Search results

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.

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.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the value of using a systematic literature review to develop an integrated framework for information and knowledge management systems.

First, the systematic literature review method is introduced, differentiating it from traditional literature reviews in terms of value-added and limitations. Second, this methodology is used in a research application focused on absorptive capacity internal capabilities with regard to the processes of acquisition, assimilation, transformation and exploitation. Third, an integrated framework for information and knowledge management systems is developed from this application.

The systematic literature review approach provides a rigor that can assist in reducing researcher bias while simultaneously enabling the definition of a precise scope of review, with a clear explanation of selection criteria with the objective to find and review all the studies that are relevant to the search definitions. As a research method, it effectively supports a qualitative, quantitative or mixed methodology.

This methodology was applied to one specific area of research. Specific limitations include the availability of articles in subscribed databases and the analytical capabilities of the tools used for text mining and analytics.

This paper demonstrates the usefulness of the systematic literature review methodology in developing an integrated framework for analysis.

Literature reviews help summarize the field of a research area and identify gaps to be addressed as part of a future research agenda. Many types of literature reviews can be undertaken, including narrative literature reviews, scoping literature reviews, integrative literature reviews, and systematic literature reviews. While every researcher has undertaken some form of narrative literature review, the more advanced types of literature reviews require careful planning and following well-established protocols. This chapter discusses the various types of literature reviews, with an emphasis on the systematic literature review. It details the steps required in conducting a systematic literature review and provides some practical tips to enhance the quality of such studies and their contribution to the research field.

This study aims to understand and a lay a foundation of how analytics has been used in depression management, this study conducts a systematic literature review using two techniques – text mining and manual review. The proposed methodology would aid researchers in identifying key concepts and research gaps, which in turn, will help them to establish the theoretical background supporting their empirical research objective.

This paper explores a hybrid methodology for literature review (HMLR), using text mining prior to systematic manual review.

The proposed rapid methodology is an effective tool to automate and speed up the process required to identify key and emerging concepts and research gaps in any specific research domain while conducting a systematic literature review. It assists in populating a research knowledge graph that does not reach all semantic depths of the examined domain yet provides some science-specific structure.

This study presents a new methodology for conducting a literature review for empirical research articles. This study has explored an “HMLR” that combines text mining and manual systematic literature review. Depending on the purpose of the research, these two techniques can be used in tandem to undertake a comprehensive literature review, by combining pieces of complex textual data together and revealing areas where research might be lacking.

Maintaining and improving productivity of product design and engineering processes has been a paramount challenge for design-driven companies, which are characterised a high degree of development of products and processes in order to meet particular customer requirements. Literature on this issue is fragmented and dispersed and a concise and systematic overview is lacking. Hence, it remains unclear, which methods are applicable for design-driven companies to improve the productivity of limitedly available engineering resources (a challenge companies and nations face currently). The purpose of this paper is to develop such a systematic overview.

An unusual approach was utilised by combining the outcomes from a systematic literature review and the results of a Delphi study. From both research approaches complementary and overlapping methods for improving the productivity of product design and engineering processes could be drawn.

The unique systematic overview presents 27 methods to increase the productivity, effectiveness and efficiency of product design and engineering processes of design-driven companies. Moreover, the study finds that methods for improving effectiveness are preferred over methods for improving efficiency and that limitations with regard to the availability of resources are often not considered.

During the development of the systematic overview, a lack of empirical evidence to assess the actual impact of productivity improvement methods was discovered. This shortcoming demonstrates the need for more conceptual and empirical work in this domain. More studies are needed to test and confirm the usefulness of the proposed methods.

Nevertheless, design-driven companies, which struggle to increase the productivity of their product design and engineering processes, can systematically select improvement methods from the overview according to their impact on productivity, effectiveness and efficiency. However, companies should keep in mind, whether effectiveness of product design and engineering can really be increased without considering limitations in engineering resources.

Therefore, the systematic overview provides a valuable map of the unexplored territory of productivity improvement methods for product design and engineering for both practitioners and researchers. For the latter ones, it creates directions for empirical investigations in order to explore and to compare methods for the improvement of productivity of product design and engineering processes.

