Writing a literature review:
A guide for MCom(HRM/IP) students
Written by
Sumari O’Neil
Department of Human Resources Management
UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA
2 010
Version 1.1
Page i
Table of content
1. What is the literature review? ....................................................................... 1
2. The purpose of the literature review ............................................................ 1
3. Where is the literature review placed in the dissertation? .......................... 3
4. How to write a literature review ................................................................... 3
4.1
The basic building blocks of a literature review .................................... 3
4.2
How many sources is enough? ............................................................... 4
4.3
Selecting sources for your review .......................................................... 4
4.4
Effective reading ..................................................................................... 5
4.5
Structuring the literature review chapter .............................................. 7
4.6
Writing as knowledge organisation and construction .......................... 11
5. Criteria for a literature review .................................................................... 13
References ...................................................................................................... 14
Version 1.1
Page i
1.
What is the literature review?
The literature review is a synthesis of the secondary literature that pertains to the research
problem of your dissertation.
Secondary literature refers to the “body of works previously
published by other scholars” (Hofstee, 2006, p. 91). Although a study can entirely consist of a
literature review (then referred to by some as a literature study), done as part of a dissertation it is
not “an end in itself, but a means to an end” (Perry, 2002). That end is to evaluate, synthesise,
analyse and represent how your research emerged from previous studies.
“In an academic context, all research is based on previous research” (Badenhorst, 2008, p. 155).
As such, a literature review will always start when you are selecting and refining your dissertation
topic and question (Mouton, 2001). Selecting a topic and defining a research question is the first
steps in any research study. When you define your research question, you need to find out what
has been done before – and this is where you literature review will start. At the end of the
research process, after you have analysed and interpreted the results, you may find that there are
still some areas in theory that you need to cover to effectively interpret the results. After this, is
when your literature review ends. A literature review is therefore not merely a chapter in your
dissertation, but really entrenched in every step of the research process. The focus of this paper
however is more on the literature review chapter that you will include in your dissertation although
many of the principles discussed here will apply to the wider idea of conducting a literature
review.
2.
The purpose of the literature review
As writer of the dissertation, writing the literature review will help you to (Bardenhorst, 2008;
Mouton, 2001):
1. Situate your study in the existing body of knowledge through the identification of a gap in the
knowledge and to make sure that you are not merely duplicating another study
2. Set up a theoretical framework for your study
3. Define, explain and unpack the concepts related to your study
4. Set up and explain the methodological perspective that informs your study
For the reader of the dissertation, the purpose of the literature review is to (Badenhorst, 2008;
Hofstee, 2006; Mouton, 2001):
Version 1.1
Page 1
1. Display your awareness of what is going on in the field, and thus your credentials
Readers will not take your work seriously if you can not convince them that you are well read
in the field that you are investigating. They have to see that you have read through a range
of appropriate materials (i.e. extensive reading).
Remember, as a master’s student, you
should be master in your field of expertise after qualification (completing your dissertation
successfully). Being well read implies that you have “read broadly in your field and that you
understand the important works in depth” (Hofstee, 2006, p. 92). This implies that you are
aware of the intellectual debates in the field and can relate it to your study.
This kind of defies the question that every student asks his/her supervisor: ‘How many
resources should I use to write the literature review?’ The answer is clearly, that you should
use as many as is available in the field(s) related to your investigation. You should especially
be using those of the ‘experts’ in the field, but not only them. You should also display a good
knowledge of ‘what is out there’ – that is, you should display your knowledge of the research
and scholarly writings available in the field. Not only those done by the experts.
2. Formulate the theory base for the research that you are conducting
A theory is a “logical explanation for why something is as it is or does as it does.” (Hofstee,
2006, p. 92). They are the “best explanations” (Hofstee, 2006, p. 92) currently available.
Theory helps you build an argument for your own study.
