A Critical Look at the Practice of Literature Review
Main Article Content
Abstract
Despite the advantages of literature review and the abundance of texts that discuss it, there is still a gap in critical reflection on its methodologies and uses. My goal in this editorial is to reflect on the practice of literature review in the administration field from a critical perspective. The literature review I am referring to is not just a set of techniques for conducting it; it is a collective doing among scholars, producing specific knowledge. By drawing on concepts such as fad, methodologism, and decolonial critique, we can conclude that contrary to the common belief among researchers, following rigid protocols in literature review does not necessarily lead to new knowledge. Instead, it reproduces pre-existing ways of thinking about a topic, which can inhibit reflective and critical thinking about research findings.
Download data is not yet available.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Since mid-February of 2023, the authors retain the copyright relating to their article and grant the journal RAC, from ANPAD, the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0), as stated in the article’s PDF document. This license provides that the article published can be shared (allows you to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapted (allows you to remix, transform, and create from the material for any purpose, even commercial) by anyone.
After article acceptance, the authors must sign a Term of Authorization for Publication, which is sent to the authors by e-mail for electronic signature before publication.
References
914-929. https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-395155249
Abreu-Pederzini, G. D., & Suarez-Barraza, M. F. (2020). Just let us be: Domination, the postcolonial condition,
and the global field of business schools. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 19(1), 40–58.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2018.0116
Alcadipani, R., & Rosa, A. R. (2011). From grobal management to glocal management: Latin American perspectives as a
counter-dominant management epistemology. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28(4), 456–463.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.165
Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2020). The problematizing review: A counterpoint to Elsbach and Van Knippenberg’s argument for integrative reviews. Journal of Management Studies, 57(6), 1290–1304. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12582
Barros, A., & Alcadipani, R. (2023). Decolonizing journals in management and organizations? Epistemological colonial encounters and the double translation. Management Learning, 54(4), 576-586. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076221083204
Bell, E., Kothiyal, N., & Willmott, H. (2017). Methodologyas-technique and the meaning of rigour in globalized
management research. British Journal of Management, 28(3),534–550. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12205
Boschetti, I. (2015). Expressões do conservadorismo na formação profissional. Revista Serviço Social e Sociedade, (124).
https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-6628.043
Boussebaa, M., & Tienari, J. (2019). Englishization and the politics of knowledge production in management
studies. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30(1), 59–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1056492619835314
Boussebaa, M. & Brown, A. D. (2017). Englishization, identity regulation and imperialism. Organisation Studies, 38(1),
7–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840616655494
Chanlat, J. F. (2014). A língua e o pensar no campo da pesquisa em Administração: constatações e questões para os
pesquisadores que não utilizam a língua inglesa. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 54(6), 706-714.
https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020140610
Cooper, H. M. (1988). Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society, 1(1),
104–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03177550
Elsbach, K. D. & Knippenberg, D. (2020). ’Creating high-impact literature reviews: an argument for
“integrative reviews”’. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12581
Fan, D., Breslin, D., Callahan, J. L., & Iszatt-White, M. (2022). Advancing literature review methodology through
rigour, generativity, scope and transparency. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(2), 171–180.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12291
Foucault, M. (1987). Vigiar e Punir. Nascimento da prisão. Tradução de Raquel Ramalhete. Vozes.
Gherardi, S., Cozza, M., & Hoppe, M. (2023). “9: Academy in my flesh: affective athleticism and performative
writing”. In Affective Capitalism in Academia. Bristol, UK: Policy Press. Retrieved Nov 10, 2023, from
https://doi.org/10.51952/9781447357865.ch009
Gherardi, S. (2019). How to conduct a practice-based study. 2 ed. Elgar Publishing.
Horn, S. A. (2017). Non-English nativeness as stigma in academic settings. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 16(4), 579–602. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26400206
Krlev, G., & Spicer, A. (2023). Reining in reviewer two: How to uphold epistemic respect in academia.
Journal of Management Studies, (60)6, 1624-1632. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12905.
Machado, A. M. N., & Bianchetti, L. (2011). (Des)fetichização do produtivismo acadêmico: desafios para o trabalhador-pesquisador. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 51(3), 244-254. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75902011000300005
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med., 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Ogbonnaya, C., & Brown, A. D. (2023). Editorial: Crafting review and essay articles for Human Relations. Human Relations, 76(3),365-394. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267221148440
Patriotta, G. (2020). Writing impactful review articles. Journal of Management Studies, 57(1), 1272-1276.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12608
Paul, J., & Criado, A. R. (2020). The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to
know? International Business Review, 29(4), 101717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717
Post, C., Sarala, R., Gatrell, C., & Prescott, J. E. (2020). Advancing theory with review articles. Journal of Management Studies,57(2), 351–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12549
Rond, M., & Miller, A. N. (2005). Publish or Perish: Bane or Boon of Academic Life? Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(4),
321-329. https://doi.org/10.1177/105649260527685
Rosa, A., & Alves, M. A. (2011). Can management and organization knowledge speak Portuguese? RAE Revista
De Administração De Empresas, 51(3), 255–264. https://periodicos.fgv.br/rae/article/view/30992
Silva, A. B. (2019). Produtivismo Acadêmico multinível: Mercadoria performativa na pós-graduação em Administração.
Revista de Administração de Empresas, 59(5), 341-352. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020190504
Vogel, R., Hattke, F., & Petersen, J. (2017). Journal rankings in management and business studies: What rules
do we play by? Research Policy, 46(10), 1707-1722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.07.001
Wedlin, L. (2011). Going global: Rankings as rhetorical devices to construct an international field of management
education. Management Learning, 42(2), 199-218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507610389683
Wong G. (2015). Literature reviews: Who is the audience? In, J. Cleland, S. J. Durning (Ed.), Researching Medical
Education. Wiley.