Week 5

Review of Related Literature

Learning Outcomes
1. Discuss the meaning and purpose of a “Literature
Review”
2. Identify the relationship between depth of literature
review with level of your research objectives
3. Identify the steps employed on how to start a
literature search
4. Conduct a critique of a literature
Questions your panel may want you to answer

❑ What are your research questions and why are you

asking them?
❑ Has anyone else done anything similar?
❑ What is already known about this topic?
❑ How might your research add to this understanding, or
challenge existing theories and beliefs?
 These are questions
that one need to have
a ready answer
and

https://encrypted-
tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRfbAOfPfPqCjEV4VR1yQFn_yUh9L2X_n9_1g78MFT0LBvBiknSIKVPT67r

that is only possible if one has done a respectable

amount of literature review!
 Doing a review is
difficult, at least at
first, specially when
library resources are
scarce.

http://www.visualphotos.com/photo/2x2886660/man_
sleeping_in_a_library_SMP0003194.jpg

It is, however, not impossible to come up with an

excellent literature review. We just have to know how!
 Literature Review
(The key to research novelty)

DO YOU THINK YOUR RESEARCH

PROBLEM IS GOING TO GENERATE NEW
KNOWLEDGE?

YOU PROBABLY WOULDN’T HAVE ANY

IDEA, UNTIL YOU HAVE DONE A
LITERATURE REVIEW!
 What is a literature review?

A literature review is a critical analysis of

scholarly articles or a published body of
knowledge
A literature review involves the following
activities:

❑ gathering,
❑ reading,
❑ summarizing,
❑ classifying,
❑ comparing, and
❑ evaluating existing literature.
 Note 1:
A literature review is a required part of grant and
research proposals and often a section in theses
and dissertations

Note 2:
In published articles, the literature review is short
and is a part of the “Introduction” – due to space
consideration!
Functions of the literature review :
1. Ensures that you are not “reinventing the wheel".
2. Demonstrates your knowledge of the research
problem and also the people who laid the
groundwork for your research.
3. Demonstrates your understanding of the theoretical
issues related to your research question.
4. Indicates your ability to integrate and synthesize,
and critically evaluate existing literature.
5. Convinces your reader that your proposed research
will make a significant and substantial
contribution to the literature (i.e., resolving an
important theoretical issue or filling a major gap
in the literature).
 When to start a literature review

• seed of a problem
Beginning

• as the research is being conducted

Middle

• manuscript writing
End
When to do a literature review

Beginning: seed of a problem

Main purpose:
a literature review in the proposal
writing stage is needed to establish
the context and rationale for your
study and to confirm your choice of
research focus/question
When to do a literature review

Middle: as the research is being

conducted

Main purpose:
the literature review keeps you in touch
with current, relevant research in your
field, which is published during the
period of your research;
When to do a literature review

Main purpose:
Needed when relating your findings to
that of others, and to identify their
implications for theory, practice, and
research. Perhaps, the further review will
provide better focus, than that in your
initial review.

End: writing the manuscript

 Advantages of doing a literature review
early on

❑ Shows what has and has not been investigated

in the research topic you want to investigate.
❑ Since all credible research studies have a short
literature review in the introduction you can
use these to jumpstart your literature search
❑ Put focus on your research problem and to refine
your research objectives
 Advantages of doing a literature review
early on
❑ To learn how others have defined key concepts
and theories and how these are reflected in the
operational framework/ methodology of the
research
❑ To show data sources that other researches have
used.
❑ To let you discover how a research project is
related to the work of others.
 Advantages of doing a literature review
early on

❑ To train you in synthesizing secondary

information
❑ The literature review will help you to
anticipate common problems in your research
context.
❑ You can use the prior experiences of others to
avoid common traps and pitfalls.
Steps of a Literature Review

5. Write the 1. Identify

review your
question

2. Search
4. Synthesize the
literature

3. Analyze
and evaluate
critically
 LITERATURE SEARCH for:

1. A MODEL REVIEW ARTICLE

AND

2. A MODEL PRIMARY DATA ARTICLE.

LITERATURE REVIEW STRATEGIES

A. “Model Article” Search

1. Go to the USL database EBSCOHost (from the library
or your own computer)
2. For model review article search :Type 3 Key Words +
“review” in Google scholar