For any topic, there should be different theories – even conflicting ones. To illustrate a good
understanding of the theory you should be able to discuss all of them as well as comment on
the way in which they relate to your field.
3. Provide a detailed context for your work:
It must be clear to the reader how what you are proposing to do fit in with what has been
done before (Hofstee, 2006: 93).
This is an illustration of the theoretical and practical
significance of your study. After someone has read your literature review it should be very
clear to them why you are conducting the study.
4. Proves that your work will lead to new knowledge (originality)
Your literature review should illustrate that what you are doing in your research is actually
new and original – it is not a duplication of something that has been done already (except if
you are duplicating a study to check its validity). To show this you have to make sure that
your literature review is current and comprehensive.
Version 1.1
Page 2
3. Where is the literature review placed in the dissertation?
In traditional, quantitative dissertations, the literature review will be the second (and sometimes
third and fourth) chapter(s) of the dissertation. However, your dissertation is a ‘book’ with a ‘story
line’ and you have to decide where to place the literature review in terms of keeping to the ‘story
line’. For instance, when you use a postmodernistic approach to research there is no specific
formula, and your literature chapter may fit better after the methodology. Or if you are busy with
grounded theory research you may find that it may fit better even later in the dissertation – after
the results. Where your chapter will fit will mostly be dictated by the methodology you use for
your research.
4. How to write a literature review
4.1 The basic building blocks of a literature review
To write a literature review, you have to identify, review and analyse the relevant research and
publication pertinent to your study. Badenhorst (2008) refers to literature reviews as analytical
papers implying that the construction of a literature review actually encompass a process of
reading, thinking, organising, analysing, reading more, thinking more, identifying patterns, and so
forth. “The task that you are required to accomplish include gathering information through
reading, understanding it, selecting and representing it in your review, and analysing,
synthesising, evaluating and creating a new text from all these activities.” (Badehorst, 2008, p.
155). Look again, this is important:
Version 1.1
Page 3
by READING
should lead to
Enables you to
through
Fig. 1
Important aspects of conducting a literature review
4.2
How many sources is enough?
There is no absolute answer to the amount of works that you should include in your literature
review. The works you select should be a representative sample of what is out there’ in the field
of your topic. If it is a common research topic that has been researched widely before, for
example Emotional Intelligence, you would have to sample from a very broad field of works. If
however, the topic is still exploratory and very new and little research has been done on it, there
will be less. However, in case of the latter, you will have to borrow on related existing theories
and works to conceptualise what you are busy with.
4.3
Selecting sources for your review
The literature that you include in your dissertation should not only concentrate on the area
specified in the research problem (Perry, 2002). For instance, if your research problem is: “Why
do some HRM masters students struggle to complete their dissertations within the allocated
time?” You will not look for literature pertaining only to this specific problem. The literature should
touch on all the related fields, in this case they will be: Student completion of individual research;
learning
motivation;
stumbling
blocks
students
experience
with
doing
masters
research/dissertation writing, and so forth. You have to look at your question and ask yourself
what are the concepts related to this problem.
Version 1.1
Page 4
To select a work, look at your thesis statement, and ask yourself how that work relates to the
statement and how it will contribute to the understanding of your thesis statement. For every
topic there is an abundance of possible works that may pertain to it. Make sure however that the
works you select are scholarly.
That is scholarly books, articles, dissertations, conference
proceedings and the like. Websites has to be respected (e.g. StatsSA, the UN, known research
institutes), and internet articles has to be peer reviewed (for this reason you cannot use
Wikepedia!). The literature covered in the review should be recent and not confined to Internet
source. As a matter of fact, very little internet sources are credible enough to use for the purpose
of a literature review. The bulk of scholarship is still published in standard scientific journals and
books (Mouton, 2001).
4.4
Effective reading
The only way in which you will find sources is to search and skim through each possible work.
