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 Old and/or outdated sources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 Professor David Denyer, Professor of Organizational Change, Cranfield School of Management,