Review of a Review

For my Level 5 Module on Business Research Methods I have been asked to read and review a particular literature review. The literature review I have to look at is called Management of Social Issues in Supply Chains: A Literature Review Exploring Social Issues, Actions and Performance Outcomes (Yawar and Suering 2015)

The criteria that I have been asked to review is as follows:

What makes a good literature review?

How have the authors structured it?

Is it easy to read? Why or why not?

Is it clear if the topic is current? Why or why not?

This is my thoughts and reflections based around literature reviews, in particular the one aforementioned.

1) So what makes a good literature review? I believe that there are a number of key requirements for a good and effective literature review:

• Multiple sources: The aim of a literature review is to give an objective view of the available literature about a specific subject or with a certain field. This can not be done from a few sources, a plethora of sources are required to write an effective literature review. 
• Range of sources: The sources that are used cannot be arguing the same point or around similar case studies. For a complete picture of the topics covered, different types, ages and views of literature need to be investigated. 
• Well structured: There is a well documented and agreed structure for a literature review, this must be followed. The structure of the main body of text is also important however. The main body can be in chronological, thematic and methodical are 3 ways of structuring the main body of text.  
• Critical view of the literature: Literature reviews must be critical of the research that they are reviewing. This helps towards peer review and robust scientific evaluations of ideas and research.
• Informative abstract: An abstract details the research that has been undertaken and the conclusions that have been made from that information. This helps people to find the work when searching for information relevant to what they are looking for. 
• Strong conclusion: The conclusion details what findings were made. It summarises all of the information that has came before it. A strong, clear conclusion highlights all of the points to be taken away from the writing. 

2) The authors of the literature review mentioned in the introduction has structured the review in a thematic style. They have broken the main body of text into sections and discuss these sections individually. Some of the themes that the authors have discussed include:

• Conceptual development
• Methodology
• Descriptive Analysis

Under each of these themes, main talking points are discussed such as performance outcomes, types of strategies, research methods etc. 

3) The structure of the review enables the text and themes to be followed well. The review puts the arguments it makes effectively. There is a large amount of acronyms used, a lot of these are explained the first time that they are used. These include CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) and SCM (Supply Chain Management) to name a couple. There are however some acronyms are not explained, such as the journals among others. The review may have benefited from a glossary or list of acronyms. 

4) A section of the Descriptive analysis is dedicated to 'Distribution Across the Years.' Within this section, the frequency of papers in each year are shown in a table with graphical data also given. The papers reviewed span from 2000 to 2013. The level of papers has an increasing trend from 2000 to 2009, where there is a peak of 26 papers released. The level of papers then slightly reduces, but not dramatically. The topic of Social Issues in SCM is still well discussed. The literally review was released in June 2015 having been received in July 2014. As it is now 4 and half years from the day that the paper was completed there may have been research released that affects the validity of the points within this review.