Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) adopt a specified and transparent approach in order to scope the literature in a field or sub-field. However, there has been little critical comment on their purpose and processes in practice. By undertaking an overview of SLRs in the field of social media (SM) marketing, this article undertakes a critical evaluation of the SLR purposes and processes in a set of recent SLRs and presents a future research agenda for social media marketing. The overview shows that the purposes of SLRs include the following: making sense (of research in a field), developing a concept matrix/taxonomy and supporting research and practice. On SLR processes, while there is some consensus on the stages of the process, there is considerable variation in how these processes are executed. This article offers a resource to inform practice and acts as a platform for further critical debate regarding the nature and value of SLRs.
TranfieldDStarkeyK.The nature, social organization and promotion of management research: towards policy. Brit J Manage1998; 9: 341–353.
2.
McGaghieWC.Varieties of integrative scholarship: why rules of evidence, criteria, and standards matter. Acad Med2015; 3: 294–302.
3.
RowleyJSlackF.Conducting a literature review. Manage Res News2004; 27: 31–39.
4.
WulffJN.A systematic assessment of empirical research on foreign entry mode. Eur J Market2016; 50: 942–972.
5.
AguinisHRamaniRSAlabduljaderN.What you see is what you get? Enhancing methodological transparency in management research. Acad Manage Ann2018; 12: 1–28.
6.
CookDJGreengoldNLEllrodtAGet al. The relation between systematic reviews and practice guidelines. Ann Int Med1997; 127: 210–216.
7.
LittelJCorcoranJPillaiV.Systematic literature reviews and meta-analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
8.
WebsterJWatsonRT.Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a review. MIS Quart2002; 26: 8–23.
9.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJet al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med2009; 6(7): e1000097.
10.
CrossanMMApaydinM.A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: a systematic review of the literature. J Manage Stud2010; 47: 1154–1191.
11.
TranfieldDDenyerDSmartP.Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Brit J Manage2003; 14: 207–222.
12.
HarrisJLBoothACargoMet al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 2: methods for question formulation, searching, and protocol development for qualitative evidence synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol2018; 97: 39–48.
13.
FischCBlockJ.Six tips for your (systematic) literature review in business and management research. Manage Rev Quart2018; 68: 103–106.
14.
BoellSKCecez-KecmanovicD.On being ‘systematic’ in literature reviews. J Inform Technol2015; 30: 161–173.
15.
DenyerDTranfieldD.Using qualitative research synthesis to build a actionable knowledge base. Manage Decis2006; 44: 213–227.
16.
TorracoRJ.Writing integrative literature reviews: guidelines and examples. Hum Res Develop Rev2005; 4: 356–367.
17.
WatsonRT.Beyond being systematic in literature reviews in IS. J Inform Technol2015; 30: 185–187.
18.
DenyerDTranfieldDVan AkenJE.Developing design propositions through research synthesis. Organ Stud2008; 29: 393–413.
19.
AlalwanAARanaNPDwivediYet al. Social media in marketing: a review and analysis of the existing literature. Telem Inform2017; 34: 1177–1190.
20.
RowleyJ.Evidence-based marketing: a perspective on the ‘practice-theory divide. Int J Market Res2012; 54: 521–541.
21.
DenyerDTranfieldD.Producing a systematic review. In: BuchananD (ed.) The SAGE handbook of organizational research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2009, pp. 671–689.
22.
LambertonCStephenA T.A thematic exploration of digital, SM, and mobile marketing: research evolution from 2000 to 2015 and an agenda for future inquiry. Journal of Marketing2016; 80: 146–172.
23.
EffingRSpilTAM. The social strategy cone: Towards a framework for evaluating social media strategies. InternationalJournal of Information Management2016; 36: 1–8.
24.
BusalimAHRazakAHussinC.Understanding social commerce: A systematic literature review and directions for further research. InternationalJournal of Information Management2016; 36: 1075–1088.
25.
SaloJ.Social media research in the industrial marketing field: Review of literature. Industrial Marketing Management2017; 66: 115–129.
26.
BaethgeCKlierJKlierM.Social commerce—state–of–the–art and future research directions. Electronic Markets2016; 26: 1–22.
27.
KingRARacherlaPBushVD.What we know and don’t know about online word-of-mouth: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Interactive Marketing2014; 28: 167–183.
28.
Ketonen-OksiSJussilaJJKärkkäinenH.Social media based value creation and business models. Indus Manage Data Syst2016; 116: 1820–1838.
29.
ZhangKZBenyoucefM.Consumer behavior in social commerce: A literature review. Decision Support Systems2016; 86: 95–108.
30.
NgaiEWTTaoSSCMoonKKL. Social media research: Theories, constructs, and conceptual frameworks. International Journal of Information Management2015; 35: 33–44.
31.
AhmedY AZakariaNH.Social media for knowledge sharing: a systematic literature review. Telematics and Informatics2018. In Press.
32.
AlvesHFernandesCRaposoM.Social media marketing: A literature review and implications. Psychology and Marketing2016; 33: 1029–1038.
33.
AbedSSDwivediYKWilliamsMD.Social media as a bridge to e- commerce adoption in SMEs: A systematic literature review. The Marketing Review2015; 15: 39–57.
34.
BrymanABellE.Business research methods. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
35.
PareGTrudelM-CJaanaMet al. Synthesizing information systems knowledge: a typology of literature reviews. Inform Manage2015; 52: 183–199.
36.
AdamsRJSmartPHuffAS.Shades of grey: guidelines for working with the grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies. Int J Manage Rev2017; 19: 432–454.
37.
DurachCKembroJWielandA.A new paradigm for systematic literature reviews in supply chain management. J Suppl Chain Manage2017; 53(4): 67–85.