3. Start search
4. Scroll through the list of “review”, articles and
read the abstract
5. Evaluate if the review article covers the topic you
have in mind. If it does, download, read, & evaluate
the full article.
6. Do #s 4 & 5 again for another review articles.
Evaluate 2 more if needed, but stop if you can’t find
any.
7. For model 1 data article search, remove “review” from
key words
8. Do #s 4-5 again. Initially, just review up to 10 articles.
9. Of this 10 articles, choose your one “model article”
(must have been published in a journal indexed by
Thomson-Reuters or Scopus).
NOTE: For engineering, computer science, chemistry &
pharmacy students, include patent database “Thomson
Innovation”.
Model article = the primary data article closest
to the topic you have in mind or which you
would like to replicate
Some guide questions in choosing relevant papers
❑ Particular research problem covered?
❑ Gaps in the knowledge of the subject?
❑ Is your intended topic/objective identified for further
study?
❑ Is there consensus/inclinations about the topic?
❑ Any significant researchers in this area?
❑ What are the areas under debate?
Some guide questions in choosing relevant papers
❑ Are these aspects similar to what you want to resolve?
❑ How might they impact your research?
❑ Any insights on appropriate methodologies for a
particular issue?
❑ What problems are encountered by the authors working
on issues similar to what you would like to work on?
 NOW,
YOU CAN PAUSE HERE AND DO THE
STEPS OUTLINED ABOVE.

OR,

FINISH THE WHOLE MODULE BUT DO

THE STEPS OUTLINED ABOVE
IMMEDIATELY AFTER.
LET US NOW ASSUME THAT YOU HAVE
EVALUATED AND CHOSEN:

1 GOOD “REVIEW” ARTICLE &

1 GOOD “MODEL” ARTICLE

OR

AT LEAST 1 GOOD “MODEL ARTICLE”!

 WHAT TO DO WITH THE
REVIEW ARTICLE

For those who are successful in having a

review article, congratulations!

Now you have a “model” article from which to

base your literature review!

Having a “model” does not imply a license to

“copy”.
 WHAT TO DO WITH THE
REVIEW ARTICLE

1. Read and ask these questions:

❑ What research question or questions did the
review cover?
❑ What concepts and theories were reviewed and
how were they interconnected?
You can make a mind-map of the review paper or
tabulate results of the analysis.
2. Take note of the most recent article included in the
review. Add related articles published between that
date and the current date. This is part of your
unique contribution!
3. Take note of the writing and organization style, you
may want to follow the same when you write your
own literature review.
4. Do #s 1 & 2 to another review paper you want to
consider.
 WHAT TO DO WITH THE REVIEW
ARTICLE

Again, having a “model” does not give you license to

“copy”.

You can follow the structure, style, and general

methodology of the model primary data article,

But, you have to introduced your own inputs!

 WHAT TO DO WITH THE REVIEW
ARTICLE

1. Thoroughly read the full article again from the

beginning to the end.
Then read again the following parts of the paper
a) objective – usually written in the last paragraph of
the Introduction,
b) methods, and
c) results and conclusion.
2. Evaluate again the replicability of the article by asking the
following questions:
A. Is the objective or research question similar to what you
want to have?
B. Could you replicate the methodology considering the
differences in the conditions of your intended research
locale?
❑ Do you also have access to the instruments and analytical
tools, including statistical tools that were used in the
model article?
❑ Do you fully understand the whole paper – it’s objective,
methodology, results and discussion, such that you could
picture in your mind the probable paper you would write
for your research project?
IF YOUR ANSWER IS YES FOR ALL THE
QUESTIONS ABOVE, THEN YOU REALLY
GOT A GOOD, USABLE MODEL!!

IF YOUR ANSWER (AND YOUR ADVISER’S

ANSWER) IS NO WITH RESPECT TO
REPLICABILITY OF METHODOLOGY, THEN
YOU NEED TO FIND ANOTHER “MODEL”
ARTICLE.
 IF YOUR ANSWER IS NO WITH REGARDS TO
THE LAST QUESTION, IT MAY STILL BE A
GOOD PAPER.

YOU JUST HAVE TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND IT

WELL. READ THE ARTICLE AGAIN. SEEK HELP,
YOUR ADVISER OR SOME OTHER
KNOWLEDGEABLE TEACHER MAY BE ABLE
TO HELP YOU
Steps in the review process

1. Scan the Conclusion and Recommendation

or Results and Discussion

Is the conclusion or results of the study, what

you envision as a probable conclusion in your
study? If yes, the paper is useful to you
Is there a recommendation?

If yes, take note of it, the recommendation

could lead you to a possible research question
that you would like to tackle.
2. Scan the section on methods. They may be
written as Materials and Method or Methodology.

