vestreaВестник Российского экономического университета имени Г. В. ПлехановаVestnik of the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics2413-28292587-9251Plekhanov Russian University of Economics10.21686/2413-2829-2021-6-144-157vestrea-1220Research ArticleТЕОРИЯ И ПРАКТИКА УПРАВЛЕНИЯTHEORY AND PRACTICE OF MANAGEMENTМетодология подготовки литературного обзора по менеджменту и бизнесу: дайджест зарубежных высокоцитируемых статейMethodology of Writing Literature Review on Management and Business: Digest of Overseas Highly-Cited Articleshttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8718-9023ДенисовИ. В.DenisovI. V.

Игорь Владимирович Денисов доктор экономических наук, доцент, заведующий кафедрой теории менеджмента и бизнес-технологий

117997, Москва, Стремянный пер., д. 36.SPIN 6488-1882

Igor V. Denisov Doctor of Economics, Assistant Professor, Head of the Department for Theory of Management and Business-Technologies

36 Stremyanny Lane, Moscow, 117997 

SPIN 6488-1882

denisov.id@gmail.comРоссийский экономический университет имени Г. В. ПлехановаРоссияPlekhanov Russian University of EconomicsRussian Federation20212212202106144157Copyright © Денисов И.В., 20212021Денисов И.В.Denisov I.V.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://vest.rea.ru/jour/article/view/1220

Цель исследования – разработка методики систематизации опубликованных за предыдущие годы результатов в области менеджмента. Основное внимание уделено типологизации обзоров. При этом выделяются систематический (метаанализ как его разновидность), полусистематический, интегративный и ряд других обзоров. В статье прослеживается генезис литературных обзоров от медицинской науки до их применения в статьях об управлении в бизнесе. Автором рассмотрены трудности проведения метаанализа и систематического анализа на материалах исследований в области менеджмента. Показано несколько способов представления результатов систематического обзора литературы. Обзорные статьи могут как полагаться на доказательства, полученные в результате предшествующих качественных (или смешанных) методов исследования, так и включать количественные данные. Также возможна ориентация на автора. Наиболее распространенным является тематический обзор, в котором исследователь описывает публикации, способствующие развитию общего понимания концепций или явлений, представляющих интерес, в том числе для будущих исследований. Выбор конкретного типа обзора и методологии его проведения определяется тем, какие именно данные подлежат анализу. Важно, чтобы авторы следовали заранее определенной методике.

The goal of the research is to elaborate methodology how to systematize findings in the field of management published during previous years. Special attention is paid to typology of reviews. In this case the author distinguished systematic (meta-analysis as its variant), semi-systematic, integrative and other types of reviews. The article traces the origin of literature reviews starting from medical science to their use in articles concerning management in business. The author described difficulties of conducting meta-analysis and systematic analysis on materials of research on management and showed several methods of presenting results of systematic review of literature. Review articles can both rely on proofs obtained in previous quality (or mixed) methods of research and include quantitative data. Orientation to author is also possible. The most widely used type is a subject review, where researcher describes publications fostering the development of general comprehension of the concept or phenomenon being of interest, including for the future research. The choice of the review type and methodology of its conducting is determined by the data that should be analyzed. Authors should follow the chosen methodology.

