Feature Topic at Organizational Research Methods

Background and Motivation

With an ever-growing body of knowledge in various areas of management including strategic management, organization theory, international business, organizational behavior, and human resource management, there is an increasing need to consolidate, organize, and synthesize the existing knowledge (e.g., Collings & Doh, 2018; Durand, Grant, & Madsen, 2017; Ethiraj, Gambardella, & Helfat, 2017). Review articles play a crucial role in the development of an accumulated body of knowledge and in guiding future research efforts (e.g., Cropanzano, 2009). For example, many doctoral students work with literature reviews to get an initial and broad overview of research areas and current debates. Senior scholars also use literature reviews to shape new debates or shift research directions. They also serve a crucial role in building a body of knowledge that is foundational for evidence-based management that informs policy makers and practitioners (Briner, Denyer, & Rousseau, 2009; Rousseau, Manning, & Denyer, 2008; Rynes & Bartunek, 2017; Tranfield, Denyer, & Smart, 2003). For example, Briner et al. (2009) note that “systematic reviews have become fundamental to evidence-based practice and represent a key methodology for locating, appraising, synthesizing, and reporting ‘best evidence’” (p. 24).

The importance of review studies is reflected by the prevalence of several review outlets such as the Academy of Management Annals, Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, and International Journal of Management Reviews—all of which are highly influential publications according to the ISI Citations Report. Highly influential are also the Journal of Management (JOM) special review issues that are published biannually. Recently, several other journals have adopted JOM’s approach and have launched regular review issues. For example, the Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of International Business Studies, and Journal of World Business now solicit proposals for a special review issue on an annual basis. In addition to these dedicated journals and special issues for literature reviews, many journals occasionally publish literature reviews, including, among others, Academy of Management Perspectives, International Business Review, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management Studies, Leadership Quarterly, and Strategic Management Journal.

Yet despite the increasing importance of literature reviews to develop an accumulated body of knowledge and guide future efforts, little methodological advice exists beyond generic and/or editorial guidelines (Cropanzano, 2009; Denyer & Tranfield, 2009; Jones & Gatrell, 2014; Short, 2009; Tranfield et al., 2003; Webster & Watson, 2002). The lack of scholarly advice is problematic for various reasons. First, scholars and editors have repeatedly criticized methodological rigor in review articles. For example, one of the main reasons offered as to why papers were not considered suitable for publication in the International Journal of Management Reviews (IJMR) was “methods poorly explained or inappropriate” (Jones & Gatrell, 2014). In fact, many review articles provide little or even no information about the underlying approaches. As Adams, Smart, and Huff (2017) note, “Previously published reviews in [Management and Organization Studies] have to a great extent been poor in methodological reporting” (p. 446).

Second, the shortage of advice is in sharp contrast to the general availability and growing knowledge of methods and statistics related to other types of research in management and organizational studies (e.g., Aguinis, Ramani, & Alabduljader, 2018). As noted by Denyer and Tranfield (2009), “Compared to the wealth of texts on philosophical approaches to social science research and methods for empirical investigations, there are few instructional texts on literature reviewing” (p. 671). A few recent exceptions exist that exemplify the urgency for methodological advice (e.g., Adams et al., 2017; Gaur & Kumar, 2018). In light of the increasing importance of literature reviews in organization and management research, there is a need to advance our knowledge about the methodological approaches for conducting such research.

Aims and Scope

Against this background, the purpose of this Feature Topic (FT) is to turn a spotlight on methodological issues and approaches in literature reviews. Indeed, a variety of review studies and methodological approaches exist (e.g., conceptual, narrative, critical, etc.). This variety is also reflected in very different requirements for reviews that different journals have (e.g., AOM Annals vs. IJMR vs. JOM vs. subject-specific journals), which can create confusion and misunderstanding. While the plurality of review methods can be seen as a strength in management and organization research, it also presents particular challenges in terms of what constitutes a high-quality review and how researchers should approach the task of reviewing. These challenges are what motivate this FT.

We seek a variety of contributions that are aimed at providing methodological advice to advance rigor in various types of literature reviews. The contributions may refer to several of the following five broad categories concerning the process of conducting a review study: (1) purposes and review types; (2) data selection; (3) assessment and synthesis; (4) reporting and using the findings; and (5) evaluation criteria, validity, and reliability.

Submission Process and Timeline for this FT:

Completed full manuscript submissions for the FT are due by March 1, 2019. Authors may begin submitting manuscripts for the FT on February 1, 2019 (and not before that date). When submitting completed manuscripts, be sure to select from the dropdown menu the FT on Rigorous and Impactful Literature Reviews.