literature review research proposals

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship, demonstrating your understanding of the topic and showing how your work contributes to the ongoing conversation in the field. Learning how to write a literature review is a critical tool for successful research. Your ability to summarize and synthesize prior research pertaining to a certain topic demonstrates your grasp on the topic of study, and assists in the learning process. 

Table of Contents

• What is the purpose of literature review? 
• a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction: 
• b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes: 
• c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs: 
• d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts: 

How to write a good literature review 

• Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question: 
• Decide on the Scope of Your Review: 
• Select Databases for Searches: 
• Conduct Searches and Keep Track: 
• Review the Literature: 
• Organize and Write Your Literature Review: 
• How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal? 
• Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review?

A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature, establishes the context for their own research, and contributes to scholarly conversations on the topic. One of the purposes of a literature review is also to help researchers avoid duplicating previous work and ensure that their research is informed by and builds upon the existing body of knowledge.

What is the purpose of literature review?

A literature review serves several important purposes within academic and research contexts. Here are some key objectives and functions of a literature review: 2  

1. Contextualizing the Research Problem: The literature review provides a background and context for the research problem under investigation. It helps to situate the study within the existing body of knowledge. 

2. Identifying Gaps in Knowledge: By identifying gaps, contradictions, or areas requiring further research, the researcher can shape the research question and justify the significance of the study. This is crucial for ensuring that the new research contributes something novel to the field. 

Find academic papers related to your research topic faster. Try Research on Paperpal  

3. Understanding Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks: Literature reviews help researchers gain an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used in previous studies. This aids in the development of a theoretical framework for the current research. 

4. Providing Methodological Insights: Another purpose of literature reviews is that it allows researchers to learn about the methodologies employed in previous studies. This can help in choosing appropriate research methods for the current study and avoiding pitfalls that others may have encountered. 

5. Establishing Credibility: A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with existing scholarship, establishing their credibility and expertise in the field. It also helps in building a solid foundation for the new research. 

6. Informing Hypotheses or Research Questions: The literature review guides the formulation of hypotheses or research questions by highlighting relevant findings and areas of uncertainty in existing literature. 

Literature review example

Let’s delve deeper with a literature review example: Let’s say your literature review is about the impact of climate change on biodiversity. You might format your literature review into sections such as the effects of climate change on habitat loss and species extinction, phenological changes, and marine biodiversity. Each section would then summarize and analyze relevant studies in those areas, highlighting key findings and identifying gaps in the research. The review would conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on specific aspects of the relationship between climate change and biodiversity. The following literature review template provides a glimpse into the recommended literature review structure and content, demonstrating how research findings are organized around specific themes within a broader topic. 

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, including significant impacts on biodiversity. This literature review synthesizes key findings from various studies: 

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

Climate change-induced alterations in temperature and precipitation patterns contribute to habitat loss, affecting numerous species (Thomas et al., 2004). The review discusses how these changes increase the risk of extinction, particularly for species with specific habitat requirements. 

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

Observations of range shifts and changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) are documented in response to changing climatic conditions (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). These shifts affect ecosystems and may lead to mismatches between species and their resources. 

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

The review explores the impact of climate change on marine biodiversity, emphasizing ocean acidification’s threat to coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Changes in pH levels negatively affect coral calcification, disrupting the delicate balance of marine ecosystems. 

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the literature review discusses various adaptive strategies adopted by species and conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity (Hannah et al., 2007). It emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for effective conservation planning. 

Strengthen your literature review with factual insights. Try Research on Paperpal for free!    

Writing a literature review involves summarizing and synthesizing existing research on a particular topic. A good literature review format should include the following elements. 

Introduction: The introduction sets the stage for your literature review, providing context and introducing the main focus of your review. 

• Opening Statement: Begin with a general statement about the broader topic and its significance in the field. 
• Scope and Purpose: Clearly define the scope of your literature review. Explain the specific research question or objective you aim to address. 
• Organizational Framework: Briefly outline the structure of your literature review, indicating how you will categorize and discuss the existing research. 
• Significance of the Study: Highlight why your literature review is important and how it contributes to the understanding of the chosen topic. 
• Thesis Statement: Conclude the introduction with a concise thesis statement that outlines the main argument or perspective you will develop in the body of the literature review. 

Body: The body of the literature review is where you provide a comprehensive analysis of existing literature, grouping studies based on themes, methodologies, or other relevant criteria. 

• Organize by Theme or Concept: Group studies that share common themes, concepts, or methodologies. Discuss each theme or concept in detail, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps or areas of disagreement. 
• Critical Analysis: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each study. Discuss the methodologies used, the quality of evidence, and the overall contribution of each work to the understanding of the topic. 
• Synthesis of Findings: Synthesize the information from different studies to highlight trends, patterns, or areas of consensus in the literature. 
• Identification of Gaps: Discuss any gaps or limitations in the existing research and explain how your review contributes to filling these gaps. 
• Transition between Sections: Provide smooth transitions between different themes or concepts to maintain the flow of your literature review. 

Write and Cite as you go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free.   

Conclusion: The conclusion of your literature review should summarize the main findings, highlight the contributions of the review, and suggest avenues for future research. 

• Summary of Key Findings: Recap the main findings from the literature and restate how they contribute to your research question or objective. 
• Contributions to the Field: Discuss the overall contribution of your literature review to the existing knowledge in the field. 
• Implications and Applications: Explore the practical implications of the findings and suggest how they might impact future research or practice. 
• Recommendations for Future Research: Identify areas that require further investigation and propose potential directions for future research in the field. 
• Final Thoughts: Conclude with a final reflection on the importance of your literature review and its relevance to the broader academic community. 

Conducting a literature review

Conducting a literature review is an essential step in research that involves reviewing and analyzing existing literature on a specific topic. It’s important to know how to do a literature review effectively, so here are the steps to follow: 1  

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:

• Select a topic that is relevant to your field of study. 
• Clearly define your research question or objective. Determine what specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? 

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:

• Determine the timeframe for your literature review. Are you focusing on recent developments, or do you want a historical overview? 
• Consider the geographical scope. Is your review global, or are you focusing on a specific region? 
• Define the inclusion and exclusion criteria. What types of sources will you include? Are there specific types of studies or publications you will exclude? 

Select Databases for Searches:

• Identify relevant databases for your field. Examples include PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. 
• Consider searching in library catalogs, institutional repositories, and specialized databases related to your topic. 

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:

• Develop a systematic search strategy using keywords, Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), and other search techniques. 
• Record and document your search strategy for transparency and replicability. 
• Keep track of the articles, including publication details, abstracts, and links. Use citation management tools like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to organize your references. 

Review the Literature:

• Evaluate the relevance and quality of each source. Consider the methodology, sample size, and results of studies. 
• Organize the literature by themes or key concepts. Identify patterns, trends, and gaps in the existing research. 
• Summarize key findings and arguments from each source. Compare and contrast different perspectives. 
• Identify areas where there is a consensus in the literature and where there are conflicting opinions. 
• Provide critical analysis and synthesis of the literature. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing research? 

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:

• Literature review outline should be based on themes, chronological order, or methodological approaches. 
• Write a clear and coherent narrative that synthesizes the information gathered. 
• Use proper citations for each source and ensure consistency in your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). 
• Conclude your literature review by summarizing key findings, identifying gaps, and suggesting areas for future research. 

Whether you’re exploring a new research field or finding new angles to develop an existing topic, sifting through hundreds of papers can take more time than you have to spare. But what if you could find science-backed insights with verified citations in seconds? That’s the power of Paperpal’s new Research feature!  

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface with the option to save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 
• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

The literature review sample and detailed advice on writing and conducting a review will help you produce a well-structured report. But remember that a good literature review is an ongoing process, and it may be necessary to revisit and update it as your research progresses. By combining effortless research with an easy citation process, Paperpal Research streamlines the literature review process and empowers you to write faster and with more confidence. Try Paperpal Research now and see for yourself.  

Frequently asked questions

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing literature (published and unpublished works) on a specific topic or research question and provides a synthesis of the current state of knowledge in a particular field. A well-conducted literature review is crucial for researchers to build upon existing knowledge, avoid duplication of efforts, and contribute to the advancement of their field. It also helps researchers situate their work within a broader context and facilitates the development of a sound theoretical and conceptual framework for their studies.

Literature review is a crucial component of research writing, providing a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. The aim is to keep professionals up to date by providing an understanding of ongoing developments within a specific field, including research methods, and experimental techniques used in that field, and present that knowledge in the form of a written report. Also, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the scholar in his or her field.  

Before writing a literature review, it’s essential to undertake several preparatory steps to ensure that your review is well-researched, organized, and focused. This includes choosing a topic of general interest to you and doing exploratory research on that topic, writing an annotated bibliography, and noting major points, especially those that relate to the position you have taken on the topic. 

Literature reviews and academic research papers are essential components of scholarly work but serve different purposes within the academic realm. 3 A literature review aims to provide a foundation for understanding the current state of research on a particular topic, identify gaps or controversies, and lay the groundwork for future research. Therefore, it draws heavily from existing academic sources, including books, journal articles, and other scholarly publications. In contrast, an academic research paper aims to present new knowledge, contribute to the academic discourse, and advance the understanding of a specific research question. Therefore, it involves a mix of existing literature (in the introduction and literature review sections) and original data or findings obtained through research methods. 

Literature reviews are essential components of academic and research papers, and various strategies can be employed to conduct them effectively. If you want to know how to write a literature review for a research paper, here are four common approaches that are often used by researchers.  Chronological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the chronological order of publication. It helps to trace the development of a topic over time, showing how ideas, theories, and research have evolved.  Thematic Review: Thematic reviews focus on identifying and analyzing themes or topics that cut across different studies. Instead of organizing the literature chronologically, it is grouped by key themes or concepts, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the topic.  Methodological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the research methods employed in different studies. It helps to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of various methodologies and allows the reader to evaluate the reliability and validity of the research findings.  Theoretical Review: A theoretical review examines the literature based on the theoretical frameworks used in different studies. This approach helps to identify the key theories that have been applied to the topic and assess their contributions to the understanding of the subject.  It’s important to note that these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and a literature review may combine elements of more than one approach. The choice of strategy depends on the research question, the nature of the literature available, and the goals of the review. Additionally, other strategies, such as integrative reviews or systematic reviews, may be employed depending on the specific requirements of the research.

The literature review format can vary depending on the specific publication guidelines. However, there are some common elements and structures that are often followed. Here is a general guideline for the format of a literature review:  Introduction:   Provide an overview of the topic.  Define the scope and purpose of the literature review.  State the research question or objective.  Body:   Organize the literature by themes, concepts, or chronology.  Critically analyze and evaluate each source.  Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the studies.  Highlight any methodological limitations or biases.  Identify patterns, connections, or contradictions in the existing research.  Conclusion:   Summarize the key points discussed in the literature review.  Highlight the research gap.  Address the research question or objective stated in the introduction.  Highlight the contributions of the review and suggest directions for future research.

Both annotated bibliographies and literature reviews involve the examination of scholarly sources. While annotated bibliographies focus on individual sources with brief annotations, literature reviews provide a more in-depth, integrated, and comprehensive analysis of existing literature on a specific topic. The key differences are as follows: 

References 

• Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review.  Journal of criminal justice education ,  24 (2), 218-234. 
• Pan, M. L. (2016).  Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Taylor & Francis. 
• Cantero, C. (2019). How to write a literature review.  San José State University Writing Center . 

Paperpal is an AI writing assistant that help academics write better, faster with real-time suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. Trained on millions of research manuscripts enhanced by professional academic editors, Paperpal delivers human precision at machine speed.  

Try it for free or upgrade to  Paperpal Prime , which unlocks unlimited access to premium features like academic translation, paraphrasing, contextual synonyms, consistency checks and more. It’s like always having a professional academic editor by your side! Go beyond limitations and experience the future of academic writing.  Get Paperpal Prime now at just US$19 a month!

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• How Long Should a Chapter Be?
• How to Use Paperpal to Generate Emails & Cover Letters?

6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, how to ace grant writing for research funding..., how to write a high-quality conference paper, how paperpal’s research feature helps you develop and..., how paperpal is enhancing academic productivity and accelerating..., how to write a successful book chapter for..., academic editing: how to self-edit academic text with..., 4 ways paperpal encourages responsible writing with ai, what are scholarly sources and where can you..., how to write a hypothesis types and examples , measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Published on 22 February 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 7 June 2022.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research.

