Search results

This article offers support and guidance for students undertaking a literature review as part of their dissertation during an undergraduate or Masters course. A literature review is a summary of a subject field that supports the identification of specific research questions. A literature review needs to draw on and evaluate a range of different types of sources including academic and professional journal articles, books, and web‐based resources. The literature search helps in the identification and location of relevant documents and other sources. Search engines can be used to search web resources and bibliographic databases. Conceptual frameworks can be a useful tool in developing an understanding of a subject area. Creating the literature review involves the stages of: scanning, making notes, structuring the literature review, writing the literature review, and building a bibliography.

This paper aims to examine the most commonly used categories of sustainability literature review regarding their purpose, nature, strengths, weaknesses and potential for impact. This paper also discusses the motivation, incremental contribution and framing that occurs by considering the research papers included in this Special Issue.

Given the paucity of clear guidelines for undertaking, writing and publishing literature review studies in sustainability research, this paper describes the main types and processes in conducting a literature review and emerging tools that can help advance the field.

This paper finds a variety of approaches in application with strengths and weaknesses, including the emerging role of software support, artificial intelligence and machine learning. This paper reviews the ethical implications of using emerging tools in the sustainability literature review methodology and their impacts on originality, authenticity and accountability. This paper discusses the seven carefully selected and meticulously reviewed articles in this Special Issue through the lens of these findings by specifically highlighting their purpose, strengths, weaknesses and practical and policy implications.

Through the systemization of ways to conduct meaningful literature reviews, this paper explores the significant relevance of the method in creating a basis of academic understanding and advancing future research that can have significant impacts on the industry. Through the discussion of the articles in this Special Issue, this paper highlights the practical and policy implications and limitations of literature reviews in sustainability research.

This paper highlights the purpose of literature reviews in identifying areas for further research and how the papers included in this Special Issue achieve this goal, i.e. how their findings possess specific positive externalities in summarizing and systematizing sustainability research.

This paper systematizes methods and processes for writing impactful literature reviews in sustainability research, particularly focusing on the use of emerging technology and the opportunities and challenges this may offer in this process.

Most papers and books on conducting literature reviews primarily emphasize achieving technical quality, ensuring reproducibility and validating results. Notwithstanding the need for technical excellence, there is also a need for relevance. The purpose of this study is to address that need and offer practical and constructive suggestions for enhancing the meaningful contribution of a literature review, thereby increasing its impact and relevance for publication.

In this conceptual paper, the authors explore strategies to enhance the relevance and contribution of a literature review. By clarifying the needs of diverse audiences and the principles of generating new insights, the authors provide a broad range of options without being prescriptive. Recognizing that every literature review is unique, this paper contrasts various approaches to offer flexible and adaptable guidance.

Literature reviews can be enjoyable to read and write, offering a wide range of substantial contributions that meet the expectations of readers and journal editors. This paper offers practical suggestions for prospective authors to make their reviews more relevant, invaluable and engaging, and summarizes these suggestions in a comprehensive checklist.

The paper is not exhaustive but rather complements prevalent literature review methodologies.

Existing literature offers limited guidance on enhancing a review’s contribution to science, academic inquiry and society. This paper fills that gap by providing both academic considerations and practical recommendations, drawing on the author’s extensive experience in reviewing and conducting literature reviews.

La mayoría de los artículos y libros sobre la realización de revisiones de literatura enfatizan principalmente la obtención de calidad técnica, asegurando la reproducibilidad y validando resultados. A pesar de la necesidad de excelencia técnica, también existe la necesidad de la relevancia. El presente artículo aborda esa necesidad y tiene como objetivo ofrecer sugerencias prácticas y constructivas para mejorar la contribución significativa de una revisión de literatura, aumentando así su impacto y relevancia para su publicación.

En este artículo conceptual, los autores exploran estrategias para mejorar la relevancia y la contribución de una revisión de literatura. Al clarificar las necesidades de audiencias diversas y los principios para generar nuevos conocimientos, los autores proporcionan una amplia gama de opciones sin ser prescriptivos. Reconociendo que cada revisión de literatura es única, este artículo contrasta varios enfoques para ofrecer orientación flexible y adaptable.

Las revisiones de literatura pueden ser placenteras de leer y escribir, ofreciendo una amplia gama de contribuciones sustanciales que satisfacen las expectativas de los lectores y editores de revistas. Este artículo ofrece sugerencias prácticas para que los autores potenciales hagan que sus revisiones sean más relevantes, valiosas y atractivas, y resume estas sugerencias en una lista de verificación integral.

La literatura existente ofrece una orientación limitada sobre cómo mejorar la contribución de una revisión a la ciencia, la investigación académica y la sociedad. Este artículo cubre ese vacío proporcionando consideraciones académicas y recomendaciones prácticas, basadas en la extensa experiencia de los autores en la revisión y realización de revisiones de literatura.

El artículo no es exhaustivo, sino que complementa las metodologías prevalentes de revisión de literatura.

