(A) The literature review creates the paper’s theoretical framework. While doing so, it defines the key terms of the paper by explaining the definitions and terminology specific to the subject of the paper. The literature review focuses on previous studies, theories, models, or case studies that provide support and clarification of the research topic. The literature has three main purposes, first to tell the reader the theory of the previous research, the method, or methodology of the previous research, and areas of the previous studies that are missing which the current study will address.
(B)Greenwood, Gibson, and Murphy (2008) used a number of sources to support their claim that values differ among the different generations. In fact, the values section of the literature review has 24 different sources that support the variances in the terminal values of three groups consisting of baby boomers, generation x, and generation y. The researchers use a statement of fact about their study and list all the previous studies that provide support for that conclusion. It is a clear and concise manner of providing support and evidence of the theoretical framework their work establishes.
(3)Netting et al (2005) conducted a study on faith-based non-profits and did not use traditional headings or terms to indicate the literature review and methodology. In this manner, it is difficult to determine if the hypothesis or research question was adequately addressed the intent in the literature review (Netting et al, 2005). The researchers state that there are few previous studies on this subject matter and present sources instead to support the definitions of the roles found in non-profit organizations (Netting et al, 2005). In this manner, the study has support of the terms, definitions, and provides clarification of the positions but lacks depth in support for the understanding of how their research questions or purpose came about.
Nufrio and Tietje (2008) also do not use typical terms such as literature review or methodology. The study uses two main sources for the foundation of the study, the college it refers to and the individual who started the program studied. While there is substantial information presented about the program, it lacks the support additional sources would provide.
For example, the researchers do not address if other programs are available that are similar to the program studied or if other similar programs were attempted but failed. The study also lacks a defined hypothesis or research question, instead claims it is an examination “between the Constructive Action and Action Learning traditions and suggest how the Constructive Action process can be improved by incorporating Action Learning components” (Nufrio & Tietje, 2008, p.3).
(4) The source identified for a literature review on public private partnerships comes from a 2011 conference “CIB TG72 /ARCOM Doctoral Research” which includes nine current and relevant articles and studies on different aspects of this topic. This one source provides in-depth information and works as a guide to investigating where the proposed research study fits into the gap of established research.
Akintoye, A., Liyanage, C., & Renukappa, S. (Eds.). (2011). Public Private Partnerships
CIB TG72 /ARCOM Doctoral Research Workshop. Lancaster, UK: University of Central Lancashire.
Greenwood, R. A., Gibson, J. W., & Murphy, Jr., E. F. (2008). An Investigation of Generational Values in the Workplace: Divergence, Convergence, and Implications for Leadership. International Leadership Journal, 1(1): 57-76.
Netting, F. E., O’Conner, M. K., Thomas, M. L., & Yancey, G. (2005). Volunteers, Staff, & Participants Roles in Faith-based Programs: Education & Practice Implications. Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 1-23.
Nurfio, P. M. & Teitje, L. (2008). The Theory and Practice of Action Learning In the MPA Program at Metropolitan College of New York. Public Administration Quarterly, 32(2): 214-242.