Undertaking a review of the literature is an important part of any research project. For research to be published it should advance of understanding through making a new contribution to knowledge.  Achieving this is dependant upon positioning your research in the context of an already formed body of literature.   A literature review provide a framework upon which your research is based, questions are formed, data are analysed and discussion / conclusions presented.

There are several purposes of a literature review.  It can help, 

• define and describe key concepts
• specify the focus, scope and boundaries of the research
• identify theories that can help explain important phenomenon
• show which research designs and methods have been employed
• bring attention to competing theories or philosophical assumptions
• develop a conceptual model
• obtain (through synthesis?) a “new” perspective on research problem
• highlight what we know and what we need to know, thus identify opportunities for future research
• justify propositions or research questions

1. No theory                                            
2. Concepts & operationalisation not aligned
3. Insufficient definition of theory  
4. Insufficient rationale for design              
5. Macro-structure - organisation & flow 
6. Amateur style and tone                        
7. Inadequate research design                  
8. Not relevant to field                             
9. Over-engineering of work    
10. Conclusions not in alignment      

What does this tell you about the role of literature reviews in academic publication?

In a more recent article in a different field McKercher (2007) found 50.9% of articles are rejected for poor quality literature reviews.  The top ten reasons for rejection are:

1. Failure to place the study in a broader context
2. Failure to establish a theoretical framework, if needed
3. Old and/or outdated sources
4. No critical evaluation of the literature
5. Literature review not relevant to the study
6. Poor referencing
7. Did not cite key sources
8. Too short / too long
9. Repetitive
10. Reference stacking (too many references for too few points being made)

What does this tell you about the features of a 'good' literature review?

References

Daft, R.L. (1985) "Why I Recommended that Your Manuscript be Rejected and What You Can Do about It," in Publishing in the Organizational Sciences, L.L. Cummings and P.J. Frost (eds.), Homewood, IL: Irwin, pp. 193-209.

McKercher, B, Law, R., Weber, K., Song, H. and Hsu, C. ‘Why Referees Reject Manuscripts’ Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 31, No. 4, November 2007, 455-470   

The text on this page was created by Dr David Denyer, Management Practice Fellow, Advanced Institute of Management Research (AIM), and Senior Lecturer in Organization Studies, Cranfield School of Management, david.denyer@cranfield,ac.uk