Theoretically Contributing with Hybrid Reviews: Special Focus on Bibliometric Analysis

Abstract

Issue 1) focused on the 'what' and 'why' of hybrid review, emphasizing the structure of the manuscript with particular reference to contribution within each section. This editorial is an extension of the previous editorial, further delving into specifics of how to theoretically contribute through a hybrid review study. In doing so, we present a suggestive template that the authors can use when writing hybrid review studies for the South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases. It is necessary to note that the template is only suggestive, and the authors can identify further creative but scientific ways of contributing to the field through hybrid studies.Hybrid reviews are literature review studies that integrate multiple review methods. An example would be component integration, also called framework-based review (TCCM, ADO, AMO, etc.), or process integration (e.g., bibliometric and framework-based review) (Paul & Criado, 2020). The journal is currently focused on the latter.It is noticed that most hybrid review manuscripts submitted to the journal fail to present bibliometric analysis meaningfully so as to contribute to the literature, which results in desk rejection. Hence, the remainder of the editorial focuses on two main aspects of bibliometric study: performance analysis and intellectual structure. Meaningful Performance AnalysisPerformance analysis, also called descriptive analysis, is the hallmark of a bibliometric study . However, it remains a primary reason for manuscript rejection. The availability of various bibliometric tools (Bibiolshiny, VOS Viewer, BibExcel, CiteSpace, etc.) has made performance analysis an easy endeavour. However, the convenience has also resulted in poor presentation and description of the section. To elaborate further, there are two particular reasons for this.The first is including multiple constituents of performance analysis without a rationale. These could include research productivity and evolution, prolific authors and documents, significant journals, significant countries, research collaboration between academic institutes. These are but a few types of performance analysis (see , for an exhaustive list). Since the bibliometric tools provide performance analysis output in an instant, novice authors tend to include all of them in the study. However, if you go through the bibliometric studies of the past few years in the management domain, you will notice a pattern change. There has been a reduction in the performance analysis section, reporting mostly four parameters: (i) research productivity, (ii) prolific documents, (iii) prolific journals and (iv) prolific authors. Instead, emphasis is given to the science mapping, which will be delved into in the latter