{"title":"How to advance theory through literature reviews in logistics and supply chain management","authors":"C. F. Durach, J. Kembro, Andreas Wieland","doi":"10.1108/ijpdlm-11-2020-0381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe discipline's most common uses for literature reviews—identifying gaps, developing research agendas, and categorizing the literature—too often fail to challenge, change or advance theoretical perspectives. The authors offer guidance to theorization through literature reviews. The key to theory advancement is consistency between the state of theory and the chosen review type.Design/methodology/approachA conceptual approach is taken. The authors identify shortcomings in literature reviews of logistics and supply chain management (L&SCM) research and develop a framework to aid theorization from literature.FindingsLiterature review types are categorized as inductive theory building, contextualized explanations, theory testing and interpretive sensemaking. The authors argue that the effectiveness of a review type depends on the prior state of theory, which ranges from nascent, to intermediate, to mature. The authors propose the interpretive sensemaking review as a novel review type rooted in the interpretive paradigm.Practical implicationsThis study should be of immediate interest and value to logistics and supply chain management scholars—as well as scholars in other fields—because it offers a pathway to theory development through literature reviews. Appropriate applications of the proposed review types will result in more comprehensive theories.Originality/valueThis article lays down arguments for the need to change the way L&SCM scholars use literature reviews. It extends earlier work from the authors (Durach et al., 2017; A New Paradigm for Systematic Literature Reviews in Supply Chain Management, Journal of Supply Chain Management) by outlining four review types, and offering further insights to theorization, as is typically the goal in the synthesis step of literature reviews.","PeriodicalId":14251,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpdlm-11-2020-0381","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
Abstract
PurposeThe discipline's most common uses for literature reviews—identifying gaps, developing research agendas, and categorizing the literature—too often fail to challenge, change or advance theoretical perspectives. The authors offer guidance to theorization through literature reviews. The key to theory advancement is consistency between the state of theory and the chosen review type.Design/methodology/approachA conceptual approach is taken. The authors identify shortcomings in literature reviews of logistics and supply chain management (L&SCM) research and develop a framework to aid theorization from literature.FindingsLiterature review types are categorized as inductive theory building, contextualized explanations, theory testing and interpretive sensemaking. The authors argue that the effectiveness of a review type depends on the prior state of theory, which ranges from nascent, to intermediate, to mature. The authors propose the interpretive sensemaking review as a novel review type rooted in the interpretive paradigm.Practical implicationsThis study should be of immediate interest and value to logistics and supply chain management scholars—as well as scholars in other fields—because it offers a pathway to theory development through literature reviews. Appropriate applications of the proposed review types will result in more comprehensive theories.Originality/valueThis article lays down arguments for the need to change the way L&SCM scholars use literature reviews. It extends earlier work from the authors (Durach et al., 2017; A New Paradigm for Systematic Literature Reviews in Supply Chain Management, Journal of Supply Chain Management) by outlining four review types, and offering further insights to theorization, as is typically the goal in the synthesis step of literature reviews.
期刊介绍:
IJPDLM seeks strategically focused, theoretically grounded, empirical and conceptual, quantitative and qualitative, rigorous and relevant, original research studies in logistics, physical distribution and supply chain management operations and associated strategic issues. Quantitatively oriented mathematical and modelling research papers are not suitable for IJPDLM. Desired topics include, but are not limited to: Customer service strategy Omni-channel and multi-channel distribution innovations Order processing and inventory management Implementation of supply chain processes Information and communication technology Sourcing and procurement Risk management and security Personnel recruitment and training Sustainability and environmental Collaboration and integration Global supply chain management and network complexity Information and knowledge management Legal, financial and public policy Retailing, channels and business-to-business management Organizational and human resource development Logistics and SCM education.