and all three have to be present.
Credibility + Summary + Problem Support. In That Order, With All Three Present.
1. Credibility: Explain why the source is trustworthy. Name the journal, confirm it’s peer-reviewed, mention the authors’ credentials if known, note the publication date. One to two sentences.
2. Summary: Summarize the article’s research question, methodology, and key findings in your own words. This is where most annotations spend most of their word count — but not all of it.
3. Problem Support: Explain specifically how this source proves that your general problem exists and that its consequences are real. Not how it’s related to the topic. How it supports the specific assertion you made in your general problem sentence. This is the component most annotations skip or blur into the summary. It needs to be its own section of the annotation, clearly written.
What Gets Problem Statements Rejected
Starting the General Problem With the Wrong Opener
“The problem this study addresses is…” or “This research focuses on the issue of…” — neither of these matches the required format. Even slightly reworded openers get flagged. Use the exact required opener.
Copy the Required Opener, Then Fill In Your Content
“The general problem to be addressed is [your content] resulting in [your consequences].” Don’t try to personalize the structure. The structure is fixed. What you own is the content inside it.
Stating the Problem Without Consequences
“The general problem to be addressed is the lack of change communication by organizational leaders.” No consequences named. The “resulting in” clause is missing. This gets sent back immediately.
Name Specific, Measurable Consequences After “Resulting In”
Name at least one concrete negative outcome — “resulting in decreased employee engagement, increased voluntary turnover, and reduced organizational performance.” Vague consequences like “negative outcomes” won’t pass. Make them specific.
The Specific Problem Is the Same Width as the General Problem
“The specific problem to be addressed is the possible lack of leadership communication in organizations.” That’s still general. “In organizations” is not a specific context. It needs industry, geography, or organizational type.
Add at Least Two Narrowing Dimensions to the Specific Problem
Industry + geography, or industry + organization size, or type of initiative + industry. “Mid-sized retail organizations in the southeastern United States” is specific. “Organizations” is not. Narrow it until a single organization could logically represent the setting.
Using Sources That Fall Outside the Five-Year Window
A source from 2019 submitted in a 2026 doctoral program is outside the window for most graduation timelines. It will be flagged. Age of sources is a mechanical check — reviewers will note the publication year.
Calculate the Window Before You Search — Not After
Know your anticipated graduation date. Subtract five years. Set that as the floor in your database search. If you’re borderline, go newer. A source from the last two to three years is safer than one right at the edge of the cutoff.
Writing the Purpose Statement With Quantitative Language
“The purpose of this qualitative single case study is to measure the relationship between leader communication and employee turnover.” “Measure” is a quantitative verb. The entire purpose statement will be flagged.
Use “Explore” or “Understand” — The Only Two Acceptable Verbs
“The purpose of this qualitative single case study is to explore how leaders communicate change initiatives and the strategies they use to gain employee engagement.” Exploratory verb. Qualitative focus. Required format intact.
Frequently Asked Questions
The problem statement is Task 1. Tasks 2 through 4 cover research questions, methodology, research framework, and the final concept paper assembly — all with the same level of structural requirements. See: DBA Research Concept Paper — All Four Tasks for the complete breakdown.
Before You Submit
Read the problem statement out loud after you write it. Does the general problem sentence describe a real organizational issue with real consequences? Do the three supporting sentences each cite a specific finding — not just reference a topic? Does the specific problem sentence use hedging language and feel like a narrowed version of the same problem — not a different one? Does the purpose statement use an exploratory verb and name the qualitative single case study design?
If you can answer yes to all four, you have a structurally sound problem statement. That doesn’t guarantee approval — your instructor may push back on the logic or the specificity of the problem — but it means you’ve cleared the structural requirements that most rejections are about.
The candidates who move through Task 1 cleanly aren’t necessarily the best researchers. They’re the ones who read the requirements first, built the structure correctly, then filled in their own ideas. That order matters more than it seems.
DBA Research Concept Paper — All Four Tasks · Dissertation writing service · Research consultant services · Research paper writing services · Citation and referencing guide · Annotated bibliography writing service
Need Help Writing Your DBA Problem Statement?
Our doctoral writing team works with DBA and DSL candidates on problem statements, research questions, methodology justification, and full concept paper development at every stage of the ADRP process.
Dissertation Writing Service Get Started