大多数关于如何进行文献综述的文章和书籍主要强调实现技术质量、确保可重复性和验证结果。尽管技术卓越性至关重要, 但同样需要注重相关性。本文正是为了满足这一需求, 旨在提供实用且建设性的建议, 以增强文献综述的有意义贡献, 从而增加其发表的影响力和相关性。

在这篇概念性文章中, 作者探讨了增强文献综述相关性和贡献的策略。通过阐明多样化受众的需求和生成新见解的原则, 作者提供了广泛的选项, 而不是一味地指示。认识到每篇文献综述都是独一无二的, 本文对比了各种方法, 以提供灵活和适应性的指导。

文献综述可以既有趣味性又富有实质性贡献, 满足读者和期刊编辑的期望。本文为潜在作者提供了实用的建议, 使他们的综述更具相关性、不可或缺且引人入胜, 并将这些建议总结在一个全面的清单中。

现有文献对如何增强综述对科学、学术研究和社会的贡献提供的指导有限。本文通过结合学术考虑和实际建议, 弥补了这一空白, 基于作者在审阅和进行文献综述方面的丰富经验, 提供了独特的见解。

该文章并非详尽无遗, 而是对现有文献综述方法的补充。

Within the context of providing an indexing service to the review literature in science and technology, reviews are defined and six types of review literature described. The sources of review literature are examined and an attempt made to estimate the current annual output of reviews in specialist review serials, primary journals, conference proceedings, books, reports and secondary services. The total output of ‘good’ quality reviews from these sources in 1972 is estimated to be 22,000. The characteristics of review literature are examined for the purposes of automatic identification; a method of identifying reviews by using the number of references was found to be between 75 and 85 per cent effective at the 40 references level.

Management research is a discipline characterized by heterogeneity in viewpoints, the application of research to real-life problems in the organization and the multidisciplinary nature of research problems. The need for a good literature review is paramount in doctoral dissertations with a view to justifying research agendas and help interested scholars use synthesized organization of extant work. The paper aims to provide an overview of the types of review, pointers for effective review, evaluating sources of information, referencing the sources cited, and avoidance of plagiarism in writing literature reviews. The paper is intended to make doctoral scholars understand the importance of literature reviews, the organization and synthesis of ideas involved, and the rigor in detailing references and avoiding plagiarism to increase the quality of the finished output.

To overcome and solve the problems of all the research community, in this chapter we offer everyone to focus on the Planning, Operationalizing, Writing, Embedding, and Reflecting (POWER) framework of conducting literature review. The framework guides the scholarly community on how to create and evaluate literature review papers to overcome the merit dilemma on the contribution made by review papers. With the sole focus toward review of literature, we are pleased to present “Review of Management Literature (RoML)” and introducing the first volume. This chapter and volume answers the present tensions accruing in the existing literature as well as present strategies on bridging the gaps. The chapters included in the first volume belong to emerging research areas such as marketing, human resources, international businesses, supply chain management, artificial neural network, luxury consumption, financial technology (FINTECH), mergers and acquisition, social media platforms like Instagram, cultural diversity, services, sustainability, quality 4.0, entrepreneurial ecosystem, and dividend decisions. The first volume is going to be useful to scholars in exploring future research areas across business management disciplines.

Systematic literature review (SLR) papers have gained significant importance during the last years as many reputed journals have asked for literature review submissions from the authors. However, at the same time, authors are experiencing a high number of desk rejections because of a lack of quality and its contribution to the existing body of knowledge. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to offer guidance to researchers who intend to communicate SLR papers in top-rated journals. We attempt to offer a guide to buddy researchers who plan to write SLR papers. This purpose is achieved by clearly stating how the traditional review method is different from SLR, when and how can each type of literature review method be used, writing effective motivation of a review paper and finally how to synthesize the available literature. We have also presented a few suggestions for writing an impactful SLR in the last. Overall, this chapter serves as a guide to various aspirants of SLR paper to understand the prerequisites of an SLR paper and offers deep insights to bring in more clarity before writing an SLR paper, thereby reducing the chances of desk rejection.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) is a widely accepted guideline for performing a systematic review (SR) in clinical journals. It not only helps an author to improve the reporting but also assists reviewers and editors in the critical appraisal of available SR. These tools help in achieving reproducibility in research, a major concern in contemporary academic research. But there is a lack of awareness about the approach among management researchers. This chapter attempts to fill this gap using a narrative review of reliable online resources and peer-reviewed articles to discuss the PRISMA guidelines and recent amendments. The chapter further points out the limitations of PRISMA in the review of management literature and suggests measures to overcome that. This piece of literature introduces a reader to the basics of a systematic review using PRISMA as an instrument. One of the significant contributions is to delineate a seven-step strategy to attain reproducibility in the systematic review. The chapter is useful for researchers and academicians in the field of social science and management.

The paper provides an overview of research published in the innovation and operations management (IOM) literature on 15 methods for cost management in new product development, and it provides a comparison to an earlier review of the management accounting (MA) literature (Wouters & Morales, 2014).

This structured literature search covers papers published in 23 journals in IOM in the period 1990–2014.

The search yielded a sample of 208 unique papers with 275 results (one paper could refer to multiple cost management methods). The top 3 methods are modular design, component commonality, and product platforms, with 115 results (42%) together. In the MA literature, these three methods accounted for 29%, but target costing was the most researched cost management method by far (26%). Simulation is the most frequently used research method in the IOM literature, whereas this was averagely used in the MA literature; qualitative studies were the most frequently used research method in the MA literature, whereas this was averagely used in the IOM literature. We found a lot of papers presenting practical approaches or decision models as a further development of a particular cost management method, which is a clear difference from the MA literature.

This review focused on the same cost management methods, and future research could also consider other cost management methods which are likely to be more important in the IOM literature compared to the MA literature. Future research could also investigate innovative cost management practices in more detail through longitudinal case studies.

This review of research on methods for cost management published outside the MA literature provides an overview for MA researchers. It highlights key differences between both literatures in their research of the same cost management methods.

This chapter provides a roadmap for a systematic literature review built around the guiding questions of basic research design. First, we highlight the relevance and development of systematic literature reviews in tourism research. Second, we put the systematic review into perspective by outlining its characteristics and by clarifying the methodological assumptions. Third, we bring together recommendations based on previous research and review guidelines and present a step-by-step tutorial for a systematic literature review. From this chapter, readers will understand the foundations of systematic literature reviews, will be able to apply the methodology to their review projects and are introduced to further readings and best practice examples.