This is what is referred to as academic reading. Academic reading is reading with a purpose. It
is not usually done by normal people to pass time. Most of us would rather eat our own hand
than do an academic reading run. So we have to do it as effectively as possible to save time and
energy. There are many approaches to reading (Badenhorst, 2008, p. 159):
The slow and steady approach:
Begin with a key article or book, then read article by article and book by book and trace the key
references from their reference lists. The advantage of this approach is that it is systematic and
methodical. It can however take a very long time and all the material you read may not be
relevant.
The Blitz approach:
Spend an allocated amount of time searching for material. Collect them and copy them and then
skim read through them while sorting and organising them into piles to read later in extra depth.
The advantages of this approach are that it gives the reader a general idea of what is out there,
while it does not waste time on inappropriate material. The disadvantage is that your keyword
search may be limited at first and therefore you may miss a lot of relevant material.
The best is to vary your reading strategy with the different phases of your research. To refine
your topic and write the proposal you may find it useful to use the Blitz approach. When you do
your literature review later on you may employ the slow and steady approach, or combine the two
approaches.
Version 1.1
Page 5
To skim effectively look at specific parts of the work. For a book, look at the table of content,
bibliography, introduction, and the first and last few paragraphs in the chapters. For articles, read
the abstract, introduction, conclusion and bibliography. That should give you a fair idea of what it
is about, the method used as well as the inferences made.
As you skim you should pick up the key words pertaining to the topic. Make a list of that and
broaden your search for material by searching with new key words. This is especially important
when you are working on a fairly unknown topic.
If you have identified the works you need to read, start with the latest and most current works
(Hofstee, 2006). This is what is referred to as retrospective reading (Mouton, 2001). It should
give you a fair idea of where the field is at the moment of your research, and should also give an
overview of what was done before.
To read effectively, define the purpose of your reading. ‘What are you looking for in a work that
pertains to your study?’ There should be several objectives that may even change through the
course of your reading and research. For instance, in the beginning, you may want to define
some concept, while at the end you may need to confirm a specific inference in a secondary
source.
To rewrite what you have read into the review it is impeccable that you understand what you are
reading. Mouton (2001) asserts that if you cannot reformulate the gits of a source you probably
do not really understand what was written in it. Therefore, a good idea is to visualise what was
written in the source by means of a mind map or notes while as well as after you have read it.
Badehnorst (2008) recommends that you free write a page on the source directly after you read it
to make sure you have comprehended its contents.
Fig. 2 gives a good overview of purposive academic reading tips.
Version 1.1
Page 6
Read to
Cover
understand
Read with a
problem &
literature
and sources
Purpose in
systematical
mind
ly
Skim read -
Free write on
Sort – Decide
readings and
interpretations
Academic
on relevance
reading
systematically
Strategies
Begin with
Organise the
key sources
ideas read in
mind maps
and trace
Take notes
while reading
Read key
sources
diligently
Fig. 2 Academic reading strategies (Adapted from Badehorst, 2008, p. 158)
4.5
Structuring the literature review chapter
Hofstee (2006) propose the funnel method to structure the literature review. This method is
illustrated in Fig. 3 If you use this method, the objectives described earlier will automatically be
met. The following steps can be followed to achieve the funnel structure
Step 1: Use index cards when reading works
If you use index cards it will make the writing up in the funnel method much easier. As you read,
right from the beginning of your research, record the information, ideas, methods, definitions or
any useful information on an index card. Fig. 4 gives an illustration of the outline of an index
card.
Step 2: Selecting all the index cards pertaining to the literature review, group the works by
communality
There are no rules to the amount of categories or the amount of works per category. Try however
to put information of one index card in one category only so that there is not a repetition of the
discussion.
Step 3: Place the categories into a logical order
Version 1.1
Page 7
The first category should contain the works that provide a theory base for your work. They should
come first in the literature review. The internal order (subcategories) of this category should
reflect the major theories that pertain to your work. Start the discussion of each category and
subcategory with the classic or major works with regard to that theory. Then comment on the
later works that either extended or argued against that theory, before moving to the next theory.
