Literature reviews can come in all shapes and sizes
Some less common ideas of what your literature review project could be turned into
How do you envision a literature review paper? Typically, first thing people imagine is a narrative that identifies the core theories and methods used in the field and summarizes the main findings of the literature, using qualitative approach to the analysis.
While this is indeed a traditional type of a literature review, it is not the only way it may look like. There are other ways how you can make an interesting contribution based on existing literature, or the data that comes from the existing literature – and I suggest the papers you review are to be treated as data.
Indeed, literature reviews can come in different shapes and sizes. In this blog post I’d like to share with you a few examples I find interesting and inspiring.
Meta-analysis … for both quantitative and qualitative research(ers)
Meta-analysis is often seen as a quantitative empirical study. I think it actually is a type of a literature review study - because it uses previously published studies as a dataset. So if your field of study is mature enough to offer lots of previous empirical work, and you love quantitative analysis, this could be your form of a literature review. For example, Pichler (2012) identified three different competing theoretical models in their field (reactions to performance appraisal), and asked a provocative question: which of them really works? To answer this question, they went back to existent empirical studies on the topic and, using them as a dataset, ran a meta-analysis to test which of three models fits best with the past data.
I often hear that meta-analytical approach works only for quantitative data, and hence qualitative researchers rule this option out for themselves. However, if we talk about an approach rather than specific analytical procedures - you can do meta-level analysis even if your dataset consists of qualitative studies. Habersang and Reihlen (in press) offer a framework that will guide you through the core decisions and methodological choices of doing a qualitative meta-study.
Habersang et al. (2019) provide an illustration of such a study as they integrate previously published single-case studies to develop a process model of organizational failure. They describe in detail their methodological approach, so their paper can serve as a template if you would like to do a qualitative meta-analysis - and you can find more examples of such studies reviewed in Habersang and Reihlen (in press).
Leverage your qualitative findings with some quantitative methods of analysis
You do not have to be a meta-analysis wizard to integrate some quantitative methods of analysis into your literature review paper - and potentially enhance the rigor of your conclusions. You can combine qualitative and quantitative methods of data analysis in one paper, and the quantitative aspect does not have to be too sophisticated.
For example, O’Higgins et al. (2021) first did a more traditional qualitative content analysis of the existing literature, to identify a list of challenges professional services firms face in their internationalization process, as well as characteristics of these firms. Then, they used Pearson’s chi-squared (χ²) goodness of fit test to explore whether the challenges they found in the literature correlate with some of the firm’s characteristics.
Meta-review
One of the recommendations that you hear when you consider writing a literature review on a specific topic, is to check if someone has already done this before. Indeed, if the topic is very mature, it is likely that it has been reviewed already – and maybe several times. In this situation, it is challenging to carve out a space for contribution of yet one more literature review. However, if you already found a few published literature reviews on your topic, it should not necessarily stop you from working on another one.
For inspiration, check a paper by Jiang & Messersmith (2018). Their field – strategic human resource management - is very mature, and well-saturated with literature reviews. Indeed, Jiang & Messersmith (2018) were able to identify 68 review articles about strategic HRM – 64 conceptual reviews and 4 meta-analyses (thus supporting my argument that meta-analysis is a type of literature review). So, instead of doing another “usual” literature review, they did a review of literature reviews in this field. They call it a “meta-review”.
Big-data analysis and visual mapping
Another approach you could use for reviewing the fields that are mature is to apply bibliometric methods and visual tools for mapping the field. Markoulli et al. (2017) provide an example of such an approach that enabled them to analyze over 12000 articles in human resource management field. As they put it, it allowed them to see the “forest” as a whole, instead of individual “trees”. An interesting twist to their analysis is that they contrast the dominant themes in academic scholarship with the themes that dominate the practitioner-oriented outlet in the same discipline.
I hope these examples give you some new ideas of what you could turn your literature review project into. If you have some other examples of less-common approaches to a literature review paper, I’d be grateful if you could share.
References
- Habersang, S., Küberling‐Jost, J., Reihlen, M. & Seckler, C. (2019). A Process Perspective on Organizational Failure: A Qualitative Meta‐Analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 56: 19-56.
- Habersang, S. & Reihlen, M. (in press). Advancing qualitative meta-studies (QMS): Current practices and reflective guidelines for synthesizing qualitative research. Organizational Research Methods.
- Jiang, K., & Messersmith, J. (2018). On the Shoulders of Giants: A Meta-review of Strategic Human Resource Management. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(1): 6-33
- Markoulli, M., Lee, C.I.S.G., Byington,E., & Felps, W.A. (2017) Mapping Human Resource Management: Reviewing the field and charting future directions, Human Resource Management Review, 27(3): 367-396.
- O’Higgins, C., Andreeva, T., & Aramburu Goya, N. (2021). International management challenges of professional service firms: a synthesis of the literature. Review of International Business and Strategy, 31(4): 596-621.
- Pichler, S. (2012). The Social Context of Performance Appraisal and Appraisal Reactions: A Meta-Analysis. Human Resource Management, 51: 709–732.
Related video
Related blogposts
- Resources on doing a literature review
- Want to publish a literature review? Think of it as an empirical paper
- Do you really want to publish your literature review? Advice for PhD students
- How to keep up-to-date with the literature, but avoid information overload?
- Using Publish or Perish to do a literature review
- How to conduct a longitudinal literature review?
- New: Publish or Perish now also exports abstracts
- A framework for your literature review article: where to find one?
- Is a literature review publication a low-cost project?
Find the resources on my website useful?
I cover all the expenses of operating my website privately. If you enjoyed this post and want to support me in maintaining my website, consider buying a copy of one of my books (see below) or supporting the Publish or Perish software.
Aug 2022: Only £5.95... |
Nov 2022: Only £5.95... |
Feb 2023: Only £5.95... |
May 2023: Only £5.95... |
August 2023: Only £9.99... |
Copyright © 2024 Tatiana Andreeva. All rights reserved. Page last modified on Mon 13 May 2024 17:06
Tatiana Andreeva is Associate Professor in Management and Organizational Behavior at the School of Business at the Maynooth University, Ireland. She served as a Research Director for the School 2018-2023. Her research addresses the challenges of managing knowledge in organizations. For example, Tatiana seeks to understand why people share or hide knowledge (and why they don’t), and what managers can do to facilitate (or prevent) these behaviours. Her ongoing research projects examine the effects of the shift to hybrid work on knowledge sharing and collaboration in organisations – what challenges companies face and how to address them. Tatiana is also interested in gender aspects of knowledge behaviours. Tatiana teaches a range of organisational behaviour, knowledge management, evidence-based management, and research methods topics, including a PhD course on “Research problems, literature reviews and theory building in business and management research”.
