Palminder Smart

Bio: Palminder Smart is an academic researcher from Cranfield University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Concurrent engineering & New product development. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 9 publications receiving 10485 citations.

Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review

Abstract: Undertaking a review of the literature is an important part of any research project. The researcher both maps and assesses the relevant intellectual territory in order to specify a research question which will further develop the knowledge base. However, traditional 'narrative' reviews frequently lack thoroughness, and in many cases are not undertaken as genuine pieces of investigatory science. Consequently they can lack a means for making sense of what the collection of studies is saying. These reviews can be biased by the researcher and often lack rigour. Furthermore, the use of reviews of the available evidence to provide insights and guidance for intervention into operational needs of practitioners and policymakers has largely been of secondary importance. For practitioners, making sense of a mass of often-contradictory evidence has become progressively harder. The quality of evidence underpinning decision-making and action has been questioned, for inadequate or incomplete evidence seriously impedes policy formulation and implementation. In exploring ways in which evidence-informed management reviews might be achieved, the authors evaluate the process of systematic review used in the medical sciences. Over the last fifteen years, medical science has attempted to improve the review process by synthesizing research in a systematic, transparent, and reproducible manner with the twin aims of enhancing the knowledge base and informing policymaking and practice. This paper evaluates the extent to which the process of systematic review can be applied to the management field in order to produce a reliable knowledge stock and enhanced practice by developing context-sensitive research. The paper highlights the challenges in developing an appropriate methodology.

Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review

Abstract: Undertaking a review of the literature is an important part of any research project. The researcher both maps and assesses the relevant intellectual territory in order to specify a research question which will further develop the knowledge hase. However, traditional 'narrative' reviews frequently lack thoroughness, and in many cases are not undertaken as genuine pieces of investigatory science. Consequently they can lack a means for making sense of what the collection of studies is saying. These reviews can he hiased by the researcher and often lack rigour. Furthermore, the use of reviews of the available evidence to provide insights and guidance for intervention into operational needs of practitioners and policymakers has largely been of secondary importance. For practitioners, making sense of a mass of often-contrad ictory evidence has hecome progressively harder. The quality of evidence underpinning decision-making and action has heen questioned, for inadequate or incomplete evidence seriously impedes policy formulation and implementation. In exploring ways in which evidence-informed management reviews might be achieved, the authors evaluate the process of systematic review used in the medical sciences. Over the last fifteen years, medical science has attempted to improve the review process hy synthesizing research in a systematic, transparent, and reproducihie manner with the twin aims of enhancing the knowledge hase and informing policymaking and practice. This paper evaluates the extent to which the process of systematic review can be applied to the management field in order to produce a reliable knowledge stock and enhanced practice by developing context-sensitive research. The paper highlights the challenges in developing an appropriate methodology.

Developing an evidence-based approach to management knowledge using systematic review

Abstract: Undertaking a review of the literature is an important part of any research project. The researcher both maps and assesses the relevant intellectual territory, in order to specify a research question, which will further develop the knowledge base. However, traditional 'narrative' reviews often lack rigour, and in many cases are not undertaken as genuine pieces of investigatory science. Consequently they can lack a means for making sense of what the collection of studies is saying. These reviews can be biased by the researcher and often lack rigour. Further, the use of reviews of the available evidence to provide insights and guidance for intervention into the operational needs of practitioners and policy-makers has largely been of secondary importance. For practitioners making sense of a mass of often contradictory evidence has become progressively harder. The quality of evidence underpinning decision making and action has been questioned, for inadequate or incomplete evidence seriously impedes policy formulation and implementation. In exploring ways in which evidence-based management reviews might be achieved, the authors evaluate the process of systematic review used in the medical sciences. Over the last 15 years medical science has attempted to improve the review process by synthesising research in a systematic, transparent and reproducible manner with the twin aims of enhancing the knowledge base and informing policy making and practice. This paper evaluates the extent to which the process of systematic review can be applied to the management field in order to produce a reliable knowledge stock and enhanced practice by developing context sensitive research. The paper highlights the challenges in developing an appropriate methodology.