The aim of this study is to find out the most common types of literature review and the accuracy of citing information related to topic in question among Saudi English as a Foreign Language (EFL) postgraduate students at Al-Baha University. This study also aims at revealing the quality of the literature review written by researchers.

This qualitative study used content analysis to investigate 15 unpublished Master of Arts (MA) dissertations written on EFL of Saudi context. They were analyzed qualitatively using criteria modified from Snyder's (2019) model which is considered a potential method for making theoretical and practical contributions of literature review.

The findings of the study showed that students favored the systematic review over the integrative. Additionally, data showed that students were lacking in paraphrasing and organizing cited information coherently and appropriately. Moreover, students' performance was better in design, conduct, and data abstraction and analysis criterion, whereas they seemed rather weak in structuring and writing the review criteria.

The significance of the study is to provide researchers with methodological guidance and reference to write a comprehensive and appropriate literature review. Based on the findings, this study concluded with some implications that aim to assist researchers in carrying out their studies professionally. Furthermore, the findings provide decision-makers in higher education institutions with important practical implications. In light of the study's findings, it is suggested to carry out further research investigating postgraduate students to find out their perceptions and attitudes regarding the quality standards of scientific research writing and the paraphrasing strategies.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the ability to researchers of using design of experiments (DoE) as a structured and systematic approach to performing systematic literature reviews. The authors demonstrate a simple case study illustrating the application of DoE in executing a systematic literature review on two popular topics in higher education: academic leadership and Lean Six Sigma.

The methodology involves the systematic literature review of linking academic leadership with terms such as Lean, Six Sigma, Total Quality Management, Maturity Model and Continuous Improvement. The main tool used to structure the systematic literature review is a Taguchi Orthogonal Array design, specifically an L16 grid and the method is verified by conducting another review, replacing the term academic leadership with simply leadership.

The approach identified at first no research papers linking the terms; however, when academic leadership was replaced with university, 19 research papers where discovered. The verification exercise, linking just leadership with the other search string generated over 1,000 results – demonstrating that the tool can find large volumes of articles if they exist, the search was completed for a ten year time frame – 2004 to 2014.

The case study focussed on a field which is known to have little current research and the verification exercise deliberately targeted a known large body of research. The authors will continue to use the approach and refine the technique over time.

This approach would help any researcher despite of their discipline to identify opportunities and gaps in the current literature.

The paper shows how DoE can be used in an academic research-based process. No other literature review approach currently exists which uses Taguchi approach to DoE to filter the search criteria.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse and evaluate the methodological structure of the lean literature, so that its characteristics and influence among academics and practitioners might be better understood. The authors define “methodological structure” to be comprising six categorical components: publication category, degree of methodological disclosure, research strategies and data collection instruments (DCIs), type of data collected and analysed and type of research informants.

This study is a systematic bibliometric analysis of the lean literature. It has a two-stage research design. The first stage involves the identification of the top 50 most highly cited publications on “Lean”, with the resultant reference details being entered into a focal population set (FPS) spread sheet. The second stage involves coding and adding the six component fields of the methodological structure for each of the FPS entries. Both citation analysis (CA) and publication counting are then used to analyse patterns in these six components of methodological structure.

The top 50 publications in the FPS represent over 52,700 citations. All are either journal papers or books, but books are the most influential. Based upon this FPS sample, the lean literature is found to be both largely atheoretical in nature and also methodologically weak. Over half of the FPS publications are viewpoint-type publications and 46% have no methodological disclosure. The lean literature is predominantly qualitative in nature. Where disclosed, the most common research strategy is the case study and the most common DCI is the interview. High- and mid-level managers are the most frequently encountered research informants, while shop floor workers are infrequently used.

This paper starts with the most extensive known systematic review of systematic reviews of the lean literature; the result of which is the characterisation of a number of gaps in this body of knowledge. One of these gaps is the lack of any previous CA. The paper then proceeds to address this gap by providing the first CA within the lean literature. This is also the most comprehensive known CA within the field of operations and supply chain management more generally. As a consequence of this analysis, previously unknown patterns and insights into the methodological structure of the lean literature are revealed.