As you move down with the discussion of theory, the works should get closer and closer to what
you are doing in your study. In other words, each category should start with a general discussion
and then funnel down to becoming more specific to your study. Pay attention to the introductory
and concluding paragraphs of each category and subcategory so to guide the reader seamlessly
from one group of works to the next.
Step 4: Look at the internal order of the categories
The works discussed in each category should have a similar theme. That is the general point of
departure. As with the categorisation of the categories, the internal structure of each category
should also be from general to specific. You would in the first paragraph for instance discuss the
general theme of that category and then discuss each work either chronologically or play them off
against each other (Hofstee, 2006). Make sure you discuss the strengths and weaknesses as
they pertain to each work. Before you start writing order your index cards in accordance to the
internal structure of your category. Write linking sentences on each card to indicate how it links
with the next card. Or if you prefer use a mind map to link the ideas so that you order your ideas
before you start writing.
Step 5: Conclude the literature review
Conclude the bottom of the funnel with a summary of the state of the scholarship as it pertains to
your dissertation and a comment about the usefulness of your work in that context. You have to
explain in light of the discussion, how your study will be original and contributing to the field. It
should usually take you directly to your original problem statement or research question.
Step 6: Write the introduction of the literature review
The introduction should contain the scope as well as the structure of the literature review. Both
are easier to describe if you have written and structured it already.
Version 1.1
Page 8
Introduction
(Scope and Structure)
Broad
(The theory base)
Your Study
= a logical group of works
Fig. 3: The funnel method of structuring a literature review (Hofstee, 2006:96)
From above, the funnel structure should look something like a concentric circle model as
indicated in Fig. 4.
Version 1.1
Page 9
An overview of the key
theories related to the study
More specific discussion of
the general theories as they
relate to the specific
research question at hand
Parts of your research
problem studied in previous
research
Research questions and
hypothesis not answered by
previous research as
justification for your study
Fig. 4
The concentric circles of the funnel method
During the course of your research, you may come across new works that pertain to your study.
It is easy to add them if you used the funnel method of writing. Remember, research is not a
linear process. During the process you will revisit your literature review many times.
Version 1.1
Page 10
Source (in full)
Specific area to use
General area to use
Item
Fig. 4 Index card contents and layout (Hofstee, 2006: 47)
4.6
Writing as knowledge organisation and construction
The literature review should be more than “Smith said….Jones said…Klopper said…”; it should
be more than just a “string of pointless, isolated summaries of writings of others” Perry, 2002, p.
22). There should be links between the different studies/theories/concepts discussed so that it is
an interesting rearrangement and synthesis of material with which the examiner should already
be familiar (Perry, 2002, p. 22). Most masters’ students struggle with this. This is not because of
your inability, but rather because of a lack of experience. In writing this document, a lot of
material was reviewed, yet very little give clear guidance in how to achieve good integration and
construction in a literature review. So here I present my own home made steps in an attempt to
give you a little bit of practical advice.
In my own experience, I found that free writing works well in telling a story, instead of writing with
an open book next to you. If you have a good idea of what you want to say, just write it down
somewhere and use the books later on to substantiate and evaluate what you have written. To
do this you have to have done a lot of reading through. You should be ready for a first draft of
your literature review after your proposal. In this stage of your research, take a blank page and
write or map on it what it is you think you want to include in your review. These should become
your first draft headings. Underneath each heading scribble down without using a book or a
reference what you think such a section should contain. After you have done this, take another
Version 1.1
Page 11
colour pen and in a couple of words describe the links between the different sections. This
should aid you in assuring that you have a story line and that everything you want to add to your
review is related and there for a good reason. You are now ready to use your resources to give
flesh to the sections. Remember, you can always change, swop, delete and amend what you
have written – don’t be afraid to write.
After you have written your first draft you have to evaluate what you have written.