A workbook-based methodology for implementing concurrent engineering

Abstract: Concurrent Engineering demands a new way of working and many organisations experience difficulty during implementation. The research described in this paper has the aim to develop a paper-based workbook style methodology that companies can use to increase the benefits generated by Concurrent Engineering, while reducing implementation costs, risk and time. The three-stage methodology provides guidance based on knowledge accumulated from implementation experience and best practitioners. It encourages companies to learn to manage their Concurrent Engineering implementation by taking actions which expose them to new and valuable experiences. This helps to continuously improve understanding of how to maximise the benefits from Concurrent Engineering. The methodology is particularly designed to cater for organisational and contextual uniqueness, as Concurrent Engineering implementations will vary from company to company. Using key actions which improve the Concurrent Engineering implementation process, individual companies can develop their own ‘best practice’ for product development. The methodology ensures that key implementation issues, which are primarily human and organisational, are addressed using simple but proven techniques. This paper describes the key issues that the majority of companies face when implementing Concurrent Engineering. The structure of the methodology is described to show how the issues are addressed and resolved. The key actions used to improve the Concurrent Engineering implementation process are explained and their inclusion in the implementation methodology described. Relevance to industry Implementation of Concurrent Engineering concepts in manufacturing industry has not been a straightforward process. This paper describes a workbook-style tool that manufacturing companies can use to accelerate and improve their Concurrent Engineering implementation.

Understanding the Concurrent Engineering Implementation Process — A Study Using Focus Groups

Abstract: Focus groups have been used as one method of collecting data on how practitioners view Concurrent Engineering and its implementation. Focus groups are a controversial research method, but their use provides a rich source of primary data, which can be supplemented by other data collection methods. The output from the focus groups shows the issues which Concurrent Engineering practitioners consider to be important for Concurrent Engineering implementation: senior management commitment, implementation planning, launching a multi-functional pilot team fast, and having a continuous improvement process. The need for extensive organisational analysis prior to implementation, for using team profiling techniques, early development of a new product strategy and investment in new technology have been understated by focus group participants.

Entrepreneurial Orientation and Business Performance: An Assessment of Past Research and Suggestions for the Future

Abstract: Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) has received substantial conceptual and empirical attention, representing one of the few areas in entrepreneurship research where a cumulative body of knowledge i ...

Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines

Abstract: Knowledge production within the field of business research is accelerating at a tremendous speed while at the same time remaining fragmented and interdisciplinary. This makes it hard to keep up with state-of-the-art and to be at the forefront of research, as well as to assess the collective evidence in a particular area of business research. This is why the literature review as a research method is more relevant than ever. Traditional literature reviews often lack thoroughness and rigor and are conducted ad hoc, rather than following a specific methodology. Therefore, questions can be raised about the quality and trustworthiness of these types of reviews. This paper discusses literature review as a methodology for conducting research and offers an overview of different types of reviews, as well as some guidelines to how to both conduct and evaluate a literature review paper. It also discusses common pitfalls and how to get literature reviews published.

A Multi‐Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Abstract: This paper consolidates the state of academic research on innovation. Based on a systematic review of literature published over the past 27 years, we synthesize various research perspectives into a comprehensive multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation - linking leadership, innovation as a process, and innovation as an outcome. We also suggest measures of determinants of organizational innovation and present implications for both research and managerial practice.

Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization

Abstract: We aim to develop a meaningful single-source reference for management and organization scholars interested in using bibliometric methods for mapping research specialties. Such methods introduce a measure of objectivity into the evaluation of scientific literature and hold the potential to increase rigor and mitigate researcher bias in reviews of scientific literature by aggregating the opinions of multiple scholars working in the field. We introduce the bibliometric methods of citation analysis, co-citation analysis, bibliographical coupling, co-author analysis, and co-word analysis and present a workflow for conducting bibliometric studies with guidelines for researchers. We envision that bibliometric methods will complement meta-analysis and qualitative structured literature reviews as a method for reviewing and evaluating scientific literature. To demonstrate bibliometric methods, we performed a citation and co-citation analysis to map the intellectual structure of the Organizational Research Methods j...