From Passively Received Wisdom to Actively Constructed Knowledge: Teaching Systematic Review Skills As a Foundation of Evidence-Based Management

Abstract

One of the four sources of evidence used in evidence-based management (EBMgt) is academic research. However, rather than taking evidence from single studies or arbitrarily selected studies, EBMgt uses findings from systematic reviews that methodically summarize the body of evidence relevant to a specific question. This allows for conclusions to be drawn about the quantity, quality, relevance, and meaning of the available evidence. Although conducting such reviews is important for EBMgt and academically, the skills required are rarely taught. Drawing on our experiences of teaching courses on conducting rapid systematic reviews to a range of students, we include four goals here. First, we describe the nature and purposes of systematic reviews and consider the multiple benefits of teaching students how to perform them. Second, we describe a course on rapid systematic reviews delivered to a group of master's students. Third, we report students' reactions to different aspects of the course and the outcomes for students and teachers. Last, we discuss the implications of these experiences for teaching systematic review skills across business school curricula and how they may in the future play a more prominent role in developing EBMgt skills in students and in management education more generally.

Wine Tourism and Sustainability: A Review

“…Literature reviews help to organize the insights emerging from desk research. Nevertheless some scholars have underlined the limitations that traditional or narrative literature reviews can have [6]. The insights emerging from literature reviews can represent a valid support: on one side they contribute to define research trends and future developments; on the other that can help the development of research fields or scholarship tools [6][7][8] and the growth of knowledge in specific fields.…”

“…Nevertheless some scholars have underlined the limitations that traditional or narrative literature reviews can have [6]. The insights emerging from literature reviews can represent a valid support: on one side they contribute to define research trends and future developments; on the other that can help the development of research fields or scholarship tools [6][7][8] and the growth of knowledge in specific fields. Boote and Beile (2005) [9] highlight that literature reviews can be considered as the first step for performing significant researches.…”

Researching expatriate types: the quest for rigorous methodological approaches

“…To achieve a smaller sample of IA/AE studies representative of the larger IA/AE sample and comparable with the combined sample of SIE and SI studies, I coded the studies for two objective variables advocated as relevant to control (Briner and Walshe, ): time of publication (categorised as 2000–04, 2005–09, 2010–14/early view) and the country or region in which the journal was published (seven countries/regions, most often the US and UK). Studies of SIEs (11 per cent) and SIs (10 per cent) were rarely published between 2000 and 2004, in contrast to IA/EA studies (30 per cent).…”

Against Evidence-Based Management, for Management Learning

“…There are examples of this sort of devaluation in the earliest literature in the field (e.g., Tranfield et al, 2003). In the recent AMLE SI, the antipathy toward narrative still comes through clearly: "Literature reviews, even those written by experts, can be made to tell any story one wants them to" (Briner & Walshe, 2014). Such denigration is the basis on which EBMgt promotes the comparative merits of the systematic review:…”