Elevating Scholarly Discourse: Editors' Perspectives on Contribution in Hybrid Literature Reviews

Dr. Emma Leclerc; Thabo Nkosi

doi:10.64917/fsm-005

Authors

Dr. Emma Leclerc Department of Library and Information Studies, Université de Montréal, Canada
Thabo Nkosi Department of Information and Knowledge Management, University of Johannesburg, South Africa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.64917/fsm-005

Keywords:

Hybrid literature review, systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis, scholarly contribution

Abstract

In the contemporary academic landscape, literature reviews serve as indispensable tools for synthesizing existing knowledge, identifying critical gaps, and charting future research trajectories. As the volume and complexity of scholarly output proliferate, review methodologies have evolved beyond traditional narrative approaches to embrace systematic rigor (Systematic Literature Reviews - SLRs) and quantitative mapping (Bibliometric Analyses). A recent and increasingly prominent development is the emergence of "hybrid review studies," which strategically combine multiple methodologies to offer richer, more nuanced insights. While these hybrid approaches promise enhanced analytical depth and breadth, they also introduce new complexities regarding what constitutes a significant scholarly contribution. This article explores the expectations of journal editors concerning contribution in hybrid review studies. Drawing upon a systematic synthesis of methodological guidelines and editorial commentaries, we delineate the critical elements editors seek: a clear and justified rationale for hybridity, rigorous execution across all methodological components, profound theoretical synthesis and advancement, precise identification of research gaps, and actionable implications. By elucidating these expectations, this article aims to guide authors in crafting hybrid reviews that not only demonstrate methodological sophistication but also make a substantive and impactful contribution to their respective fields, thereby elevating the overall quality of scholarly discourse.

References

Bhukya, R., & Paul, J. (2023). Social influence research in consumer behavior: What we learned and what we need to learn? A hybrid systematic literature review. Journal of Business Research, 162, 113870.

Callahan, J. L. (2014). Writing literature reviews: A reprise and update. Human Resource Development Review, 13(3), 271–275.

Cropanzano, R. (2009). Writing nonempirical articles for Journal of Management: General thoughts and suggestions. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1304–1311.

Danese, P., Manfè, V., & Romano, P. (2018). A systematic literature review on recent lean research: State-of-the-art and future directions. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(2), 579–605.

Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., & van Aken, J. E. (2008). Developing design propositions through research synthesis. Organization Studies, 29(3), 393–413.

Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296.

Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: Secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101–117.

Jesson, J., & Lacey, F. (2006). How to do (or not to do) a critical literature review. Pharmacy Education, 6(2), 139–148.

Kaushal, N., Kaurav, R. P. S., Sivathanu, B., & Kaushik, N. (2023). Artificial intelligence and HRM: Identifying future research agenda using systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Management Review Quarterly, 73(2), 455–493.

Kraus, S., Breier, M., Lim, W. M., Dabić, M., Kumar, S., Kanbach, D., Mukherjee, D., Corvello, V., Piñeiro-Chousa, J., Liguori, E., Palacios-Marqués, D., Schiavone, F., Ferraris, A., Fernandes, C., & Ferreira, J. J. (2022). Literature reviews as independent studies: Guidelines for academic practice. Review of Managerial Science, 16(8), 2577–2595.

Kumar Hota, P., Manoharan, B., Rakshit, K., & Panigrahi, P. (2023). Hybrid organisation deconstructed: A bibliographic investigation into the origins, development, and future of the research domain. International Journal of Management Reviews, 25(2), 384–409.

Kunisch, S., Menz, M., Bartunek, J. M., Cardinal, L. B., & Denyer, D. (2018). Feature topic at organizational research methods: How to conduct rigorous and impactful literature reviews? Organisational Research Methods, 21(3), 519–523.

Lages, C. R., Perez-Vega, R., Kadić-Maglajlić, S., & Borghei-Razavi, N. (2023). A systematic review and bibliometric analysis of the dark side of customer behavior: An integrative customer incivility framework. Journal of Business Research, 161, 113779.

Lim, W., & Kumar, S. (2023). Guidelines for interpreting the results of bibliometric analysis: A sensemaking approach. Global Business and Organizational Excellence.

Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Ali, F. (2022). Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: ‘What’, ‘why’, and ‘how to contribute’. The Service Industries Journal, 42(7–8), 481–513.

Maseda, A., Iturralde, T., Cooper, S., & Aparicio, G. (2022). Mapping women’s involvement in family firms: A review based on bibliographic coupling analysis. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(2), 279–305.

Mumu, J. R., Saona, P., Mamun Md. A. A., & Azad Md. A. K. (2022). Is trust gender biased? A bibliometric review of trust in e-commerce. Journal of Internet Commerce, 21(2), 217–245.

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., & Moher, D. (2021). Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: Development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 134, 103–112.

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.

Paul, J., Khatri, P., & Kaur Duggal, H. (2023). Frameworks for developing impactful systematic literature reviews and theory building: What, why and how? Journal of Decision Systems, 0(0), 1–14.

Paul, J., Lim, W. M., O’Cass, A., Hao, A., & Bresciani, S. (2021). Scientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR‐4‐SLR). International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45.

Paul, J., Parthasarathy, S., & Gupta, P. (2017). Exporting challenges of SMEs: A review and future research agenda. Journal of World Business, 52(3), 327–342.

Paul, J., & Rosado-Serrano, A. (2019). Gradual internationalisation vs born-global/international new venture models: A review and research agenda. International Marketing Review, 36(6), 830–858.

Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9(1), Article 1.

Rodrigues, M., Daniel, A. D., & Franco, M. (2022). What is important to know about mumpreneurship? A bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, (ahead-of-print).

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339.

Statsenko, L., Samaraweera, A., Bakhshi, J., & Chileshe, N. (2022). Construction 4.0 technologies and applications: A systematic literature review of trends and potential areas for development. Construction Innovation.

Tsiotsou, R. H., Koles, B., Paul, J., & Loureiro, S. M. C. (2022). Theory Generation from Literature Reviews: A Methodological Guidance. International Journal of Consumer Studies.

Turnbull, D., Chugh, R., & Luck, J. (2023). Systematic-narrative hybrid literature review: A strategy for integrating a concise methodology into a manuscript. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100381.

Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analysing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), 13–23.

Frontiers in Strategic Management

Article Details Page