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

• Search for relevant literature
• Evaluate sources
• Identify themes, debates and gaps
• Outline the structure
• Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarise sources – it analyses, synthesises, and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

Why write a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1: search for relevant literature, step 2: evaluate and select sources, step 3: identify themes, debates and gaps, step 4: outline your literature review’s structure, step 5: write your literature review, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a dissertation or thesis, you will have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your dissertation addresses a gap or contributes to a debate

You might also have to write a literature review as a stand-alone assignment. In this case, the purpose is to evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of scholarly debates around a topic.

The content will look slightly different in each case, but the process of conducting a literature review follows the same steps. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

• Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
• Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
• Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
• Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research objectives and questions .

If you are writing a literature review as a stand-alone assignment, you will have to choose a focus and develop a central question to direct your search. Unlike a dissertation research question, this question has to be answerable without collecting original data. You should be able to answer it based only on a review of existing publications.

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research topic. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list if you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

• Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
• Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
• Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some databases to search for journals and articles include:

• Your university’s library catalogue
• Google Scholar
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
• EconLit (economics)
• Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

Read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

To identify the most important publications on your topic, take note of recurring citations. If the same authors, books or articles keep appearing in your reading, make sure to seek them out.

You probably won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on the topic – you’ll have to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your questions.

For each publication, ask yourself:

• What question or problem is the author addressing?
• What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
• What are the key theories, models and methods? Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
• What are the results and conclusions of the study?
• How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
• How does the publication contribute to your understanding of the topic? What are its key insights and arguments?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible, and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

The scope of your review will depend on your topic and discipline: in the sciences you usually only review recent literature, but in the humanities you might take a long historical perspective (for example, to trace how a concept has changed in meaning over time).

Remember that you can use our template to summarise and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using!

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It’s important to keep track of your sources with references to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography, where you compile full reference information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

You can use our free APA Reference Generator for quick, correct, consistent citations.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

To begin organising your literature review’s argument and structure, you need to understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

• Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
• Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
• Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
• Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
• Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

• Most research has focused on young women.
• There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
• But there is still a lack of robust research on highly-visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat – this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarising sources in order.

Try to analyse patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organise your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

• Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
• Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text, your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasise the timeliness of the topic (“many recent studies have focused on the problem of x”) or highlight a gap in the literature (“while there has been much research on x, few researchers have taken y into consideration”).

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, make sure to follow these tips:

• Summarise and synthesise: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole.
• Analyse and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole.
• Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources.
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transitions and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts.

In the conclusion, you should summarise the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasise their significance.

If the literature review is part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate how your research addresses gaps and contributes new knowledge, or discuss how you have drawn on existing theories and methods to build a framework for your research. This can lead directly into your methodology section.

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarise yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your  dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 27 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

How to Prepare a Research Proposal and Literature Review

All HDR candidates are required to prepare a research proposal and literature review for their first Research Progress Review. If you are a PhD candidate, this will be your Confirmation Review. 

Your research proposal and literature review should be a comprehensive outline of your research topic and show how you will make an original contribution to knowledge in your field. Your Review panel will use your research proposal and literature review to assess the viability of your research project, and to provide you with valuable feedback on your topic, methodology, research design, timeline and milestones. 

UNSW Academic Skills provides a detailed description of how to develop and structure your research proposal. 

Your Faculty and/or School may have particular requirements, and you should contact your Postgraduate Coordinator or your supervisor if you’re unsure of what is required.  

Additional Resources

All disciplinary areas A guide for writing thesis proposals - UNSW Academic Skills Confirmation – not as big a deal as you think it is? - the Thesis Whisperer

Humanities and Social Sciences Essential ingredients of a good research proposal for undergraduate and postgraduate students in the social sciences – Raymond Talinbe Abdulai and Anthony Owusu-Ansah, SAGE Open, Jul-Sep 2014  Template for writing your PhD Confirmation document in Sociology and Anthropology - S A Hamed Hosseini

Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine How to prepare a research proposal – Asya Al-Riyami, Oman Medical Journal Writing a scientific research proposal – author unknown

• Find a degree
• Ask a Question
• Getting Started
• International
• Find a Researcher/Area
• Apply for a Higher Degree Research Program
•   UNSW Sydney NSW 2052 Australia
•   Telephone +61 2 9385 5500
•   Maps

Graduate Research School, Level 2, Rupert Myers Building (South Wing), UNSW Sydney NSW 2052 Australia Telephone +61 2 93855500 Dean of Graduate Research, Professor Jonathan Morris. UNSW CRICOS   Provider Code:  00098G  TEQSA Provider ID : PRV12055  ABN:  57 195 873 179

Literature Review in Research Proposal: A Comprehensive Guide

• Introduction: What is a Literature Review and Why is it Important?

The introduction is an essential part of any literature review in a research proposal. It provides a foundation for the entire review and gives context to the importance of conducting a literature review in the first place. In this section, you will need to provide a brief definition of what a literature review is and why it is an essential component of a research proposal.

A literature review is a critical evaluation and summary of published research studies and other sources relevant to a particular research topic. The purpose of a literature review is to identify and evaluate the existing knowledge on a topic, as well as to identify any gaps in the knowledge base that the proposed research aims to fill.

In a research proposal, the introduction section must explain the importance of the literature review to the overall project. It is an opportunity to convince the reader of the significance of the research problem and to show how the literature review will contribute to knowledge building. This section should also provide a clear and concise statement of the research problem and the research question(s).

Overall, the introduction section sets the stage for the literature review and the research proposal as a whole. It provides a context for the research problem, highlights the knowledge gaps that the proposed research aims to fill, and justifies the importance of the literature review in achieving the research objectives. By providing a clear and compelling introduction, researchers can ensure that their proposal has a strong foundation for success.

In This Article:

Defining the Research Problem

Developing a research question, conducting a literature search, analyzing and synthesizing literature, evaluating the quality of literature, identifying themes and patterns, previous articles:, how to change document to pdf: a step-by-step guide.

• PowerPoint Remove Background Feature:Say Goodbye to Cluttered Presentations
• How to Make Manuscript: Tips and Tricks for Writers
• Scientific Article Journal: How to Find The Right One For Your Manuscript
• Referencing Bib 101: The Basics

Subheading 2, “Defining the Research Problem: Using Literature Review to Identify Gaps in Knowledge,” is an important subheading in the literature review section of a research proposal. A literature review is an essential part of any research project as it provides a comprehensive overview of the existing body of knowledge on a specific research topic.

To define the research problem, it is crucial to identify what is already known and what is not known about the research topic. This is where a literature review comes in handy. This process of identifying gaps in knowledge allows the researcher to identify the specific research problem and develop research questions and objectives that can address those gaps.

In summary, subheading 2 is critical in the literature review section of a research proposal as it highlights the importance of using a literature review to identify gaps in knowledge and define the research problem.

The subheading “Developing a Research Question: Using Literature Review to Inform Research Questions and Objectives” highlights the crucial role of literature review in guiding the development of research questions and objectives. A well-formulated research question provides a clear focus for the study, ensuring that the research stays on track and avoids any unnecessary or irrelevant work. In addition, by conducting a thorough literature review, researchers can identify the current state of knowledge on the topic, recognize any gaps or inconsistencies in the literature, and identify potential areas of further exploration.

To develop a research question, it is important to first consider the research problem and the purpose of the study. Once the problem has been defined, the literature review can help to identify relevant theoretical and empirical frameworks that can inform the development of research questions. The literature review can also help to refine and narrow the research question, ensuring that it is feasible, relevant, and important.

The fourth subheading, “Conducting a Literature Search: Tips and Strategies for Finding Relevant Studies and Sources,” is an essential aspect of writing a comprehensive literature review for a research proposal. The literature search is a critical step in identifying relevant studies and sources that will help answer the research question and objectives.

When conducting a literature search, it is crucial to develop a systematic approach that will guide the process.

In addition, it is important to document the search process by keeping a record of the keywords used, the sources searched, and the search results. This documentation will enable researchers to retrace their steps if necessary and ensure that they are transparent in their research methods.

Another important consideration when conducting a literature search is the quality of the sources used. Researchers should be mindful of the credibility of the sources and ensure that they are peer-reviewed, reputable, and relevant to the research question. Using sources that are not reliable or relevant can weaken the literature review and the overall research proposal.

Subheading 5, “Analyzing and Synthesizing Literature: Methods for Summarizing and Integrating Findings,” is a critical component of any literature review in a research proposal. This subheading refers to the process of reviewing and synthesizing existing research to gain an understanding of the current state of knowledge on the research topic.

In the analysis and synthesis phase, the researcher begins by reviewing the literature collected in the search phase. This process involves reading through each article or source, summarizing the main findings, and noting the key points that contribute to the understanding of the research problem. The researcher may use a variety of methods to organize the information, such as tables, charts, or diagrams.

Once the researcher has completed the summary of each study, the synthesis phase begins. This is the process of integrating the findings from the individual studies into a cohesive whole. The researcher must identify commonalities and differences between the studies and identify themes and patterns that emerge across the literature.

Subheading 6, “Evaluating the Quality of Literature: Criteria for Assessing the Validity and Reliability of Studies,” is a crucial element of any literature review in a research proposal. Evaluating the quality of literature is an essential step in ensuring that the information gathered from various sources is trustworthy and accurate.

To evaluate the quality of literature, researchers must use established criteria that are specific to the research topic and questions. For example, when conducting research in the social sciences, the criteria may include the validity of the research design, the reliability of the data collection methods, and the transparency of the analysis. In contrast, when researching in the natural sciences, the criteria may include the accuracy of the measurements, the statistical analysis, and the experimental design.

One way to evaluate the quality of literature is to use a systematic review approach. Systematic reviews involve a thorough and structured process of searching, evaluating, and synthesizing existing research to answer specific research questions. This approach ensures that the quality of the literature is assessed in a rigorous and transparent way, which increases the confidence in the findings of the literature review.

Subheading 7, “Identifying Themes and Patterns: Techniques for Identifying Common Themes and Patterns Across Studies,” is an important aspect of conducting a literature review in a research proposal. After conducting a thorough literature search and analyzing and synthesizing the findings, researchers need to identify the common themes and patterns that emerge across different studies. Furthermore, this process is essential because it helps to build a solid foundation for the proposed research by identifying existing knowledge gaps and areas where further research is needed.

One technique for identifying themes and patterns is to use a thematic analysis approach. Thematic analysis involves reading through the literature and highlighting or coding relevant data that relates to the research question or objective. Once all of the data has been coded, researchers can then categorize the codes into themes, which can be used to summarize the key findings of the literature review.

Another technique for identifying themes and patterns is to use a meta-synthesis approach. Meta-synthesis involves synthesizing the findings of multiple studies and identifying common themes and patterns that emerge.

In conclusion, a literature review is an essential component of any research proposal, and its importance cannot be overstated. The literature review helps to identify existing knowledge gaps, inform research questions and objectives, and build a solid foundation for the proposed research. In addition, by conducting a thorough literature search, analyzing and synthesizing the findings, and identifying common themes and patterns, researchers can ensure that their literature review is comprehensive and relevant to their research objectives.

Similar Posts

Streamline Your Storytelling: The Power of a Storyboard Word Template

Introduction to Storyboarding and its Importance Storyboarding is a critical step in the filmmaking and animation process that involves creating a visual representation of a story’s narrative structure. It helps filmmakers and animators plan the shots, transitions, and overall flow of a production before filming or animating. A well-crafted storyboard in Microsoft Word serves as…

Maximizing the Benefits of Applicant Tracking Systems in the UK

Introduction to Applicant Tracking Systems Applicant Tracking Systems in The Uk (ATS) are software solutions that help organizations manage the recruitment process. The primary goal of these systems is to streamline the hiring process by automating many of the manual tasks involved in recruiting. ATSs are designed to make the process of attracting, screening, and…

Understanding the Benefits of Converting Your Documents to PDF PDF, or Portable Document Format, is a widely-used file format for electronic documents. One of the biggest advantages of PDF is its ability to maintain the original formatting and layout of the document, regardless of the software or platform being used to view it. This makes…

How To Make a Manuscript

Planning and Researching Your Manuscript The first step in making a successful manuscript is to plan and research. This is crucial in ensuring that your manuscript is well thought out and developed. To start, consider the genre you want to write in and what type of story you want to tell. Research similar books in…

How to Edit a Document on iPhone Like a Pro

Introduction to Document Editing on iPhone The Apple iPhone is a versatile device that is designed to make our lives easier. One of its many features is the ability to edit documents, making it a powerful tool for both personal and professional use. Whether you need to make quick changes to a document or complete…

Maximize Your Productivity with Excel’s Data Analysis Button

Introduction to the Excel Data Analysis Button The Data Analysis Button in Microsoft Excel is a powerful tool that can help streamline your data analysis process. Whether you’re a business professional, student, or simply someone looking to analyze data in a more efficient manner, the Data Analysis Button is a feature you should be familiar…

Privacy Overview

How To Structure Your Literature Review

3 options to help structure your chapter.