If the methods section does not interest you or you

think it is radically different from that in your
model article, you will not be interested enough in
the full report to critically analyze its contents.

Do #s1 & 2, for all the literature you have

downloaded.
Evaluating each of the article selected.

❑ Select the first article you will review and read the
“body” indicated below
❑ read and mark the following
a. General problem and specific objectives
usually found in the introduction
b. Methodology or Materials and Methods
c. Findings or Results
d. Analyses
e. Conclusions and Recommendations
Evaluate the Introduction as to these:
a. writing style,
b. significance, and
c. documentation of earlier work.

Good article
▪ Clear writing style
▪ Problem and objective easily understood
▪ Progression of ideas is logical
▪ Background literature reasonably adequate and
correctly done.
Evaluate the Methodology as to these:
a. bias,
b. adequacy and appropriateness,
c. general replicability

Good methodology
▪ Removes or minimizes sampling bias.
▪ Appropriate and adequate in relation to the
attainment of the objectives.
▪ Contains enough information to allow another
person to replicate what was done.
Evaluate the Results as to:
a. clarity of the reporting style and
b. adequacy of data presented,

Good results
▪ Sample is adequately represented in the data
▪ Data given are what are expected from the
methodology and objective of the paper
▪ Data are presented in a clearly and organized
manner.
Evaluate the Analyses as to these:
a. Clarity
b. Connection between the problem and data analysis

Good analysis
▪ Comprehensible,
▪ Responsive to the data
▪ Congruent with all preceding material in the
article.
Evaluate the Conclusion as to:
a. Connection with results and analysis
b. Relevance
c. Usability

Good findings and conclusions

▪ Generated from the research
▪ Must not be “fatherhood statements” lacking
relevance to the specific problem at hand.
▪ Has a sense of finality and closure that is derived
directly from the problem.
Take note also, that the preceding criteria
will also be used to judge your written
study when you submit it for publication!
 Literature Matrix
MAJOR
BIBLIOGRAPHY OBJECTIVES/ MAJOR RECOMMENDATION/REM
NO. THEMES/VARIABLES METHOD
(APA FORMAT) RESEARCH FINDINGS/COCLUSION ARKS
QUESTIONS

2
ABSTRACT
Despite being often touted as a best practice to enhance
organisational performance, in reality, employee empowerment
practices have not been widely adopted. This paper combines
transaction cost economics with organisational behaviour and
resource‐based views to examine antecedents and outcomes of
empowerment practices, from both cost‐efficiency and
value‐creation perspectives. On the basis of a study of 99
multinational subsidiaries in China, we found that human asset
specificity, a key characteristic of employee–employer exchange,
related significantly to organisations' adoption of empowerment
practices.
ABSTRACT cont.
We also found that empowerment practices had a positive impact on
organizational performance, and they mediated the relationship
between human asset specificity and performance. In addition, results
showed that task interdependence strengthened the impact of
empowerment practices on performance outcome. The paper
contributes to research on empowerment practices by offering a
theoretically more comprehensive and balanced analysis of why and
when empowerment is good for performance, with the support of
empirical evidence.

Keywords: employee empowerment practices, firm performance,

human asset specificity, resource‐based view, task interdependence,
transaction costs theory
 Literature Matrix
Bibliography
Major Objective/ Themes/ Major Findings/
No. (APA Format) Methods Recommendation
Main Question Variables Conclusion

1 Yin, Y., Wang, To examine employee Descriptive- It was found that human Future research
Y., & Lu, Y. antecedents and empowerme Correlational asset specificity, a key on the
(2019). Anteced outcomes of nt practices, characteristic of relationship
ents and empowerment firm Questionnaires employee–employer between human
outcomes of practices, from performance were exchange, related asset specificity
employee both , human distributed to significantly to and firm
empowerment cost‐efficiency asset HR managers organizations' adoption of performance can
practices: A and specificity, of 99 empowerment practices. broaden the
theoretical value‐creation resource‐bas multinational It was also found that search for a range
extension with perspectives ed view, subsidiaries in empowerment practices of alternative
empirical task China had a positive impact on governance
evidence. interdepende organizational mechanisms.
Human nce, performance, and they
Resource transaction mediated the relationship
Management costs theory between human asset
Journal, 1–21. specificity and
performance. In addition,
doi:10.1111/174 results showed that task
8-8583. 12243 interdependence
https://onlinelibr strengthened the impact
ary.wiley.com/jo of empowerment
urnal/17488583 practices on performance
outcome.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
INTEREST!