Theorizing Through Literature Reviews: The Miner-Prospector Continuum

被引:139
作者
Breslin, Dermot [1 ]
Gatrell, Caroline [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Sch Management, Org Behav, Conduit Rd, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ Liverpool, Sch Management, Org Studies, Chatham St, Liverpool, Merseyside, England
关键词
literature reviews; theoretical contribution; metaphor; miner-prospector; publication; ORGANIZATIONAL ROUTINES; ABSORPTIVE-CAPACITY; MANAGEMENT; METAPHORS; KNOWLEDGE; FUTURE; OPPORTUNITIES; LIFE; CAPABILITIES; SCHOLARSHIP;
D O I
10.1177/1094428120943288
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
While literature reviews play an increasingly important role in theory development, understanding how they contribute to the process of theorizing is lacking. This article develops the metaphor of a miner-prospector continuum, which allows review scholars to identify approaches taken in literature reviews to develop theory. We identify eight strategies located on a continuum ranging from miners-who position their contributions within a bounded and established domain of study alongside other researchers-to prospectors, who are more likely to step outside disciplinary boundaries, introducing novel perspectives and venture beyond knowledge silos. We explore the pathways between miner and prospector in terms of strategies followed, choices made, risks borne, and benefits gained. We identify the roles to be played by different stakeholders in balancing the mix between miners and prospectors. While respecting the need for both miner and prospector approaches, we suggest that collective efforts toward encouraging prospector reviews could assist management research in tackling, through reviews, the complex challenges facing organizations and society today.
引用
收藏
页码:139 / 167
页数:29
相关论文
共 124 条
  • [1] "AN A IS AN A": THE NEW BOTTOM LINE FOR VALUING ACADEMIC RESEARCH
    Aguinis, Herman
    Cummings, Chailin
    Ramani, Ravi S.
    Cummings, Thomas G.
    [J]. ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES, 2020, 34 (01) : 135 - 154
  • [2] WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET? ENHANCING METHODOLOGICAL TRANSPARENCY IN MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
    Aguinis, Herman
    Ramani, Ravi S.
    Alabduljader, Nawaf
    [J]. ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT ANNALS, 2018, 12 (01) : 83 - 110
  • [3] 'Tough love and tears': learning doctoral writing in the sciences
    Aitchison, Claire
    Catterall, Janice
    Ross, Pauline
    Burgin, Shelley
    [J]. HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, 2012, 31 (04) : 435 - 447
  • [4] How do entrepreneurs know what to do? learning and organizing in new ventures
    Aldrich, Howard E.
    Yang, Tiantian
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EVOLUTIONARY ECONOMICS, 2014, 24 (01) : 59 - 82
  • [5] Alvesson M., 2017, Return to Meaning: A Social Science with Something to Say
  • [6] Alvesson M, 2007, ACAD MANAGE REV, V32, P1265, DOI 10.5465/AMR.2007.26586822
  • [7] The Problematizing Review: A Counterpoint to Elsbach and Van Knippenberg's Argument for Integrative Reviews
    Alvesson, Mats
    Sandberg, Jorgen
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, 2020, 57 (06) : 1290 - 1304
  • [8] Has Management Studies Lost Its Way? Ideas for More Imaginative and Innovative Research
    Alvesson, Mats
    Sandberg, Joergen
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, 2013, 50 (01) : 128 - 152
  • [9] Taking time to integrate temporal research
    Ancona, DG
    Okhuysen, GA
    Perlow, LA
    [J]. ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2001, 26 (04) : 512 - 529
  • [10] Anderson D, 2014, ISS EDUC RES, V24, P1