Advancing Theory with Review Articles

Abstract

Reviewing a body of work presents unique opportunities for making a theoretical contribution. Review articles can make readers think theoretically differently about a given field or phenomenon. Yet, review articles that advance theory have been historically under‐represented in Journal of Management Studies. Accordingly, the purpose of this editorial is to propose a multi‐faceted approach for fashioning theoretical contributions in review articles, which we hope will inspire more authors to develop and submit innovative, original, and high‐quality theory‐building review articles. We argue that advancing theory with review articles requires an integrative and generative approach. We propose a non‐exhaustive set of avenues for developing theory with a review article: exposing emerging perspectives, analysing assumptions, clarifying constructs, establishing boundary conditions, testing new theory, theorizing with systems theory, and theorizing with mechanisms. As a journal, Journal of Management Studies is a journal of ideas – new ideas; ideas drawn from reflections on extant theory and ideas with potential to change the way we understand and interpret theory. With this in mind, we think that advancing theory with review articles is an untapped source of new ideas.

Reviewing the Field of External Knowledge Search for Innovation: Theoretical Underpinnings and Future (Re‐)search Directions

“…First, we advance our theoretical and empirical knowledge by providing a reflective interpretation of the field of external knowledge search for innovation. A reflective review goes beyond an integrative review by additionally generating a novel concept (Post, Sarala, Gatrell, and Prescott, 2020; Rousseau, Manning, and Denyer, 2008). Our integrative work systematically analyzes and comprehensively synthesizes the field (Torraco, 2005).…”

Similarities and differences in international and comparative human resource management: A review of 60 years of research

“…In our review, we follow the recent editorial by Post, Sarala, Gatrell, and Prescott (2020), who propose a multi‐faceted approach for fashioning theoretical contributions in review articles. More specifically, they propose the following “set of avenues for developing theory” (p. 351): exposing emerging perspectives, analyzing assumptions, clarifying constructs, establishing boundary conditions, testing new theory, theorizing with system theory, and theorizing with mechanism.…”

Extending the frontier of research on (strategic) human resource management in China: a review of David Lepak and colleagues’ influence and future research direction

“…This does not imply China exceptionalism, rather, it calls for more academic space for stories from China, and indeed, space for stories from other countries that remain less heard, through well designed and executed research. As Post et al (2020) suggest, an important approach to advancing theories is adopting an emerging perspective. In the next section, we take the context-driven perspective to focus on the recent societal contexts and novel China-specific HR practices.…”

“…Third, given the fact that this review aims for scholars interested in strategic HRM research in general and in the Chinese context specifically, we also address a number of areas where future research efforts may be directed to making strategic HRM research more reflective of the recent societal context and relevant to practice. Indeed, adopting an emerging perspective, the context-driven perspective in this review, is an important avenue for generating theories (Post et al, 2020). We acknowledge upfront that Lepak's works are intellectual outputs of collective wisdom; by singling out Lepak, our intention is not to underplay the contributions of Lepak's co-authors.…”