Debating Systematic Literature Reviews (SLR) and their Ramifications for IS: A rejoinder to Mike Chiasson, Briony Oates, Ulrike Schultze, and Richard Watson

Abstract

Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) are making their inroads into the IS discipline. By responding to the commentaries this rejoinder contributes to a debate about potential merits, limitations and wider ramifications of SLR for the IS discipline. More specifically we engage with the questions: What is an SLR and can it be conducted partially? How can literature reviews and SLR be improved? What is the view of ‘evidence’ in SLRs and the evidence-based practice movement and what are potential implications for ‘research informing IS practice'? How can the efficiency and effectiveness of literature reviews be improved? Overall we argue for a practice of critique that scrutinizes methodologies such as SLR in the light of values and ends we seek to achieve in the IS discipline.