By: Amy Rommelspacher (PhD) | Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | November 2020 (Updated May 2023)

Writing the literature review chapter can seem pretty daunting when you’re piecing together your dissertation or thesis. As  we’ve discussed before , a good literature review needs to achieve a few very important objectives – it should:

• Demonstrate your knowledge of the research topic
• Identify the gaps in the literature and show how your research links to these
• Provide the foundation for your conceptual framework (if you have one)
• Inform your own  methodology and research design

To achieve this, your literature review needs a well-thought-out structure . Get the structure of your literature review chapter wrong and you’ll struggle to achieve these objectives. Don’t worry though – in this post, we’ll look at how to structure your literature review for maximum impact (and marks!).

But wait – is this the right time?

Deciding on the structure of your literature review should come towards the end of the literature review process – after you have collected and digested the literature, but before you start writing the chapter. 

In other words, you need to first develop a rich understanding of the literature before you even attempt to map out a structure. There’s no use trying to develop a structure before you’ve fully wrapped your head around the existing research.

Equally importantly, you need to have a structure in place before you start writing , or your literature review will most likely end up a rambling, disjointed mess. 

Importantly, don’t feel that once you’ve defined a structure you can’t iterate on it. It’s perfectly natural to adjust as you engage in the writing process. As we’ve discussed before , writing is a way of developing your thinking, so it’s quite common for your thinking to change – and therefore, for your chapter structure to change – as you write. 

Need a helping hand?

Like any other chapter in your thesis or dissertation, your literature review needs to have a clear, logical structure. At a minimum, it should have three essential components – an  introduction , a  body   and a  conclusion . 

Let’s take a closer look at each of these.

1: The Introduction Section

Just like any good introduction, the introduction section of your literature review should introduce the purpose and layout (organisation) of the chapter. In other words, your introduction needs to give the reader a taste of what’s to come, and how you’re going to lay that out. Essentially, you should provide the reader with a high-level roadmap of your chapter to give them a taste of the journey that lies ahead.

Here’s an example of the layout visualised in a literature review introduction:

Your introduction should also outline your topic (including any tricky terminology or jargon) and provide an explanation of the scope of your literature review – in other words, what you  will   and  won’t   be covering (the delimitations ). This helps ringfence your review and achieve a clear focus . The clearer and narrower your focus, the deeper you can dive into the topic (which is typically where the magic lies). 

Depending on the nature of your project, you could also present your stance or point of view at this stage. In other words, after grappling with the literature you’ll have an opinion about what the trends and concerns are in the field as well as what’s lacking. The introduction section can then present these ideas so that it is clear to examiners that you’re aware of how your research connects with existing knowledge .

2: The Body Section

The body of your literature review is the centre of your work. This is where you’ll present, analyse, evaluate and synthesise the existing research. In other words, this is where you’re going to earn (or lose) the most marks. Therefore, it’s important to carefully think about how you will organise your discussion to present it in a clear way. 

The body of your literature review should do just as the description of this chapter suggests. It should “review” the literature – in other words, identify, analyse, and synthesise it. So, when thinking about structuring your literature review, you need to think about which structural approach will provide the best “review” for your specific type of research and objectives (we’ll get to this shortly).

There are (broadly speaking)  three options  for organising your literature review.

Option 1: Chronological (according to date)

Organising the literature chronologically is one of the simplest ways to structure your literature review. You start with what was published first and work your way through the literature until you reach the work published most recently. Pretty straightforward.

The benefit of this option is that it makes it easy to discuss the developments and debates in the field as they emerged over time. Organising your literature chronologically also allows you to highlight how specific articles or pieces of work might have changed the course of the field – in other words, which research has had the most impact . Therefore, this approach is very useful when your research is aimed at understanding how the topic has unfolded over time and is often used by scholars in the field of history. That said, this approach can be utilised by anyone that wants to explore change over time .

For example , if a student of politics is investigating how the understanding of democracy has evolved over time, they could use the chronological approach to provide a narrative that demonstrates how this understanding has changed through the ages.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself to help you structure your literature review chronologically.

• What is the earliest literature published relating to this topic?
• How has the field changed over time? Why?
• What are the most recent discoveries/theories?

In some ways, chronology plays a part whichever way you decide to structure your literature review, because you will always, to a certain extent, be analysing how the literature has developed. However, with the chronological approach, the emphasis is very firmly on how the discussion has evolved over time , as opposed to how all the literature links together (which we’ll discuss next ).

Option 2: Thematic (grouped by theme)

The thematic approach to structuring a literature review means organising your literature by theme or category – for example, by independent variables (i.e. factors that have an impact on a specific outcome).

As you’ve been collecting and synthesising literature , you’ll likely have started seeing some themes or patterns emerging. You can then use these themes or patterns as a structure for your body discussion. The thematic approach is the most common approach and is useful for structuring literature reviews in most fields.

For example, if you were researching which factors contributed towards people trusting an organisation, you might find themes such as consumers’ perceptions of an organisation’s competence, benevolence and integrity. Structuring your literature review thematically would mean structuring your literature review’s body section to discuss each of these themes, one section at a time.

Here are some questions to ask yourself when structuring your literature review by themes:

• Are there any patterns that have come to light in the literature?
• What are the central themes and categories used by the researchers?
• Do I have enough evidence of these themes?

PS – you can see an example of a thematically structured literature review in our literature review sample walkthrough video here.

Option 3: Methodological

The methodological option is a way of structuring your literature review by the research methodologies used . In other words, organising your discussion based on the angle from which each piece of research was approached – for example, qualitative , quantitative or mixed  methodologies.

Structuring your literature review by methodology can be useful if you are drawing research from a variety of disciplines and are critiquing different methodologies. The point of this approach is to question  how  existing research has been conducted, as opposed to  what  the conclusions and/or findings the research were.

For example, a sociologist might centre their research around critiquing specific fieldwork practices. Their literature review will then be a summary of the fieldwork methodologies used by different studies.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself when structuring your literature review according to methodology:

• Which methodologies have been utilised in this field?
• Which methodology is the most popular (and why)?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the various methodologies?
• How can the existing methodologies inform my own methodology?

3: The Conclusion Section

Once you’ve completed the body section of your literature review using one of the structural approaches we discussed above, you’ll need to “wrap up” your literature review and pull all the pieces together to set the direction for the rest of your dissertation or thesis.

The conclusion is where you’ll present the key findings of your literature review. In this section, you should emphasise the research that is especially important to your research questions and highlight the gaps that exist in the literature. Based on this, you need to make it clear what you will add to the literature – in other words, justify your own research by showing how it will help fill one or more of the gaps you just identified.

Last but not least, if it’s your intention to develop a conceptual framework for your dissertation or thesis, the conclusion section is a good place to present this.

Example: Thematically Structured Review

In the video below, we unpack a literature review chapter so that you can see an example of a thematically structure review in practice.

Let’s Recap

In this article, we’ve  discussed how to structure your literature review for maximum impact. Here’s a quick recap of what  you need to keep in mind when deciding on your literature review structure:

• Just like other chapters, your literature review needs a clear introduction , body and conclusion .
• The introduction section should provide an overview of what you will discuss in your literature review.
• The body section of your literature review can be organised by chronology , theme or methodology . The right structural approach depends on what you’re trying to achieve with your research.
• The conclusion section should draw together the key findings of your literature review and link them to your research questions.

If you’re ready to get started, be sure to download our free literature review template to fast-track your chapter outline.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

27 Comments

Great work. This is exactly what I was looking for and helps a lot together with your previous post on literature review. One last thing is missing: a link to a great literature chapter of an journal article (maybe with comments of the different sections in this review chapter). Do you know any great literature review chapters?

I agree with you Marin… A great piece

I agree with Marin. This would be quite helpful if you annotate a nicely structured literature from previously published research articles.

Awesome article for my research.

I thank you immensely for this wonderful guide

It is indeed thought and supportive work for the futurist researcher and students

Very educative and good time to get guide. Thank you

Great work, very insightful. Thank you.

Thanks for this wonderful presentation. My question is that do I put all the variables into a single conceptual framework or each hypothesis will have it own conceptual framework?

Thank you very much, very helpful

This is very educative and precise . Thank you very much for dropping this kind of write up .

Pheeww, so damn helpful, thank you for this informative piece.

I’m doing a research project topic ; stool analysis for parasitic worm (enteric) worm, how do I structure it, thanks.

comprehensive explanation. Help us by pasting the URL of some good “literature review” for better understanding.

great piece. thanks for the awesome explanation. it is really worth sharing. I have a little question, if anyone can help me out, which of the options in the body of literature can be best fit if you are writing an architectural thesis that deals with design?

I am doing a research on nanofluids how can l structure it?

Beautifully clear.nThank you!

Lucid! Thankyou!

Brilliant work, well understood, many thanks

I like how this was so clear with simple language 😊😊 thank you so much 😊 for these information 😊

Insightful. I was struggling to come up with a sensible literature review but this has been really helpful. Thank you!

You have given thought-provoking information about the review of the literature.

Thank you. It has made my own research better and to impart your work to students I teach

I learnt a lot from this teaching. It’s a great piece.

I am doing research on EFL teacher motivation for his/her job. How Can I structure it? Is there any detailed template, additional to this?

You are so cool! I do not think I’ve read through something like this before. So nice to find somebody with some genuine thoughts on this issue. Seriously.. thank you for starting this up. This site is one thing that is required on the internet, someone with a little originality!

I’m asked to do conceptual, theoretical and empirical literature, and i just don’t know how to structure it

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

The goal of a research proposal is twofold: to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. The design elements and procedures for conducting research are governed by standards of the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, therefore, the guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews. They must provide persuasive evidence that a need exists for the proposed study. In addition to providing a rationale, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on anticipated outcomes and benefits derived from the study's completion.

Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005.

How to Approach Writing a Research Proposal

Your professor may assign the task of writing a research proposal for the following reasons:

• Develop your skills in thinking about and designing a comprehensive research study;
• Learn how to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature to determine that the research problem has not been adequately addressed or has been answered ineffectively and, in so doing, become better at locating pertinent scholarship related to your topic;
• Improve your general research and writing skills;
• Practice identifying the logical steps that must be taken to accomplish one's research goals;
• Critically review, examine, and consider the use of different methods for gathering and analyzing data related to the research problem; and,
• Nurture a sense of inquisitiveness within yourself and to help see yourself as an active participant in the process of conducting scholarly research.

A proposal should contain all the key elements involved in designing a completed research study, with sufficient information that allows readers to assess the validity and usefulness of your proposed study. The only elements missing from a research proposal are the findings of the study and your analysis of those findings. Finally, an effective proposal is judged on the quality of your writing and, therefore, it is important that your proposal is coherent, clear, and compelling.

Regardless of the research problem you are investigating and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions:

• What do you plan to accomplish? Be clear and succinct in defining the research problem and what it is you are proposing to investigate.
• Why do you want to do the research? In addition to detailing your research design, you also must conduct a thorough review of the literature and provide convincing evidence that it is a topic worthy of in-depth study. A successful research proposal must answer the "So What?" question.
• How are you going to conduct the research? Be sure that what you propose is doable. If you're having difficulty formulating a research problem to propose investigating, go here for strategies in developing a problem to study.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Failure to be concise . A research proposal must be focused and not be "all over the map" or diverge into unrelated tangents without a clear sense of purpose.
• Failure to cite landmark works in your literature review . Proposals should be grounded in foundational research that lays a foundation for understanding the development and scope of the the topic and its relevance.
• Failure to delimit the contextual scope of your research [e.g., time, place, people, etc.]. As with any research paper, your proposed study must inform the reader how and in what ways the study will frame the problem.
• Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research . This is critical. In many workplace settings, the research proposal is a formal document intended to argue for why a study should be funded.
• Sloppy or imprecise writing, or poor grammar . Although a research proposal does not represent a completed research study, there is still an expectation that it is well-written and follows the style and rules of good academic writing.
• Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues . Your proposal should focus on only a few key research questions in order to support the argument that the research needs to be conducted. Minor issues, even if valid, can be mentioned but they should not dominate the overall narrative.

Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal.  The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sanford, Keith. Information for Students: Writing a Research Proposal. Baylor University; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Structure and Writing Style

Beginning the Proposal Process

As with writing most college-level academic papers, research proposals are generally organized the same way throughout most social science disciplines. The text of proposals generally vary in length between ten and thirty-five pages, followed by the list of references. However, before you begin, read the assignment carefully and, if anything seems unclear, ask your professor whether there are any specific requirements for organizing and writing the proposal.

A good place to begin is to ask yourself a series of questions:

• What do I want to study?
• Why is the topic important?
• How is it significant within the subject areas covered in my class?
• What problems will it help solve?
• How does it build upon [and hopefully go beyond] research already conducted on the topic?
• What exactly should I plan to do, and can I get it done in the time available?

In general, a compelling research proposal should document your knowledge of the topic and demonstrate your enthusiasm for conducting the study. Approach it with the intention of leaving your readers feeling like, "Wow, that's an exciting idea and I can’t wait to see how it turns out!"

Most proposals should include the following sections:

I.  Introduction

In the real world of higher education, a research proposal is most often written by scholars seeking grant funding for a research project or it's the first step in getting approval to write a doctoral dissertation. Even if this is just a course assignment, treat your introduction as the initial pitch of an idea based on a thorough examination of the significance of a research problem. After reading the introduction, your readers should not only have an understanding of what you want to do, but they should also be able to gain a sense of your passion for the topic and to be excited about the study's possible outcomes. Note that most proposals do not include an abstract [summary] before the introduction.

Think about your introduction as a narrative written in two to four paragraphs that succinctly answers the following four questions :

• What is the central research problem?
• What is the topic of study related to that research problem?
• What methods should be used to analyze the research problem?
• Answer the "So What?" question by explaining why this is important research, what is its significance, and why should someone reading the proposal care about the outcomes of the proposed study?

II.  Background and Significance

This is where you explain the scope and context of your proposal and describe in detail why it's important. It can be melded into your introduction or you can create a separate section to help with the organization and narrative flow of your proposal. Approach writing this section with the thought that you can’t assume your readers will know as much about the research problem as you do. Note that this section is not an essay going over everything you have learned about the topic; instead, you must choose what is most relevant in explaining the aims of your research.

To that end, while there are no prescribed rules for establishing the significance of your proposed study, you should attempt to address some or all of the following:

• State the research problem and give a more detailed explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction. This is particularly important if the problem is complex or multifaceted .
• Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing; be sure to answer the "So What? question [i.e., why should anyone care?].
• Describe the major issues or problems examined by your research. This can be in the form of questions to be addressed. Be sure to note how your proposed study builds on previous assumptions about the research problem.
• Explain the methods you plan to use for conducting your research. Clearly identify the key sources you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
• Describe the boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you plan to study, but what aspects of the research problem will be excluded from the study.
• If necessary, provide definitions of key concepts, theories, or terms.

III.  Literature Review

Connected to the background and significance of your study is a section of your proposal devoted to a more deliberate review and synthesis of prior studies related to the research problem under investigation . The purpose here is to place your project within the larger whole of what is currently being explored, while at the same time, demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methodological approaches they have used, and what is your understanding of their findings and, when stated, their recommendations. Also pay attention to any suggestions for further research.

Since a literature review is information dense, it is crucial that this section is intelligently structured to enable a reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your proposed study in relation to the arguments put forth by other researchers. A good strategy is to break the literature into "conceptual categories" [themes] rather than systematically or chronologically describing groups of materials one at a time. Note that conceptual categories generally reveal themselves after you have read most of the pertinent literature on your topic so adding new categories is an on-going process of discovery as you review more studies. How do you know you've covered the key conceptual categories underlying the research literature? Generally, you can have confidence that all of the significant conceptual categories have been identified if you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations that are being made.

NOTE: Do not shy away from challenging the conclusions made in prior research as a basis for supporting the need for your proposal. Assess what you believe is missing and state how previous research has failed to adequately examine the issue that your study addresses. Highlighting the problematic conclusions strengthens your proposal. For more information on writing literature reviews, GO HERE .

To help frame your proposal's review of prior research, consider the "five C’s" of writing a literature review:

• Cite , so as to keep the primary focus on the literature pertinent to your research problem.
• Compare the various arguments, theories, methodologies, and findings expressed in the literature: what do the authors agree on? Who applies similar approaches to analyzing the research problem?
• Contrast the various arguments, themes, methodologies, approaches, and controversies expressed in the literature: describe what are the major areas of disagreement, controversy, or debate among scholars?
• Critique the literature: Which arguments are more persuasive, and why? Which approaches, findings, and methodologies seem most reliable, valid, or appropriate, and why? Pay attention to the verbs you use to describe what an author says/does [e.g., asserts, demonstrates, argues, etc.].
• Connect the literature to your own area of research and investigation: how does your own work draw upon, depart from, synthesize, or add a new perspective to what has been said in the literature?

IV.  Research Design and Methods

This section must be well-written and logically organized because you are not actually doing the research, yet, your reader must have confidence that you have a plan worth pursuing . The reader will never have a study outcome from which to evaluate whether your methodological choices were the correct ones. Thus, the objective here is to convince the reader that your overall research design and proposed methods of analysis will correctly address the problem and that the methods will provide the means to effectively interpret the potential results. Your design and methods should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

Describe the overall research design by building upon and drawing examples from your review of the literature. Consider not only methods that other researchers have used, but methods of data gathering that have not been used but perhaps could be. Be specific about the methodological approaches you plan to undertake to obtain information, the techniques you would use to analyze the data, and the tests of external validity to which you commit yourself [i.e., the trustworthiness by which you can generalize from your study to other people, places, events, and/or periods of time].

When describing the methods you will use, be sure to cover the following:

• Specify the research process you will undertake and the way you will interpret the results obtained in relation to the research problem. Don't just describe what you intend to achieve from applying the methods you choose, but state how you will spend your time while applying these methods [e.g., coding text from interviews to find statements about the need to change school curriculum; running a regression to determine if there is a relationship between campaign advertising on social media sites and election outcomes in Europe ].
• Keep in mind that the methodology is not just a list of tasks; it is a deliberate argument as to why techniques for gathering information add up to the best way to investigate the research problem. This is an important point because the mere listing of tasks to be performed does not demonstrate that, collectively, they effectively address the research problem. Be sure you clearly explain this.
• Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers and pitfalls in carrying out your research design and explain how you plan to address them. No method applied to research in the social and behavioral sciences is perfect, so you need to describe where you believe challenges may exist in obtaining data or accessing information. It's always better to acknowledge this than to have it brought up by your professor!

V.  Preliminary Suppositions and Implications

Just because you don't have to actually conduct the study and analyze the results, doesn't mean you can skip talking about the analytical process and potential implications . The purpose of this section is to argue how and in what ways you believe your research will refine, revise, or extend existing knowledge in the subject area under investigation. Depending on the aims and objectives of your study, describe how the anticipated results will impact future scholarly research, theory, practice, forms of interventions, or policy making. Note that such discussions may have either substantive [a potential new policy], theoretical [a potential new understanding], or methodological [a potential new way of analyzing] significance.   When thinking about the potential implications of your study, ask the following questions:

• What might the results mean in regards to challenging the theoretical framework and underlying assumptions that support the study?
• What suggestions for subsequent research could arise from the potential outcomes of the study?
• What will the results mean to practitioners in the natural settings of their workplace, organization, or community?
• Will the results influence programs, methods, and/or forms of intervention?
• How might the results contribute to the solution of social, economic, or other types of problems?
• Will the results influence policy decisions?
• In what way do individuals or groups benefit should your study be pursued?
• What will be improved or changed as a result of the proposed research?
• How will the results of the study be implemented and what innovations or transformative insights could emerge from the process of implementation?

NOTE:   This section should not delve into idle speculation, opinion, or be formulated on the basis of unclear evidence . The purpose is to reflect upon gaps or understudied areas of the current literature and describe how your proposed research contributes to a new understanding of the research problem should the study be implemented as designed.

ANOTHER NOTE : This section is also where you describe any potential limitations to your proposed study. While it is impossible to highlight all potential limitations because the study has yet to be conducted, you still must tell the reader where and in what form impediments may arise and how you plan to address them.

VI.  Conclusion

The conclusion reiterates the importance or significance of your proposal and provides a brief summary of the entire study . This section should be only one or two paragraphs long, emphasizing why the research problem is worth investigating, why your research study is unique, and how it should advance existing knowledge.

Someone reading this section should come away with an understanding of:

• Why the study should be done;
• The specific purpose of the study and the research questions it attempts to answer;
• The decision for why the research design and methods used where chosen over other options;
• The potential implications emerging from your proposed study of the research problem; and
• A sense of how your study fits within the broader scholarship about the research problem.

VII.  Citations

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used . In a standard research proposal, this section can take two forms, so consult with your professor about which one is preferred.

• References -- a list of only the sources you actually used in creating your proposal.
• Bibliography -- a list of everything you used in creating your proposal, along with additional citations to any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.

In either case, this section should testify to the fact that you did enough preparatory work to ensure the project will complement and not just duplicate the efforts of other researchers. It demonstrates to the reader that you have a thorough understanding of prior research on the topic.

Most proposal formats have you start a new page and use the heading "References" or "Bibliography" centered at the top of the page. Cited works should always use a standard format that follows the writing style advised by the discipline of your course [e.g., education=APA; history=Chicago] or that is preferred by your professor. This section normally does not count towards the total page length of your research proposal.

Develop a Research Proposal: Writing the Proposal. Office of Library Information Services. Baltimore County Public Schools; Heath, M. Teresa Pereira and Caroline Tynan. “Crafting a Research Proposal.” The Marketing Review 10 (Summer 2010): 147-168; Jones, Mark. “Writing a Research Proposal.” In MasterClass in Geography Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning . Graham Butt, editor. (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), pp. 113-127; Juni, Muhamad Hanafiah. “Writing a Research Proposal.” International Journal of Public Health and Clinical Sciences 1 (September/October 2014): 229-240; Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005; Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Punch, Keith and Wayne McGowan. "Developing and Writing a Research Proposal." In From Postgraduate to Social Scientist: A Guide to Key Skills . Nigel Gilbert, ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006), 59-81; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences , Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

• << Previous: Writing a Reflective Paper
• Next: Generative AI and Writing >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:45 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

Literature Reviews

• What is a Literature Review?
• Concept Mapping
• Writing a Proposal
• For Faculty

Need help? Ask a librarian

Tools for All Writers

• Reading, Writing, Speaking
• Citing Sources
• Library Searching

Templates for Proposal Writing

• Template 1 from Drew University
• Template 2 from Rutgers University (Saracevic)

Content of a proposal for a thesis or any research project

Full Pdf  from Rutgers University

• What do you call this investigation?
• What problem or area will you investigate in general?
• Why is this problem important to investigate?
• What was previously done in relation to this problem? What were some of the significant studies? (Literature review)
• What theory or model is going to guide your research?
• What will you specifically investigate or do in the framework of that problem? What are your specific research questions or hypotheses?
• How will each research question be addressed ? What methods will you use for each research question?
• How will the results be analyzed?
• What are the deliverables? What can or will be gained by investigation of this problem?

Avoid Patchwriting

• << Previous: Concept Mapping
• Next: For Faculty >>
• Last Updated: Apr 29, 2024 4:24 PM
• URL: https://researchguides.njit.edu/literaturereview

How to write a literature review introduction (+ examples)

The introduction to a literature review serves as your reader’s guide through your academic work and thought process. Explore the significance of literature review introductions in review papers, academic papers, essays, theses, and dissertations. We delve into the purpose and necessity of these introductions, explore the essential components of literature review introductions, and provide step-by-step guidance on how to craft your own, along with examples.

Why you need an introduction for a literature review

When you need an introduction for a literature review, what to include in a literature review introduction, examples of literature review introductions, steps to write your own literature review introduction.

A literature review is a comprehensive examination of the international academic literature concerning a particular topic. It involves summarizing published works, theories, and concepts while also highlighting gaps and offering critical reflections.

In academic writing , the introduction for a literature review is an indispensable component. Effective academic writing requires proper paragraph structuring to guide your reader through your argumentation. This includes providing an introduction to your literature review.

It is imperative to remember that you should never start sharing your findings abruptly. Even if there isn’t a dedicated introduction section .

Instead, you should always offer some form of introduction to orient the reader and clarify what they can expect.

There are three main scenarios in which you need an introduction for a literature review:

• Academic literature review papers: When your literature review constitutes the entirety of an academic review paper, a more substantial introduction is necessary. This introduction should resemble the standard introduction found in regular academic papers.
• Literature review section in an academic paper or essay: While this section tends to be brief, it’s important to precede the detailed literature review with a few introductory sentences. This helps orient the reader before delving into the literature itself.
• Literature review chapter or section in your thesis/dissertation: Every thesis and dissertation includes a literature review component, which also requires a concise introduction to set the stage for the subsequent review.

You may also like: How to write a fantastic thesis introduction (+15 examples)

It is crucial to customize the content and depth of your literature review introduction according to the specific format of your academic work.

In practical terms, this implies, for instance, that the introduction in an academic literature review paper, especially one derived from a systematic literature review , is quite comprehensive. Particularly compared to the rather brief one or two introductory sentences that are often found at the beginning of a literature review section in a standard academic paper. The introduction to the literature review chapter in a thesis or dissertation again adheres to different standards.

Here’s a structured breakdown based on length and the necessary information:

Academic literature review paper

The introduction of an academic literature review paper, which does not rely on empirical data, often necessitates a more extensive introduction than the brief literature review introductions typically found in empirical papers. It should encompass:

• The research problem: Clearly articulate the problem or question that your literature review aims to address.
• The research gap: Highlight the existing gaps, limitations, or unresolved aspects within the current body of literature related to the research problem.
• The research relevance: Explain why the chosen research problem and its subsequent investigation through a literature review are significant and relevant in your academic field.
• The literature review method: If applicable, describe the methodology employed in your literature review, especially if it is a systematic review or follows a specific research framework.
• The main findings or insights of the literature review: Summarize the key discoveries, insights, or trends that have emerged from your comprehensive review of the literature.
• The main argument of the literature review: Conclude the introduction by outlining the primary argument or statement that your literature review will substantiate, linking it to the research problem and relevance you’ve established.
• Preview of the literature review’s structure: Offer a glimpse into the organization of the literature review paper, acting as a guide for the reader. This overview outlines the subsequent sections of the paper and provides an understanding of what to anticipate.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will provide a clear and structured overview of what readers can expect in your literature review paper.

Regular literature review section in an academic article or essay

Most academic articles or essays incorporate regular literature review sections, often placed after the introduction. These sections serve to establish a scholarly basis for the research or discussion within the paper.

In a standard 8000-word journal article, the literature review section typically spans between 750 and 1250 words. The first few sentences or the first paragraph within this section often serve as an introduction. It should encompass:

• An introduction to the topic: When delving into the academic literature on a specific topic, it’s important to provide a smooth transition that aids the reader in comprehending why certain aspects will be discussed within your literature review.
• The core argument: While literature review sections primarily synthesize the work of other scholars, they should consistently connect to your central argument. This central argument serves as the crux of your message or the key takeaway you want your readers to retain. By positioning it at the outset of the literature review section and systematically substantiating it with evidence, you not only enhance reader comprehension but also elevate overall readability. This primary argument can typically be distilled into 1-2 succinct sentences.

In some cases, you might include:

• Methodology: Details about the methodology used, but only if your literature review employed a specialized method. If your approach involved a broader overview without a systematic methodology, you can omit this section, thereby conserving word count.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will effectively integrate your literature review into the broader context of your academic paper or essay. This will, in turn, assist your reader in seamlessly following your overarching line of argumentation.

Introduction to a literature review chapter in thesis or dissertation

The literature review typically constitutes a distinct chapter within a thesis or dissertation. Often, it is Chapter 2 of a thesis or dissertation.

Some students choose to incorporate a brief introductory section at the beginning of each chapter, including the literature review chapter. Alternatively, others opt to seamlessly integrate the introduction into the initial sentences of the literature review itself. Both approaches are acceptable, provided that you incorporate the following elements:

• Purpose of the literature review and its relevance to the thesis/dissertation research: Explain the broader objectives of the literature review within the context of your research and how it contributes to your thesis or dissertation. Essentially, you’re telling the reader why this literature review is important and how it fits into the larger scope of your academic work.
• Primary argument: Succinctly communicate what you aim to prove, explain, or explore through the review of existing literature. This statement helps guide the reader’s understanding of the review’s purpose and what to expect from it.
• Preview of the literature review’s content: Provide a brief overview of the topics or themes that your literature review will cover. It’s like a roadmap for the reader, outlining the main areas of focus within the review. This preview can help the reader anticipate the structure and organization of your literature review.
• Methodology: If your literature review involved a specific research method, such as a systematic review or meta-analysis, you should briefly describe that methodology. However, this is not always necessary, especially if your literature review is more of a narrative synthesis without a distinct research method.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will empower your literature review to play a pivotal role in your thesis or dissertation research. It will accomplish this by integrating your research into the broader academic literature and providing a solid theoretical foundation for your work.

Comprehending the art of crafting your own literature review introduction becomes significantly more accessible when you have concrete examples to examine. Here, you will find several examples that meet, or in most cases, adhere to the criteria described earlier.

Example 1: An effective introduction for an academic literature review paper

To begin, let’s delve into the introduction of an academic literature review paper. We will examine the paper “How does culture influence innovation? A systematic literature review”, which was published in 2018 in the journal Management Decision.

The entire introduction spans 611 words and is divided into five paragraphs. In this introduction, the authors accomplish the following:

• In the first paragraph, the authors introduce the broader topic of the literature review, which focuses on innovation and its significance in the context of economic competition. They underscore the importance of this topic, highlighting its relevance for both researchers and policymakers.
• In the second paragraph, the authors narrow down their focus to emphasize the specific role of culture in relation to innovation.
• In the third paragraph, the authors identify research gaps, noting that existing studies are often fragmented and disconnected. They then emphasize the value of conducting a systematic literature review to enhance our understanding of the topic.
• In the fourth paragraph, the authors introduce their specific objectives and explain how their insights can benefit other researchers and business practitioners.
• In the fifth and final paragraph, the authors provide an overview of the paper’s organization and structure.

In summary, this introduction stands as a solid example. While the authors deviate from previewing their key findings (which is a common practice at least in the social sciences), they do effectively cover all the other previously mentioned points.

Example 2: An effective introduction to a literature review section in an academic paper

The second example represents a typical academic paper, encompassing not only a literature review section but also empirical data, a case study, and other elements. We will closely examine the introduction to the literature review section in the paper “The environmentalism of the subalterns: a case study of environmental activism in Eastern Kurdistan/Rojhelat”, which was published in 2021 in the journal Local Environment.

The paper begins with a general introduction and then proceeds to the literature review, designated by the authors as their conceptual framework. Of particular interest is the first paragraph of this conceptual framework, comprising 142 words across five sentences:

“ A peripheral and marginalised nationality within a multinational though-Persian dominated Iranian society, the Kurdish people of Iranian Kurdistan (a region referred by the Kurds as Rojhelat/Eastern Kurdi-stan) have since the early twentieth century been subject to multifaceted and systematic discriminatory and exclusionary state policy in Iran. This condition has left a population of 12–15 million Kurds in Iran suffering from structural inequalities, disenfranchisement and deprivation. Mismanagement of Kurdistan’s natural resources and the degradation of its natural environmental are among examples of this disenfranchisement. As asserted by Julian Agyeman (2005), structural inequalities that sustain the domination of political and economic elites often simultaneously result in environmental degradation, injustice and discrimination against subaltern communities. This study argues that the environmental struggle in Eastern Kurdistan can be asserted as a (sub)element of the Kurdish liberation movement in Iran. Conceptually this research is inspired by and has been conducted through the lens of ‘subalternity’ ” ( Hassaniyan, 2021, p. 931 ).

In this first paragraph, the author is doing the following:

• The author contextualises the research
• The author links the research focus to the international literature on structural inequalities
• The author clearly presents the argument of the research
• The author clarifies how the research is inspired by and uses the concept of ‘subalternity’.

Thus, the author successfully introduces the literature review, from which point onward it dives into the main concept (‘subalternity’) of the research, and reviews the literature on socio-economic justice and environmental degradation.

While introductions to a literature review section aren’t always required to offer the same level of study context detail as demonstrated here, this introduction serves as a commendable model for orienting the reader within the literature review. It effectively underscores the literature review’s significance within the context of the study being conducted.

Examples 3-5: Effective introductions to literature review chapters

The introduction to a literature review chapter can vary in length, depending largely on the overall length of the literature review chapter itself. For example, a master’s thesis typically features a more concise literature review, thus necessitating a shorter introduction. In contrast, a Ph.D. thesis, with its more extensive literature review, often includes a more detailed introduction.

Numerous universities offer online repositories where you can access theses and dissertations from previous years, serving as valuable sources of reference. Many of these repositories, however, may require you to log in through your university account. Nevertheless, a few open-access repositories are accessible to anyone, such as the one by the University of Manchester . It’s important to note though that copyright restrictions apply to these resources, just as they would with published papers.

Master’s thesis literature review introduction

The first example is “Benchmarking Asymmetrical Heating Models of Spider Pulsar Companions” by P. Sun, a master’s thesis completed at the University of Manchester on January 9, 2024. The author, P. Sun, introduces the literature review chapter very briefly but effectively:

PhD thesis literature review chapter introduction

The second example is Deep Learning on Semi-Structured Data and its Applications to Video-Game AI, Woof, W. (Author). 31 Dec 2020, a PhD thesis completed at the University of Manchester . In Chapter 2, the author offers a comprehensive introduction to the topic in four paragraphs, with the final paragraph serving as an overview of the chapter’s structure:

PhD thesis literature review introduction

The last example is the doctoral thesis Metacognitive strategies and beliefs: Child correlates and early experiences Chan, K. Y. M. (Author). 31 Dec 2020 . The author clearly conducted a systematic literature review, commencing the review section with a discussion of the methodology and approach employed in locating and analyzing the selected records.

Having absorbed all of this information, let’s recap the essential steps and offer a succinct guide on how to proceed with creating your literature review introduction:

• Contextualize your review : Begin by clearly identifying the academic context in which your literature review resides and determining the necessary information to include.
• Outline your structure : Develop a structured outline for your literature review, highlighting the essential information you plan to incorporate in your introduction.
• Literature review process : Conduct a rigorous literature review, reviewing and analyzing relevant sources.
• Summarize and abstract : After completing the review, synthesize the findings and abstract key insights, trends, and knowledge gaps from the literature.
• Craft the introduction : Write your literature review introduction with meticulous attention to the seamless integration of your review into the larger context of your work. Ensure that your introduction effectively elucidates your rationale for the chosen review topics and the underlying reasons guiding your selection.

Master Academia

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.

Subscribe and receive Master Academia's quarterly newsletter.

The best answers to "What are your plans for the future?"

10 tips for engaging your audience in academic writing, related articles.

10 key skills of successful master’s students

How to write effective cover letters for a paper submission

Dealing with failure as a PhD student

Reject decisions: Sample peer review comments and examples

15 Literature Review Examples

Literature reviews are a necessary step in a research process and often required when writing your research proposal . They involve gathering, analyzing, and evaluating existing knowledge about a topic in order to find gaps in the literature where future studies will be needed.

Ideally, once you have completed your literature review, you will be able to identify how your research project can build upon and extend existing knowledge in your area of study.

Generally, for my undergraduate research students, I recommend a narrative review, where themes can be generated in order for the students to develop sufficient understanding of the topic so they can build upon the themes using unique methods or novel research questions.

If you’re in the process of writing a literature review, I have developed a literature review template for you to use – it’s a huge time-saver and walks you through how to write a literature review step-by-step:

Get your time-saving templates here to write your own literature review.

Literature Review Examples

For the following types of literature review, I present an explanation and overview of the type, followed by links to some real-life literature reviews on the topics.

1. Narrative Review Examples

Also known as a traditional literature review, the narrative review provides a broad overview of the studies done on a particular topic.

It often includes both qualitative and quantitative studies and may cover a wide range of years.

The narrative review’s purpose is to identify commonalities, gaps, and contradictions in the literature .

I recommend to my students that they should gather their studies together, take notes on each study, then try to group them by themes that form the basis for the review (see my step-by-step instructions at the end of the article).

Example Study

Title: Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations

Citation: Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ijcp.12686  

Overview: This narrative review analyzed themes emerging from 69 articles about communication in healthcare contexts. Five key themes were found in the literature: poor communication can lead to various negative outcomes, discontinuity of care, compromise of patient safety, patient dissatisfaction, and inefficient use of resources. After presenting the key themes, the authors recommend that practitioners need to approach healthcare communication in a more structured way, such as by ensuring there is a clear understanding of who is in charge of ensuring effective communication in clinical settings.

Other Examples

• Burnout in United States Healthcare Professionals: A Narrative Review (Reith, 2018) – read here
• Examining the Presence, Consequences, and Reduction of Implicit Bias in Health Care: A Narrative Review (Zestcott, Blair & Stone, 2016) – read here
• A Narrative Review of School-Based Physical Activity for Enhancing Cognition and Learning (Mavilidi et al., 2018) – read here
• A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents (Dyrbye & Shanafelt, 2015) – read here

2. Systematic Review Examples

This type of literature review is more structured and rigorous than a narrative review. It involves a detailed and comprehensive plan and search strategy derived from a set of specified research questions.

The key way you’d know a systematic review compared to a narrative review is in the methodology: the systematic review will likely have a very clear criteria for how the studies were collected, and clear explanations of exclusion/inclusion criteria. 

The goal is to gather the maximum amount of valid literature on the topic, filter out invalid or low-quality reviews, and minimize bias. Ideally, this will provide more reliable findings, leading to higher-quality conclusions and recommendations for further research.

You may note from the examples below that the ‘method’ sections in systematic reviews tend to be much more explicit, often noting rigid inclusion/exclusion criteria and exact keywords used in searches.

Title: The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review  

Citation: Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092422441730122X  

Overview: This systematic review included 72 studies of food naturalness to explore trends in the literature about its importance for consumers. Keywords used in the data search included: food, naturalness, natural content, and natural ingredients. Studies were included if they examined consumers’ preference for food naturalness and contained empirical data. The authors found that the literature lacks clarity about how naturalness is defined and measured, but also found that food consumption is significantly influenced by perceived naturalness of goods.

• A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018 (Martin, Sun & Westine, 2020) – read here
• Where Is Current Research on Blockchain Technology? (Yli-Huumo et al., 2016) – read here
• Universities—industry collaboration: A systematic review (Ankrah & Al-Tabbaa, 2015) – read here
• Internet of Things Applications: A Systematic Review (Asghari, Rahmani & Javadi, 2019) – read here

3. Meta-analysis

This is a type of systematic review that uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several studies.

Due to its robust methodology, a meta-analysis is often considered the ‘gold standard’ of secondary research , as it provides a more precise estimate of a treatment effect than any individual study contributing to the pooled analysis.

Furthermore, by aggregating data from a range of studies, a meta-analysis can identify patterns, disagreements, or other interesting relationships that may have been hidden in individual studies.

This helps to enhance the generalizability of findings, making the conclusions drawn from a meta-analysis particularly powerful and informative for policy and practice.

Title: Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s Disease Risk: A Meta-Meta-Analysis

Citation: Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Source: https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060386  

O verview: This study examines the relationship between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Researchers conducted a systematic search of meta-analyses and reviewed several databases, collecting 100 primary studies and five meta-analyses to analyze the connection between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease. They find that the literature compellingly demonstrates that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels significantly influence the development of Alzheimer’s disease.

• The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research (Wisniewski, Zierer & Hattie, 2020) – read here
• How Much Does Education Improve Intelligence? A Meta-Analysis (Ritchie & Tucker-Drob, 2018) – read here
• A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling (Geiger et al., 2019) – read here
• Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits (Patterson, Chung & Swan, 2014) – read here

Other Types of Reviews

• Scoping Review: This type of review is used to map the key concepts underpinning a research area and the main sources and types of evidence available. It can be undertaken as stand-alone projects in their own right, or as a precursor to a systematic review.
• Rapid Review: This type of review accelerates the systematic review process in order to produce information in a timely manner. This is achieved by simplifying or omitting stages of the systematic review process.
• Integrative Review: This review method is more inclusive than others, allowing for the simultaneous inclusion of experimental and non-experimental research. The goal is to more comprehensively understand a particular phenomenon.
• Critical Review: This is similar to a narrative review but requires a robust understanding of both the subject and the existing literature. In a critical review, the reviewer not only summarizes the existing literature, but also evaluates its strengths and weaknesses. This is common in the social sciences and humanities .
• State-of-the-Art Review: This considers the current level of advancement in a field or topic and makes recommendations for future research directions. This type of review is common in technological and scientific fields but can be applied to any discipline.

How to Write a Narrative Review (Tips for Undergrad Students)

Most undergraduate students conducting a capstone research project will be writing narrative reviews. Below is a five-step process for conducting a simple review of the literature for your project.

• Search for Relevant Literature: Use scholarly databases related to your field of study, provided by your university library, along with appropriate search terms to identify key scholarly articles that have been published on your topic.
• Evaluate and Select Sources: Filter the source list by selecting studies that are directly relevant and of sufficient quality, considering factors like credibility , objectivity, accuracy, and validity.
• Analyze and Synthesize: Review each source and summarize the main arguments  in one paragraph (or more, for postgrad). Keep these summaries in a table.
• Identify Themes: With all studies summarized, group studies that share common themes, such as studies that have similar findings or methodologies.
• Write the Review: Write your review based upon the themes or subtopics you have identified. Give a thorough overview of each theme, integrating source data, and conclude with a summary of the current state of knowledge then suggestions for future research based upon your evaluation of what is lacking in the literature.

Literature reviews don’t have to be as scary as they seem. Yes, they are difficult and require a strong degree of comprehension of academic studies. But it can be feasibly done through following a structured approach to data collection and analysis. With my undergraduate research students (who tend to conduct small-scale qualitative studies ), I encourage them to conduct a narrative literature review whereby they can identify key themes in the literature. Within each theme, students can critique key studies and their strengths and limitations , in order to get a lay of the land and come to a point where they can identify ways to contribute new insights to the existing academic conversation on their topic.

Ankrah, S., & Omar, A. T. (2015). Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(3), 387-408.

Asghari, P., Rahmani, A. M., & Javadi, H. H. S. (2019). Internet of Things applications: A systematic review. Computer Networks , 148 , 241-261.

Dyrbye, L., & Shanafelt, T. (2016). A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents. Medical education , 50 (1), 132-149.

Geiger, J. L., Steg, L., Van Der Werff, E., & Ünal, A. B. (2019). A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling. Journal of environmental psychology , 64 , 78-97.

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & education , 159 , 104009.

Mavilidi, M. F., Ruiter, M., Schmidt, M., Okely, A. D., Loyens, S., Chandler, P., & Paas, F. (2018). A narrative review of school-based physical activity for enhancing cognition and learning: The importance of relevancy and integration. Frontiers in psychology , 2079.

Patterson, G. T., Chung, I. W., & Swan, P. W. (2014). Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits: A meta-analysis. Journal of experimental criminology , 10 , 487-513.

Reith, T. P. (2018). Burnout in United States healthcare professionals: a narrative review. Cureus , 10 (12).

Ritchie, S. J., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological science , 29 (8), 1358-1369.

Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , 3087.

Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K. (2016). Where is current research on blockchain technology?—a systematic review. PloS one , 11 (10), e0163477.

Zestcott, C. A., Blair, I. V., & Stone, J. (2016). Examining the presence, consequences, and reduction of implicit bias in health care: a narrative review. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations , 19 (4), 528-542

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Piaget vs Vygotsky: Similarities and Differences
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 10 Conditioned Response Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 25 Humanistic Psychology Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 17 Behaviorism Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

• Sample Literature Reviews
• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• Chicago: Notes Bibliography This link opens in a new window
• MLA Style This link opens in a new window

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3

Have you written a stellar literature review you care to share for teaching purposes?

Are you an instructor who has received an exemplary literature review and have permission from the student to post?

Please contact Britt McGowan at [email protected] for inclusion in this guide. All disciplines welcome and encouraged.

• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: Get Help! >>
• Last Updated: Mar 22, 2024 9:37 AM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

Review of Related Literature (RRL)

Ai generator.

The Review of Related Literature (RRL) is a crucial section in research that examines existing studies and publications related to a specific topic. It summarizes and synthesizes previous findings, identifies gaps, and provides context for the current research. RRL ensures the research is grounded in established knowledge, guiding the direction and focus of new studies.

What Is Review of Related Literature (RRL)?

The Review of Related Literature (RRL) is a detailed analysis of existing research relevant to a specific topic. It evaluates, synthesizes, and summarizes previous studies to identify trends, gaps, and conflicts in the literature. RRL provides a foundation for new research, ensuring it builds on established knowledge and addresses existing gaps.

Format of Review of Related Literature (RRL)

The Review of Related Literature (RRL) is a critical part of any research paper or thesis . It provides an overview of existing research on your topic and helps to establish the context for your study. Here is a typical format for an RRL:

1. Introduction

• Purpose : Explain the purpose of the review and its importance to your research.
• Scope : Define the scope of the literature reviewed, including the time frame, types of sources, and key themes.

2. Theoretical Framework

• Concepts and Theories : Present the main theories and concepts that underpin your research.
• Relevance : Explain how these theories relate to your study.

3. Review of Empirical Studies

• Sub-theme 1 : Summarize key studies, including methodologies, findings, and conclusions.
• Sub-theme 2 : Continue summarizing studies, focusing on different aspects or variables.
• Sub-theme 3 : Include any additional relevant studies.

4. Methodological Review

• Approaches : Discuss the various methodologies used in the reviewed studies.
• Strengths and Weaknesses : Highlight the strengths and weaknesses of these methodologies.
• Gaps : Identify gaps in the existing research that your study aims to address.

5. Synthesis and Critique

• Integration : Integrate findings from the reviewed studies to show the current state of knowledge.
• Critique : Critically evaluate the literature, discussing inconsistencies, limitations, and areas for further research.

6. Conclusion

• Summary : Summarize the main findings from the literature review.
• Research Gap : Clearly state the research gap your study will address.
• Contribution : Explain how your study will contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

7. References

• Citation Style : List all the sources cited in your literature review in the appropriate citation style (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago).

Review of Related Literature (RRL) 1. Introduction This review examines research on social media’s impact on mental health, focusing on anxiety and depression across various demographics over the past ten years. 2. Theoretical Framework Anchored in Social Comparison Theory and Uses and Gratifications Theory, this review explores how individuals’ social media interactions affect their mental health. 3. Review of Empirical Studies Adolescents’ Mental Health Instagram & Body Image : Smith & Johnson (2017) found Instagram use linked to body image issues and lower self-esteem among 500 high school students. Facebook & Anxiety : Brown & Green (2016) showed Facebook use correlated with higher anxiety and depressive symptoms in a longitudinal study of 300 students. Young Adults’ Mental Health Twitter & Stress : Davis & Lee (2018) reported higher stress levels among heavy Twitter users in a survey of 400 university students. LinkedIn & Self-Esteem : Miller & White (2019) found LinkedIn use positively influenced professional self-esteem in 200 young professionals. Adult Mental Health General Social Media Use : Thompson & Evans (2020) found moderate social media use associated with better mental health outcomes, while excessive use correlated with higher anxiety and depression in 1,000 adults. 4. Methodological Review Studies used cross-sectional surveys, longitudinal designs, and mixed methods. Cross-sectional surveys provided large data sets but couldn’t infer causation. Longitudinal studies offered insights into long-term effects but were resource-intensive. Mixed methods enriched data through qualitative insights but required careful integration. 5. Synthesis and Critique The literature shows a complex relationship between social media and mental health, with platform-specific and demographic-specific effects. However, reliance on self-reported data introduces bias, and many cross-sectional studies limit causal inference. More longitudinal and experimental research is needed. 6. Conclusion Current research offers insights into social media’s mental health impact but leaves gaps, particularly regarding long-term effects and causation. This study aims to address these gaps through comprehensive longitudinal analysis. 7. References Brown, A., & Green, K. (2016). Facebook Use and Anxiety Among High School Students . Psychology in the Schools, 53(3), 257-264. Davis, R., & Lee, S. (2018). Twitter and Psychological Stress: A Study of University Students . Journal of College Student Development, 59(2), 120-135. Miller, P., & White, H. (2019). LinkedIn and Its Effect on Professional Self-Esteem . Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(1), 78-90. Smith, J., & Johnson, L. (2017). The Impact of Instagram on Teen Body Image . Journal of Adolescent Health, 60(5), 555-560. Thompson, M., & Evans, D. (2020). The Relationship Between Social Media Use and Mental Health in Adults . Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 23(4), 201-208.

Review of Related Literature (RRL) Examples

Review of related literature in research, review of related literature in research paper, review of related literature qualitative research.

Review of Related Literature Quantitative Research

More Review of Related Literature (RRL) Examples

• Impact of E-learning on Student Performance
• Effectiveness of Mindfulness in Workplace
• Green Building and Energy Efficiency
• Impact of Technology on Healthcare Delivery
• Effects of Nutrition on Cognitive Development in Children
• Impact of Employee Training Programs on Productivity
• Effects of Climate Change on Biodiversity
• Impact of Parental Involvement on Student Achievement
• Effects of Mobile Learning on Student Engagement
• Effects of Urban Green Spaces on Mental Health

Purpose of the Review of Related Literature (RRL)

The Review of Related Literature (RRL) serves several critical purposes in research:

• Establishing Context : It situates your research within the broader field, showing how your study relates to existing work.
• Identifying Gaps : It highlights gaps, inconsistencies, and areas needing further exploration in current knowledge, providing a clear rationale for your study.
• Avoiding Duplication : By reviewing what has already been done, it helps ensure your research is original and not a repetition of existing studies.
• Building on Existing Knowledge : It allows you to build on the findings of previous research, using established theories and methodologies to inform your work.
• Theoretical Foundation : It provides a theoretical basis for your research, grounding it in existing concepts and theories.
• Methodological Insights : It offers insights into the methods and approaches used in similar studies, helping you choose the most appropriate methods for your research.
• Establishing Credibility : It demonstrates your familiarity with the field, showing that you are well-informed and have a solid foundation for your research.
• Supporting Arguments : It provides evidence and support for your research questions, hypotheses, and objectives, strengthening the overall argument of your study.