управлениетеориясистематический обзоринтегративный обзорmanagementtheorysystematic reviewintegrative review.ReferencesBooth A., Sutton A., Papaioannou D. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review. – New York, 2016.Booth A., Sutton A., Papaioannou D. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review. New York, 2016.Briner R. B., Denyer D. Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis as a Practice and Scholarship Tool // Handbook of Evidence-Based Management: Companies, Classrooms and Research. – 2012. – P. 112–129.Briner R. B., Denyer D. Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis as a Practice and Scholarship Tool. Handbook of Evidence-Based Management: Companies, Classrooms and Research, 2012, pp. 112–129.Denyer D., Tranfield D. Producing a Systematic Review // Buchanan D., Bryman A. (eds.). The Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Methods. – London, 2009. – P. 671–689.Denyer D., Tranfield D. Producing a Systematic Review. Buchanan D., Bryman A. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Methods. London, 2009, pp. 671–689.Durach Ch. F., Kembro J., Wieland A. A New Paradigm for Systematic Literature Reviews in Supply Chain Management // Journal of Supply Chain Management. – 2017. – Vol. 53. – N 4. – P. 67–85.Durach C. F., Kembro J., Wieland A. A New Paradigm for Systematic Literature Reviews in Supply Chain Management. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 2017, Vol. 53, No. 4, pp. 67–85.Hoon C., Baluch A. M. The Role of Dialectical Interrogation in Review Studies: Theorizing from what we see rather than what we have already seen // Journal of Management Studies. – 2020. – Vol. 57. – N 6. – P. 1246–1271.Hoon C., Baluch A. M. The Role of Dialectical Interrogation in Review Studies: Theorizing from what we see rather than what we have already seen. Journal of Management Studies, 2020, Vol. 57, No. 6, pp. 1246–1271.Langley A. Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data // Academy of Management Review. – 1999. – Vol. 24. – N 4. – P. 691–710.Langley A. Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data. Academy of Management Review, 1999, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 691–710.LePine J. A., King A. W. (eds.). Editors' Comments: Developing Novel Theoretical Insight from Reviews of Existing Theory and Research // Academy of Management Review. – 2010. – Vol. 35. – N 4. – P. 506–509.LePine J. A., King A. W. (eds.). Editors' Comments: Developing Novel Theoretical Insight from Reviews of Existing Theory and Research. Academy of Management Review, 2010, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 506–509.Liberati A., Altman D. G., Tetzlaff J., Mulrow C., Gøtzsche P. C., Ioannidis J. P. A., Clarke M., Devereaux P. J., Kleijnen J., Moher D. The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies that Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration // Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. – 2009. – Vol. 62. – N 10. – P. e1–e34.Liberati A., Altman D. G., Tetzlaff J., Mulrow C., Gøtzsche P. C., Ioannidis J. P. A., Clarke M., Devereaux P. J., Kleijnen J., Moher D. The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies that Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2009, Vol. 62, No. 10, pp. e1–e34.Linnenluecke M. K., Marrone M., Singh A. K. Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews and Bibliometric Analyses // Australian Journal of Management. – 2020. – Vol. 45. – N 2. – P. 175–194.Linnenluecke M. K., Marrone M., Singh A. K. Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews and Bibliometric Analyses. Australian Journal of Management, 2020, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 175–194.Mariani M., Borghi M. Industry 4.0: A Bibliometric Review of its Managerial Intellectual Structure and Potential Evolution in the Service Industries // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. – 2019. – N 149. – P. 119752.Mariani M., Borghi M. Industry 4.0: A Bibliometric Review of its Managerial Intellectual Structure and Potential Evolution in the Service Industries. Technological Forecasting and Social Changem, 2019, No. 149, p. 119752.Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA Statement // PLoS medicine. – 2009. – Vol. 6. – N 7. – P. e1000097.Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA Statement. PLoS medicine, 2009, Vol. 6, No. 7, p. e1000097.Piccarozzi M., Aquilani B., Gatti C. Industry 4.0 in Management Studies: A Systematic Literature Review // Sustainability. – 2018. – Vol. 10. – N 10. – P. 3821.Piccarozzi M., Aquilani B., Gatti C. Industry 4.0 in Management Studies: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability, 2018, Vol. 10, No. 10, p. 3821.Post C. et al. Advancing Theory with Review Articles // Journal of Management Studies. – 2020. – Vol. 57. – N 2. – P. 351–376.Post C. et al. Advancing Theory with Review Articles. Journal of Management Studies, 2020, Vol. 57, No. 2, pp. 351–376.Shepherd D. A., Suddaby R. Theory Building: A Review and Integration // Journal of Management. – 2017. – Vol. 43. – N 1. – P. 59–86.Shepherd D. A., Suddaby R. Theory Building: A Review and Integration. Journal of Management, 2017, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 59–86.Snyder H. Literature Review as a Research Methodology: An Overview and Guidelines // Journal of Business Research. – 2019. – Vol. 104. – P. 333–339.Snyder H. Literature Review as a Research Methodology: An Overview and Guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 2019, Vol. 104, pp. 333–339.Torraco R. J. Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Using the Past and Present to Explore the Future // Human Resource Development Review. – 2016. – Vol. 15. – N 4. – P. 404–428.Torraco R. J. Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Using the Past and Present to Explore the Future. Human Resource Development Review, 2016, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 404–428.Tranfield D., Denyer D., Smart P. Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review // British Journal of Management. – 2003. – Vol. 14. – N 3. – P. 207–222.Tranfield D., Denyer D., Smart P. Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Management, 2003, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 207–222.Vieira E., Gomes J. A Comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a Typical University // Scientometrics. – 2009. – Vol. 81. – N 2. – P. 587–600.Vieira E., Gomes J. A Comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a Typical University. Scientometrics, 2009, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 587–600.Weick K. E. Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination // Academy of Management Review. – 1989. – Vol. 14. – N 4. – P. 516–531.Weick K. E. Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination. Academy of Management Review, 1989, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 516–531.Wong G. et al. RAMESES Publication Standards: Meta-Narrative Reviews // Journal of Advanced Nursing. – 2013. – Vol. 69. – N 5. – P. 987–1004.Wong G. et al. RAMESES Publication Standards: Meta-Narrative Reviews. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2013, Vol. 69, No. 5, pp. 987–1004.Zahra S. A., Sapienza H. J., Davidsson P. Entrepreneurship and Dynamic Capabilities: A Review, Model and Research Agenda // Journal of Management Studies. – 2006. – Vol. 43. – N 4. – P. 917–955.Zahra S. A., Sapienza H. J., Davidsson P. Entrepreneurship and Dynamic Capabilities: A Review, Model and Research Agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 2006, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 917–955.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.