A reviewer for HRDR once asked the editors, "How do I know whether this is an integrative literature review or a conceptual paper?" When we explored the submissions we were receiving at HRDR, we realized that the majority of the manuscripts were really conceptual papers, but the authors often presented their work as an integrative literature review. Torraco (2005) wrote a most useful article that described how to write an integrative literature review. After that, many authors began framing every article submitted to HRDR in that format, even if they were not writing an integrative literature review. However, HRDR publishes several types of articles and, as Torraco ( 2005) noted, the editors "continue to seek well-written review [and other types of] articles that yield provocative, new perspectives on key issues in the field" (p. 356).The aims and scope of the journal (http://www.sagepub.com/journalsProdAims .nav?prodId=Journal201506) call for "submissions that provide new theoretical insights to advance our understanding of human resource development. Such papers may include syntheses of existing bodies of theory, new substantive theories, exploratory conceptual models, taxonomies and typology developed as foundations for theory, treatises in formal theory construction, papers on the history of theory, critique of theory that includes alternative research propositions, metatheory, and integrative literature reviews with strong theoretical implications. Papers addressing foundations of HRD might address philosophies of HRD, historical foundations, definitions of the field, conceptual organization of the field, and ethical foundations." Of these, the two most common types submitted are conceptual/theoretical manuscripts and integrative literature reviews. This article will describe these two categories of manuscripts and will conclude with a call to prospective authors to consider other types of manuscripts, such as historical and methodological works, in their future submissions as well.

No abstract

The International Journal of Management Reviews (IJMR) is proud to offer a special section for articles that address methods and methodologies associated with undertaking literature reviews. In this editorial, we share our goals and aspirations for this special section. Drawing upon the motivations and objectives set out in 2020 and 2021 IJMR editorials, this editorial first discusses what potential benefits such an ongoing special section can bring to management and organization research in the longer term. In the next two sections, we detail what editors expect to see in the submissions we receive, and we also elaborate on some general and specific publication criteria as to how editors and reviewers will assess submissions related to methodology discussion. We hope this editorial will help authors avoid the disappointment of a rejection and encourage them to develop rigorous, innovative and impactful methodological advances and discussion.

No abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to identify how themes and contributions featured in the four scholarly journals sponsored by the largest human resource development (HRD) research association (the Academy of Human Resource Development, AHRD) reflect the changing identity of the HRD field. Design/methodology/approach – A frequency and content analysis of articles published during the period 2002-2011 was conducted to identify the dominant themes and research trend. Further, comments were made on the aims and scope and editorial discretion for each journal to understand how the journals influence the direction of scholarship in HRD. Findings – It was found that the boundaries of the field are constantly expanding with some of the older and mature themes losing momentum and new themes coming to the forefront of scholarly interest. The journals were found to play a critical role in setting the future direction for the field. Research limitations/implications – Future researchers can examine if the waxing and waning themes identified in the findings remain same after analyzing contributions featured in journals that are not sponsored by the AHRD, but publish articles on topics closely related to HRD. Also, the findings can guide further examination of the editors’ leadership role in driving the evolution of the HRD field. Practical implications – Considering the characteristics of HRD as an applied discipline, the findings can guide future researchers to explore if the thematic changes as identified in the study are associated with the needs of HRD practice. Originality/value – The study attempts to understand the landscape of HRD research by looking at how the field’s identity boundaries have shifted over time and how different entities, like authors and editors publishing scholarly articles in the four HRD journals in the past decade, have interacted to contribute to the shift.