How to Write Review of Related Literature (RRL)

Writing a Review of Related Literature (RRL) involves several key steps. Here’s a step-by-step guide:

1. Define the Scope and Objectives

• Determine the Scope : Decide on the breadth of the literature you will review, including specific themes, time frame, and types of sources.
• Set Objectives : Clearly define the purpose of the review. What do you aim to achieve? Identify gaps, establish context, or build on existing knowledge.

2. Search for Relevant Literature

• Identify Keywords : Use keywords and phrases related to your research topic.
• Use Databases : Search academic databases like Google Scholar, PubMed, JSTOR, etc., for relevant articles, books, and papers.
• Select Sources : Choose sources that are credible, recent, and relevant to your research.

3. Evaluate and Select the Literature

• Read Abstracts and Summaries : Quickly determine the relevance of each source.
• Assess Quality : Consider the methodology, credibility of the authors, and publication source.
• Select Key Studies : Choose studies that are most relevant to your research questions and objectives.

4. Organize the Literature

• Thematic Organization : Group studies by themes or topics.
• Chronological Organization : Arrange studies in the order they were published to show the development of ideas over time.
• Methodological Organization : Categorize studies by the methods they used.

5. Write the Review

• State the purpose and scope of the review.
• Explain the importance of the topic.
• Theoretical Framework : Present and discuss the main theories and concepts.
• Summarize key studies, including their methodologies, findings, and conclusions.
• Organize by themes or other chosen organizational methods.
• Methodological Review : Discuss the various methodologies used, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses.
• Synthesis and Critique : Integrate findings, critically evaluate the literature, and identify gaps or inconsistencies.
• Summarize the main findings from the literature review.
• Highlight the research gaps your study will address.
• State how your research will contribute to the existing knowledge.

6. Cite the Sources

• Use Appropriate Citation Style : Follow the required citation style (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago).
• List References : Provide a complete list of all sources cited in your review.

What is an RRL?

An RRL summarizes and synthesizes existing research on a specific topic to identify gaps and guide future studies.

Why is RRL important?

It provides context, highlights gaps, and ensures new research builds on existing knowledge.

How do you write an RRL?

Organize by themes, summarize studies, evaluate methodologies, identify gaps, and conclude with relevance to current research.

What sources are used in RRL?

Peer-reviewed journals, books, conference papers, and credible online resources.

How long should an RRL be?

Length varies; typically 10-20% of the total research paper.

What are common RRL mistakes?

Lack of organization, insufficient synthesis, over-reliance on outdated sources, and failure to identify gaps.

Can an RRL include non-scholarly sources?

Primarily scholarly, but reputable non-scholarly sources can be included for context.

What is the difference between RRL and bibliography?

RRL synthesizes and analyzes the literature, while a bibliography lists sources.

How often should an RRL be updated?

Regularly, especially when new relevant research is published.

Can an RRL influence research direction?

Yes, it identifies gaps and trends that shape the focus and methodology of new research.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

Synthesizing three decades of digital servitization: a systematic literature review and conceptual framework proposal

• Theoretical article
• Open access
• Published: 08 May 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Pedro E. Minaya   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1179-9378 1 ,
• Lucía Avella   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2598-7318 2 &
• Juan A. Trespalacios   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0658-4038 2  

This study, through a systematic literature review spanning 1990 to 2023, interrogates how servitization, and nowadays digital servitization, enhances manufacturing competitiveness. It introduces the DASOBI (Drivers, Actors, Strategies, Obstacles, Benefits, and Impact) framework for navigating the digital servitization transition, emphasizing strategic adaptability and technological alignment. Analysis of 157 articles reveals a significant increase in research, highlighting digital servitization’s role in competitive enhancement and customer engagement. The DASOBI framework offers manufacturers a novel approach for managing this transition, marking a unique contribution by distilling extensive literature into actionable insights for both theory and practice in the evolving field of digital servitization.

Similar content being viewed by others

Understanding the Internal and External Drivers and Barriers for Digital Servitization in the European Textile Manufacturing Industry

The effects of digital servitization on business competitiveness: A case study of Spanish manufacturers

Exploring Dynamic Capabilities to Facilitate a Smoother Transition from Servitization to Digital Servitization: A Theoretical Framework

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

1.1 context, motivation, and research topic.

In today’s dynamic manufacturing sector, companies are increasingly acknowledging the importance of complementing their product offerings with value-added services. This strategic shift, known as servitization—and more specifically digital servitization—marks a fundamental turn in the contemporary business paradigm. This transformation involves not only a shift from a product-centric to a service-centric focus but also a deep integration of advanced digital technologies. While considerable research has been conducted on individual aspects of servitization, a comprehensive analysis that encompasses all essential facets of this phenomenon, from its motivations to its final outcomes, remains relatively unexplored. This research proposal aims to develop a holistic conceptual framework that synthesizes and extends existing knowledge, thereby providing a more complete and nuanced understanding of digital servitization. This exhaustive review examines this evolving business model, highlighting its key benefits and challenges, its intersection with digital technologies, and its theoretical and practical implications.

The foundational premise, supported by Bustinza et al. ( 2015 ), suggests that manufacturing companies can achieve higher returns by offering services in conjunction with their products, a claim echoed in seminal works by Davies et al. ( 2007 ), Johnstone et al. ( 2009 ), Martín-Peña et al. ( 2017 ), and Leoni and Aria ( 2021 ). These services, ranging from maintenance and support to more sophisticated and customized solutions, expand the revenue streams of these firms. In this context, the contributions of Baines et al. ( 2007 ) and Neely et al. ( 2011 ) are pivotal, as they underscore how transitioning to a service-oriented market is driving strategic transformations in manufacturing firms, emphasizing value creation and differentiation in increasingly competitive markets (Brady et al. 2005 ).

The current market dynamics almost make this shift imperative. As noted by Sandström et al. ( 2008 ) and Tukker ( 2015 ), companies that limit their offerings to products alone face formidable challenges in maintaining profitability, driving them toward business model innovation that incorporates services into their product portfolios, as discussed in the literature by Gebauer and Fleisch ( 2007 ), Visnjic and Van Looy ( 2013 ), and Díaz-Garrido et al. ( 2018 ).

Servitization requires effective coordination among multiple stakeholders. Alghisi and Saccani ( 2015 ) address the critical importance of internal and external alignment, while Ayala et al. ( 2019 ) highlight the essential role of service providers in the successful adoption of servitization strategies. Moreover, Baines et al. ( 2011 ) and Lightfoot et al. ( 2013 ) explore how manufacturing firms can effectively integrate services into their product portfolio, emphasizing the importance of a strategically well-planned approach.

Beyond being a customer-facing strategy, the internal benefits are equally compelling. As delineated by Kamp and Alcalde ( 2014 ), servitization facilitates process optimization and extends the lifespan of machinery. These advantages are further enhanced with the incorporation of digital technologies, particularly in the era of Industry 4.0 (Kamp and Perry 2017 ). This digital servitization, explored in studies by Lee et al. ( 2014 ), Kans and Ingwald ( 2016 ), and Paiola and Gebauer ( 2020 ), offers an enhanced layer of value, encompassing innovative goods and services.

Researchers such as Favoretto et al. ( 2022 ) and Rabetino et al. ( 2023 ) have elucidated how technological advancements act as catalysts for developing differentiated products and services, thereby enhancing competitiveness (Müller et al. 2021 ). This leads to the formulation of hybrid business models, termed Product-Service Systems (PSS), which are economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable. This PSS model provides a more holistic solution, meeting specific customer needs beyond just providing functional products (Barquet et al. 2013 ).

In this process, a demand for specific organizational and technological capabilities is identified. Coreynen et al. ( 2017 ) and Schroeder et al. ( 2022 ) have pinpointed the importance of organizational structure and technological capabilities, particularly in the context of digitalization, as key factors for a successful transition to digital servitization (Parida et al. 2014 ; Kanninen et al. 2017 ).

Implementing servitization, as highlighted by Mathieu ( 2001 ) and Yu and Sung ( 2023 ), is not without its challenges, ranging from internal organizational resistance to external factors, such as customer reluctance. Brax ( 2005 ) and Benedettini et al. ( 2015 ) provide a comprehensive analysis of these risks, emphasizing the importance of effective management to navigate potential obstacles in achieving successful servitization (Windahl and Lakemond 2006 ; Pessôa and Becker 2017 ). The process demands a well-structured and strategically informed approach, incorporating both business and customer perspectives. Proper implementation of servitization can lead to substantial benefits, as demonstrated by Baines et al. ( 2009b , 2017 ) and Wang et al. ( 2018 ), highlighting its potential for long-term value creation (Brady et al. 2005 ).

The phenomenon of servitization, particularly in its digital form, has emerged as a prominent area of study, characterized by its complexity and multidimensionality. Academic literature has thoroughly explored this concept, from underlying motivations to implementation strategies, examining both inherent challenges and potential benefits (Raddats et al. 2016 ; Rabetino et al. 2021 ).

1.2 Research gap

Despite the extensive body of knowledge on servitization amassed by previous studies, there remains a discernible gap characterized by fragmented examinations rather than a consolidated analytical approach. This study pinpoints a need for a unified framework that can effectively guide servitization strategies, addressing this lacuna as a pivotal area for forthcoming research (Calabrese et al. 2019 ; Kohtamäki et al. 2020a ). The advent of the digital era has precipitated transformative shifts, underscoring the servitization concept—the transition from purely selling products to offering integrated product-service solutions. Nevertheless, the interaction between servitization and digital technologies, a realm referred to as digital servitization, remains a relatively uncharted territory. This area lacks a systematic and thorough review spanning the last three decades. This omission highlights the imperative need for an in-depth understanding of how servitization has evolved and the essential development of a framework to adeptly navigate the intricacies involved in implementing these strategies effectively.

1.3 Methodology proposed

To address the identified research gap, our study employs a comprehensive, multi-phased methodology structured as follows: Initially, we conduct an in-depth examination of the literature on servitization and digital servitization. This phase aims to develop an integrative theoretical framework that captures the evolution of servitization over the past three decades, emphasizing the shift toward digital service delivery within the manufacturing sector. Subsequently, the study undertakes a systematic literature review to classify the existing body of work. This review specifically focuses on selecting pertinent studies that encompass both traditional and digital servitization, aiming to identify trends, patterns, and existing research gaps. Following the review, we perform a detailed analysis of the selected articles to explore how various aspects of servitization and digital servitization interact and influence each other. In the final phase, we synthesize the findings from the study to deepen the conceptual understanding of the servitization phenomenon, including its digital components. This synthesis will provide valuable insights into effectively managing the transition toward servitization and digital servitization, highlighting its practical applicability in a business context.

1.4 Expected contributions

The primary goal of this research is to construct an integrative framework that captures the evolution, current state, and future trajectory of servitization and digital servitization. This framework will delineate both the theoretical underpinnings and practical ramifications of servitization, illuminating the challenges and opportunities that have surfaced. Particularly, it will explore the transformative influence of Industry 4.0 technologies—such as the Internet of Things, Big Data analytics, and Artificial Intelligence—on traditional servitization models, steering them toward more advanced digital practices. This examination is crucial for understanding how digital technologies can enhance the competitiveness and value proposition of manufacturing firms engaged in servitization.

The overarching aim of this study is to deepen the comprehension of servitization by exploring its interplay with digitalization, thus broadening its theoretical and managerial relevance. The research intends to offer an integrated perspective that not only advances the academic discourse in this field but also aids manufacturing companies in adeptly navigating the complexities of servitization and digital servitization. Furthermore, this review will articulate a roadmap for manufacturers considering this transition, conceptually enriching a domain that, despite its increasing importance, remains underexplored in scholarly research. By highlighting the enduring interest in adopting servitization correctly and underscoring the necessity for a unified theoretical framework, this study responds to calls for theoretical consolidation and a more comprehensive research agenda (Pettigrew 1988 ; Pye and Pettigrew 2005 ).

In summary, our proposed study aims to provide a detailed analysis that integrates insights from various studies into a cohesive narrative, with a particular focus on the servitization and digital servitization processes within the manufacturing sector. This synthesis will significantly contribute to both academic knowledge and practical applications, emphasizing the complex and evolving nature of servitization in manufacturing, and marking a key conclusion of this thorough examination.

