A framework for strict structured literature reviews within management research and management education: establishing a model for evidence-based management and increased scholarly interaction

Gunnarsson, Daniel A framework for strict structured literature reviews within management research and management education: establishing a model for evidence-based management and increased scholarly interaction., 2018 [Preprint]

[thumbnail of Article 2019 e-lis pdf.pdf]
Preview
 Text
Article 2019 e-lis pdf.pdf - Draft version
Download (321kB) | Preview

English abstract

Over the last decade, the systematic literature review has extended to management research and management education. The purpose of this paper is to present an alternative method named Strict Structured Literature Review (SSLR), to provide a robust selection of articles for starting a longitudinal study or as a fast reliable and transparent method reviewing literature for shorter work under a time-limit, for example research projects or educational assignments. A properly executed Strict Structured Literature Review will lead to the desirable outcome of connecting researchers, or students, with practitioners and create conditions for evidence-based management based on already existing research results. Using a Strict Structured Literature Review would create a publishing strategy where research funders return on investments (ROI) can be met through increased implementation of earlier research results in organizational decision making as well as extended scholarly communication. This is completely in line with the movement towards open science. At the same time, the method for Strict Structured Literature Review fosters a development within management education towards evidence-based management and scholarly interaction.

Item type: Preprint
Keywords: literature reviews, management research, management education, scholarly communication, scholarly cooperation, evidence-based management, knowledge management, university-industry collaboration, open science, systematic literature review, decision making
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BA. Use and impact of information.
F. Management. > FJ. Knowledge management
G. Industry, profession and education. > GD. Organizations.
G. Industry, profession and education. > GH. Education.
Depositing user: Mr Daniel Gunnarsson
Date deposited: 21 Jan 2019 09:08
Last modified: 21 Jan 2019 09:08
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/33791

References

Anderson, L. W. et al. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Argyris, C. & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Arksey, H. & O’Malley, L (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32.

Armitage, A. & Keeble-Allen, D. (2008). Undertaking a structured literature review or structuring a literature review: Tales from the field. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(2), 103-114.

Bero, L., Grilli R., Grimshaw, J. M., Harvey, E., Oxman, A. D. & Thomson, M. A. (1998). Closing the gap between research and practice: An overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. British Medical Journal, 317, 465-468.

Besley, J.C. (2015). What do scientist think about the public and does it matter to their online engagement? Science and Public Policy, 42, 201-214.

Boaz, A., Baeza, J., Fraser, A., & The European Implementation Score Collaborative Group (EIS) (2011). Effective implementation of research into practice: An overview of systematic reviews of the health literature. BMC Research Notes, 4, 212.

Bornmann, L. & Mutz, R. (2015). Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(11), 2215-2222.

Briner, R. B., Denyer D. & Rousseau, D. M. (2009). Evidence-based management: Concept cleanup time? Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(4), 19-32.

Durach, C. F., Kembro, J. & Weiland, A (2017). A new paradigm for systematic literature reviews in supply chain management. Journal of Supply Chain Management 53(4), 67-85.

Goodman, J. S., Gary M. S. & Wood, R. E. (2014). Bibliographic search training for evidence-based management education: A review of relevant literatures. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 13(3), 322-353.

Grant, J. & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26, 91-108.

Hambrick, D. C. (1994). 1993 Presidential address: What if the academy actually mattered? Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 11-16.

Kennedy, L., Cole, C. & Carter, S. (1999). The false focus in online searching. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 38(3), 267-273.

Leach, M. J. (2006). Evidence-based practice: a framework for clinical practice and research design. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 12, 248-251.

MacLure, M. (2005). “Clarity bordering on stupidity”: where’s the quality in systematic review? Journal of Education Policy, 20(4), 393-416.

McKinsey & Company. New insights for new growth: What it takes to understand your customers today. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/new-insights-for-new-growth-what-it-takes-to-understand-your-customers-today. (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/70L3fQyYb)

Mortensen, M. J., & Vidgen, R. (2016). A computational literature review of the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Information Management, 36(6), 1248-1259.

Nowotny, H., Scott, P. & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Malden: Blackwell Publishers Inc.

Nutley, S. & Davies, H. T. O. (2000). Getting research into practice: Making a reality of evidence-based practice: Some lessons from the diffusion of innovations. Public Money & Management, 20(4), 35-42.

Pawson, R. (2002). Evidence-based policy: The promise of realist synthesis. Evaluation, 8(3), 340-358.

Rowley, J. & Slack, F. (2004). Conducting a literature review. Management Research News 27(6), 31-39.

Rundall, T. G., Martelli, P. F., Arroyo, L., McCurdy, R., Graetz, I., Neuwirth E.B., … Hsu, J. (2007). The informed decision toolbox: Tools for knowledge transfer and performance improvement. Journal of Healthcare Management, 52(5), 325-341.

Samuelson, R. J. (1993). The death of management. Newsweek May 10, 55.

Schopfel, J., Vanacker, S., Kergosien E. & Jacquemin, B. (2018). Master’s theses and open scholarship: a case study. Digital Library Perspectives, 34(4), 276-287.

Sugimoto, C. R. & Lariviere, V. (2018). Measuring research: what everyone needs to know. New York: Oxford University Press.

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207-222.

Trinder, L. & Reynolds, S. (2000). Evidence-based practice: A critical appraisal. Malden: Blackwell Science Inc.

Vanclay, J. K. (2012). Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? Scientometrics, 92, 211-238.

Weiss, C. H. (1998). Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluation? American Journal of Evaluation, 19(1), 21-33.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS