BRM Summary: 3.1 Aims and Objectives of A Review

BRM Summary
Chapter 3
3.1 Aims and objectives of a review

The purposes of scientific literature review:
 Establish the context of the problem or topic by reference to previous work
The first function of a literature review is to embed the current study in the existing structure
of knowledge. It allows the reader to understand much better which particular issue the
study addresses, where it contributes to the knowledge and how it relates to the
knowledge/other studies.
 Understand the structure of the problem
The embeddedness of management science and business studies within other disciplines
creates interdependencies between these fields of other studies, which means that, to
research a problem in management, it is often necessary to acquaint oneself with existing
knowledge in related disciplines (in social studies).
The literature review allows you to show the reader your understanding of the problem and
its structure.
 Relate theories and ideas to the problem
 Identify the relevant variables and relations
 Show the reader what has been done previously
 This is an important function of the review, because you cannot assume that every reader is
as knowledgeable about the field as you are. In such a summary and discussion of the
previous literature, you show which theoretical concepts others have applied to the
problems, what research designs and methods they have chosen to investigate the problem,
and the results they have found.
The literature review allows the well informed reader to assess at a glance how
knowledgeable the writer is.
Meta -analysis: allows you to investigate quantitatively which outcomes are supported by
most studies and which outcomes are more ambiguous. Further, you can identify whether
differences in the research set-up, such as sample size, different types of population etc,
explain differences in the outcome.
Effect size statistic: quantitative information for each study in conducting a meta-analysis.
There is one major concern regarding narrative literature reviews and that is whether the
literature reviewed is exhaustive and unbiased.
Systematic review process: Stage I: Planning (phase 1: identification for review need, phase
2 review proposal, phase 3: development review protocol) Stage II: Conducting review (phase
4: identification of research, phase 5: study selection, phase 6: study quality assessment,
phase 7: data extraction and monitoring, phase 8: data synthesis), Stage III: Reporting and
dissemination (phase 9: report and recommendations, phase 10: getting evidence into
practice)
 Show which theories have been applied to the problems
 Show which research designs and methods have been chosen
 Rationalize the significance of the problem and the study presented
 Synthesize and gain a new perspective on the problem
 Show what needs to be done in light of the existing knowledge
 General problems of literature review
Pulling together all the ideas that stem from different disciplines is often difficult, as authors
can be rooted in certain styles of thinking and writing that are specific to certain disciplines.
3.2 Assessment of a ‘good’ literature review
Ingredients of a good literature review
Basic:
 Literature mentioned and discussed relates to the problem statement of the study
 Mentions theoretical ideas contributing to the further exploration or explanation of the
study’s problem statement
 Summarizes previous studies addressing and investigating the current study’s problem
statement
Extra:
 Discusses the theoretical ideas mentioned against the background of the results of previous
studies
 Analyses and compares previous studies in the light of their research design and
methodology
 Demonstrates how the current study fits in with previous studies, and shows its specific new
contribution
3.3 Critical review

Most academic journals use a system called ‘peer review’ to decide which manuscripts they publish.
The editor of the journal will ask two or three other scientist who have published on related topics to
read a submitted manuscript and then write a review which will be between one and ten pages long.
This process is anonymous. Based on the reviewers reports the editor decides whether to reject the
manuscript or whether they invite the authors to revise and resubmit. Afterwards, the revised
manuscript is again sent to the reviewers and they will assess whether the changes made did
improve the paper.
The objective of a review is to assess the quality of a text and to provide a short summary. The typical
structure of critical review is:
1. Introduction
2. Summary
3. Critique
4. Conclusion
In the critique you mention weak and strong points and discuss these using specific criteria. Criteria
used in critical reviews:
 Contribution to the field
 Argumentation
 Methods and analysis
 Writing
3.4 process and organization

Writing a literature review is an iterative process of three tasks:
1. Searching information
Use bibliographic databases or indexes. There are 5 steps for literature research:
 Define your management dilemma or management question
 Consult encyclopaedias, dictionaries, handbooks and textbooks to identify key terms,
people or events relevant to your management dilemma or management question
 Apply these key terms, people or events in searching indexes, bibliographies and the
web to identify specific secondary sources
 Locate and review specific secondary sources for relevance
 Evaluate the value of each source and its content
In economic and business studies, the main problem is not finding literature that is related to
a certain topic, but filtering the really relevant and good literature, and distinguishing it from
irrelevant literature and dubious sources. Steps in literature search process: Step I: build
information pool, Step II: apply filter to reduce pool size, Step III: Rough assessment of
sources to further reduce pool size, Step IV: analyse literature in pool, Step V: refine filters or
stop search.
2. Assessing the information obtained
3. Synthesizing the assessment of information

BRM Summary: 3.1 Aims and Objectives of A Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BRM Summary: 3.1 Aims and Objectives of A Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BRM Summary: 3.1 Aims and Objectives of A Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BRM Summary

3.1 Aims and objectives of a review

3.3 Critical review

3.4 process and organization

You might also like