Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis as a Practice and Scholarship Tool

Briner, Rob B.; Denyer, David

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199763986.013.0007

Cited by 527 publications

(491 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

468

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Each of these stages may include several steps in the review process that "is designed about and specifically to address the question the review is setting out to answer" ( [38], p. 338). In the literature, the number and designation of the proposed phases for a systematic review differ.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the literature, the number and designation of the proposed phases for a systematic review differ. For example, Tranfield et al [33] propose ten phases while Briner and Denyer [38] propose five key phases. Based on the contributions of Tranfield et al [33], Denyer and Tranfield [39] and Rousseau et al [37] in this study we define five phases: (1) problem formulation and question identification; (2) literature search; (3) evaluation of research; (4) research analysis and interpretation; and (5) presentation of results.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Maturity Models in Supply Chain Sustainability: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A systematic literature review of supply chain maturity models with sustainability concerns is presented. The objective is to give insights into methodological issues related to maturity models, namely the research objectives; the research methods used to develop, validate and test them; the scope; and the main characteristics associated with their design. The literature review was performed based on journal articles and conference papers from 2000 to 2015 using the SCOPUS, Emerald Insight, EBSCO and Web of Science databases. Most of the analysed papers have as main objective the development of maturity models and their validation. The case study is the methodology that is most widely used by researchers to develop and validate maturity models. From the sustainability perspective, the scope of the analysed maturity models is the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) and environmental dimension, focusing on a specific process (eco-design and new product development) and without a broad SC perspective. The dominant characteristics associated with the design of the maturity models are the maturity grids and a continuous representation. In addition, results do not allow identifying a trend for a specific number of maturity levels. The comprehensive review, analysis, and synthesis of the maturity model literature represent an important contribution to the organization of this research area, making possible to clarify some confusion that exists about concepts, approaches and components of maturity models in sustainability. Various aspects associated with the maturity models (i.e., research objectives, research methods, scope and characteristics of the design of models) are explored to contribute to the evolution and significance of this multidimensional area.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maturity Models in Supply Chain Sustainability: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This synthesis of JD-R model literature allows us to draw conclusions "about what we currently know and do not know about a given question or topic" (Briner and Denyer, 2012). Consequently, knowledge dissemination regarding a lack of empirical consideration for establishing ecological validity towards the international work context is important to set the stage for theory direction and stimulate the emergence of future high quality studies that can progress knowledge within the field.…”

Section: Conclusion Implications and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The job demands-resources model and the international work context – a systematic review

Rattrie

Kittler

2014

Journal of Global Mobility

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This systematic review provides a synthesis and evaluation of literature surrounding the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model (Demerouti et al., 2001) with particular emphasis on establishing an evidence-based universal application towards different national and international work contexts. Design:The study uses a systematic review approach following the stages suggested by Tranfield et al. (2003). Based on empirical data from 62 studies, we systematically analyse the application of the JD-R model and query whether it is applicable outside merely domestic work contexts. Findings:We found convincing support for the JD-R model in different national contexts.However, we also found an absence of studies employing the JD-R model in cross-national settings. None of the empirical studies in the sample had explicitly considered the international context of today's work environment or had clearly associated JD-R research with the IHRM literature. Research implications: Based on the wide acceptance of the JD-R model in domestic workcontexts and the increased interest in work related outcomes such as burnout and engagement in the IHRM literature, our study identifies a gap and suggests future research applying the JD-R model to international work and global mobility contexts. It also provides a preview on potential job demands and resources relevant to the international work context. Originality:This study is the first to systematically assess the application of the JD-R model in domestic and international work contexts based on a systematic review of empirical literature accumulating since the inception of the model. Our study identifies a lack of internationally focussed JD-R studies and invites further empirical research and theoretical extensions.

show abstract

“…We therefore undertake a systematic review (Gough et al, 2012;Briner and Denyer, 2012;Tranfield et al, 2003) of online-home-based entrepreneurs and their businesses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%