With
evaluation, I mean you have to evaluate every sentence and every paragraph that you have
written.
You start with the sections.
Evaluate whether the introductory sentence and the
concluding sentence of each section is properly integrated (talks to each other). Then work
through each paragraph and next to the paragraph scribble down what it says in a couple of
words. Evaluate if it says what you wanted it to say. Evaluate whether it fits within the section
and the preceding and following paragraphs. Do this with every paragraph and every section. If
a sentence does not contribute to a paragraph theme, take it out or change it.
It takes a couple of drafts to write a well integrated piece of work. Don’t give up. It takes time –
and it should.
Some of your writing will be a display of what you know; that is describing the body of knowledge
pertaining to your study. This is easy for most. Then some writing would bring an argument or a
point across. This is what is referred to as argumentative writing. This is really messy and
difficult since you cannot only suck an argument out of your thumb, but must carefully weave
what you have read into a good and substantial argument. Such an argument will be something
that usually develops out of your reading and understanding of the scholarship out there. You
have to use the information you have read and analysed as evidence in your argument.
Especially during the first couple of drafts of your literature review, you will find it very difficult to
write an argument and it usually has something to do with your comprehension of what was
written. Rule number one is that you have to really, really understand the concepts, debates and
theories in the field to write an argument. As such, your arguments will develop through reading
and understanding. Rule number 2 is that your ability to argue is limited due to the breadth of the
information that you have read. To argue means that you have assessed the different opposing
views in pertaining to a topic, and based on the evidence presented to you in the literature, you
decide which side you agree with (if any). It also implies that you are questioning and challenging
the work of previously mentioned researchers, based on valid points of critique.
It does not
mean, as commonly accepted by students that an argument is your own opinion. It is your
opinion based on the knowledge of previous work and substantiated by the theory. For example,
Version 1.1
Page 12
an argument is not: “I think Perry’s work is way off the mark” but rather “Perry’s (1998) research is
the only research indicating that conflict will actually bring forth order.
This issue needs
clarification through further research”. If you read the preceding argument again, you will see it is
not actually the authors own opinion, but rather that the authors own ideas is used to structure the
treatment of the literature and the create the theoretical framework at the end of the chapter. And
even this should be clearly supported by authorative evidence and logic (Perry, 2002).
5. Criteria for a literature review
Use this criterion to review your literature review before you send it to your supervisor. It is
similar to the criteria used in your final dissertation assessment.
Is the review comprehensive? It should be exhaustive in its coverage of the main aspects of
the study.
Does the literature review cover the broad field(s) related to the study?
Does the student illustrate an in-depth understanding of the works in the field?
Are the sources’ authors known and credible?
Are the article used published in a well-known national or international journals?
Are the references recent?
If the sources are older than 10 years, is there good reason for its use (such as being part of
classical works on the topic)?
Are the articles or books peer reviewed?
Are the sources selected to show only one point of view? Or are many points of view
reviewed?
Is the review relevant to the study?
Is the review well organised? It should not only cover and summarise the information in the
sources, it should give a critical evaluation and synthesis of the works. It should also be well
structured and logically organised.
Are areas of controversy discussed?
Does the review clearly indicate how the proposed study fits with existing scholarship and
thus indicate its significance?
Version 1.1
Page 13
References
Badehrost, C. (2008). Dissertation Writing: A research journey. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.
Henning, E, Gravett, S & Van Rensburg, W. (2002). Finding your way in Academic Writing.
Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.
Hofstee, E. (2006). Constructing a good dissertation: A practical guide to finishing a Masters,
MBA or PhD on Schedule. Sandton: EPE.
Mouton, J. (2001). How to succeed in your Master’s & Doctoral Studies: A South African Guide
and Resource Book. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.
Perry, C. (2002). A structured approach to presenting theses: notes for students and their
supervisors. Available from the author at [email protected].
Version 1.1
Page 14