2 Research aims

This study is dedicated to a comprehensive analysis of the servitization phenomenon and its progression toward digital servitization within the manufacturing sector, meticulously examining the most significant research from the past 30 years. The aim is to understand the development and various applications of servitization, along with the challenges and obstacles it entails. The study seeks to identify the motivations driving companies toward servitization, examine the various actors involved in the process and their interplay, and explore the strategies necessary for successful implementation. Furthermore, the organizational and technological capabilities required for transitioning to servitization will be analyzed, as well as the associated risks and challenges, including both internal and external hurdles that companies must overcome to reap the potential benefits of servitization. This analysis is guided by key research in the field (Zhang and Banerji 2017 ; Khanra et al. 2021 ) offering a comprehensive perspective on this significant shift in business dynamics within the manufacturing sector.

Essentially, this study seeks to answer the main research question: To what extent do servitization and digital servitization provide benefits that contribute to enhancing a company’s competitiveness? Alongside this primary question, the study intends to address the following aspects related to the development of servitization and digital servitization:

RQ1. Implementation of a digital servitization strategy. How it should be affected by the company’s business environment? How it should be the co-creation process in an international context? Which new knowledge and new skills need to be developed to be implemented correctly? Which benefits can be obtained by implementing the digital enablers of Industry 4.0? Which changes could it involve in the internal structure of the business? Which changes could it involve in the company’s business environment (relations with suppliers or strategic partners)? How could it face the challenges and obstacles that arise during the transition process?

RQ2. Benefits of developing an effective digital servitization strategy. How it provides greater value to the customer? How can product customization be optimized? How it encourages access to new markets? How it promotes gaining new customers? How it allows innovation in ideas or business models? How it allows the development of goods with novel services? How it effectively allows greater returns to be achieved? How it improves competitiveness?

The focus of this study is not only on analyzing servitization as a strategic shift for manufacturing companies but also on exploring how the integration of digital technologies can enrich and complicate this process. Additionally, the aim is to synthesize existing knowledge to provide a broader and more nuanced understanding of digital servitization, highlighting its key advantages, challenges, and intersection with digital technologies.

Four stages were established for this systematic literature review (Tranfield et al. 2003 ), one for each of the four phases outlined in the first section.

This collection focuses on four fields of research: business administration, marketing, operations management, and administration of services. The studies from the two main databases were examined: Web of Science and Scopus, as they are considered reference sources for the topic being analyzed. Once the information was screened, the most-cited studies were selected, which formed the basis for the present study.

3.1 Review process

In conducting a systematic literature review to gain a profound understanding of servitization and digital servitization within the manufacturing sector, our approach integrated multiple rigorous methodologies (Thomé et al. 2016 ). Initially, following the method proposed by Hertzberg and Rudner ( 1999 ), we conducted a meticulous keyword search in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, aiming to identify pertinent literature using terms like “servitization,” “digital servitization,” and their variants. This was instrumental in capturing the subject’s breadth and depth, allowing for the creation of search strings using the Boolean connector OR. The search strings were incorporated in titles, abstracts, and/or keywords, adhering to the time span of 1990 to 2023 in major databases, thus fulfilling the guidelines set by Tranfield et al. ( 2003 ) for inclusion criteria.

To further refine the search and ensure a robust database, we applied additional parameters and restrictions post-establishing the primary search strings for both databases. We limited our search to open access and hybrid gold journals, focusing on high-quality, readily available research outputs. Additionally, we set a citation threshold to include articles with significant field impact, thereby ensuring the inclusion of seminal works and recent influential studies. This strategy was pivotal in developing a comprehensive, relevant collection of literature, ensuring the inclusion of the most pertinent works in the field of digital servitization.

The approach was enhanced by strictly adhering to three key inclusion criteria: (a) considering publications from 1990 to 2023, to ensure a contemporary and comprehensive review, (b) prioritizing articles from prestigious academic journals within the relevant study areas, thus ensuring source quality and relevance, and (c) selecting articles focusing explicitly on key aspects of servitization and digital servitization. This approach, aligned with the study’s objectives and research questions, ensures a holistic and detailed understanding of the phenomenon, accurately reflecting the dynamics and transformations in the manufacturing sector.

The present study aimed to answer the research question and the various related questions. This was done via the PRISMA method (Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). The selection criteria produced 647 articles (from Web of Science) and 630 articles (from Scopus). Once identified, the abstracts of each article were read to screen and select only those in line with the fourth study phase: to help properly understand the concept, how it is managed, and how it is applied. 157 articles were ultimately identified that met all of the inclusion criteria. Figure  1 outlines the PRISMA method used.

Source: Authors’ own work from Web of Science and Scopus databases

Flow diagram, based on the PRISMA Method, for the selection of relevant documents for the systematic literature review.

3.2 Descriptive analysis

Figure 2 offers an analytical synthesis of the publication trends within the realms of servitization and digital servitization over a span of more than three decades, utilizing data harvested from the Web of Science and Scopus databases. The blue bars across all three charts articulate the volume of literature pertaining to servitization, encompassing its theoretical underpinnings, industry applications, and cross-disciplinary studies. This scholarly corpus embodies the foundational and evolutionary aspects of servitization as a strategic paradigm shift in manufacturing and service industries.

Source: Web of Science and Scopus databases and authors’ own work

Evolution of publications on Servitization and Digital Servitization (1990–2023).

In parallel, the orange bars specifically chart the trajectory of literature focused on digital servitization. This subset of research delves into the intricacies of embedding digital technologies within traditional servitization frameworks. It illuminates the burgeoning intersection of digital innovation and service strategies, reflecting a vibrant and rapidly advancing frontier of research.

The upward trend of both blue and orange bars in the separate charts for Web of Science and Scopus indicates a robust increase in scholarly output. This not only testifies to the growing academic and practical significance of servitization concepts but also their digital counterparts, which are pivotal in today’s technology-driven marketplaces.

The application of inclusion and exclusion criteria to the study of servitization and digital servitization clarifies the focus of academic research, emphasizing the most relevant and impactful studies in these areas. This refined approach highlights the critical and emerging conversations shaping the future of manufacturing industries through servitization and its digital augmentation. The graph reflects the scholarly community’s increasing investment in understanding these concepts and their application, suggesting a dual focus: the persistent importance of servitization in strengthening the interplay between manufacturing and services, and the transformative potential of digital technologies within this framework. Serving both as a retrospective and a forecast, the visualization indicates key areas for future research that promise to advance industrial practices and academic thought.

Regarding the countries in which the identified studies have been carried out, the visual data presented in Fig.  3 captures a comprehensive view of the global research output on servitization and digital servitization from 1990 to 2023, as indexed by the Web of Science and Scopus databases and further refined by the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. The top section, shown in blue, delineates the Web of Science data, indicating a prominent concentration of scholarly activity within certain countries, possibly linked to their robust research infrastructures, funding provisions, or strong manufacturing sectors that are conducive to studies in servitization.

Source: Web of Science and Scopus databases

Number of publications by country on Servitization and Digital Servitization (1990–2023).

The middle section, in orange, portrays the Scopus data, revealing a parallel distribution pattern to that of the Web of Science but with slight variances that may be indicative of the different regional research emphases or variations in the databases’ indexing methodologies. The countries with the highest volume of publications are recognized as potential centers of excellence and innovation in the field of servitization.

The bottom section of the graph, in green, represents the distilled essence of this academic output following the application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. This section emphasizes the refined and concentrated scholarly work that aligns more closely with the specific nuances and requirements of servitization and digital servitization research as defined by the study. It presents a narrower but more focused spectrum of publications, suggesting a curated body of knowledge that serves as a critical resource for understanding the current state and future directions of servitization in the manufacturing sector.

Together, these three segments of Fig.  3 not only illustrate the quantitative aspects of the research output but also underscore the qualitative focus and depth of scholarly exploration achieved through rigorous selection. This tripartite analysis offers a lens through which to view the international dissemination and development of knowledge in servitization and digital servitization, highlighting established leaders in the field as well as regions with the potential for increased research activity, international collaboration, and contribution to the servitization discourse.

In Fig.  4 , the Web of Science data (represented by the blue graph) lists Oscar Bustinza as the author with the highest number of publications, closely followed by Marko Kohtamäki and Vinit Parida. In contrast, the Scopus data (illustrated by the orange graph) also positions Vinit Parida prominently, yet Marko Kohtamäki’s publication count is lower than that reported in the Web of Science, presenting a notable discrepancy.

Number of publications by author on Servitization and Digital Servitization (1990–2023).

When the inclusion and exclusion criteria are applied (as shown in the green graph), there is a decrease in the number of publications, which aligns with expectations, given that these criteria aim to omit publications failing to meet the predetermined standards of quality and relevance. Following this filtration, Tim Baines emerges as the author with the most publications, indicating the significant relevance of his research work to the focused aims of this systematic literature review. Consequently, the filtration process underscores those authors whose contributions are particularly central or foundational to the field.

The comparison across the three graphs demonstrates the influence of database selection and methodological rigor on the perceived prominence of authors within the academic community. This analysis goes beyond merely highlighting the leading figures in servitization research; it underscores the importance of thorough evaluation in literature reviews to identify research of substantial impact.

Thus, the filtration process distinctly recognizes authors whose contributions are considered pivotal to the discipline.

Figure  5 provides a succinct overview of journal publication volumes on servitization and digital servitization from 1990 to 2023, based on data from Web of Science and Scopus databases. Prior to applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, the journals listed in the Web of Science (blue) and Scopus (orange) indicate a diverse quantity of publications.

Number of publication volume in journals with the highest frequency of articles on Servitization and Digital Servitization (1990–2023).

Post-application (green), the data are refined to highlight the top ten journals that are most aligned with the research criteria. It is noteworthy that the application of these criteria significantly alters the landscape of the considered literature. Some journals that initially (in the Web of Science or Scopus databases) had a high volume of publications appear to have fewer articles meeting the requirements, which may reflect on the specificity and relevance of their contributions to the field.

The graphic serves as an insightful metric of the research landscape, indicating not only the journals that are most prolific in the domain but also the robustness of articles surviving rigorous scholarly scrutiny. This visual representation is integral to the academic discourse, as it not only informs researchers of the core journals within the field but also reflects the evolving standards and focal areas within the literature on servitization and digital servitization.

The descriptive analyses included in this section serve as a pivotal foundation for the authors’ elaboration, shedding light on the trajectory of academic inquiry into servitization and digital servitization. It encapsulates the dual analysis conducted using the Web of Science and Scopus databases and the meticulous selection process leading to the corpus of papers employed in the systematic literature review. The synthesis of these findings offers valuable insights into the progression of research in this domain, indicating a maturing yet dynamically expanding field of study.

3.3 Classification process

Upon identifying studies that met the established selection criteria, a thorough examination of each was conducted to categorize them according to specific themes. These encompassed the motivations driving companies toward servitization, namely the reasons why manufacturers transition from producing solely goods to combining these with services, including the anticipated benefits of such a transformation. The various actors involved in the servitization process and the nature of their interactions were scrutinized, as well as the strategies necessary for successful implementation, which entailed identifying potential needs for external partners, commonly service providers (Martínez et al. 2010 ; Bastl et al. 2012 ; Spring and Araujo 2013 ; Ziaee et al. 2018 ). The types of services commonly offered were analyzed, categorized as basic, intermediate, or advanced, along with the specific servitization strategies adopted by the companies. Furthermore, the study delved into the organizational and technological capabilities required for an effective transition to servitization (Momeni et al. 2023 ), as well as the potential risks and challenges arising in these transition processes, including both internal and external obstacles that must be overcome to fully capitalize on the potential benefits of servitization (Raddats et al. 2017 ; Reim et al. 2019 ; Minaya et al. 2023 ).

4 Results: theoretical background

4.1 from servitization to digital servitization.

The concept of servitization, which has significantly evolved over the years, has achieved solid recognition in both the academic and industrial spheres. Initially defined by Levitt ( 1972 ) and Vandermerwe and Rada ( 1988 ) as the process of adding value through services (Johnson and Mena 2008 ; Baines et al. 2011 ; Lindman et al. 2016 ; Ruiz-Martín and Díaz-Garrido 2021 ), servitization has expanded to encompass multiple strategic objectives, such as competitive advantage (Baines et al. 2009a ; Raddats et al. 2019 ), financial goals, and marketing benefits (Khanra et al. 2021 ).

The shift toward servitization entails a redefinition of traditional business models, focusing on innovation (Sandström et al. 2008 ; Martín-Peña et al. 2018 ; Qi et al. 2020 ; Xing et al. 2023 ), and transforming manufacturers into service-centric companies (Cusumano 2008 ; Santamaría et al. 2012 ; Mosch et al. 2021 ). In this regard, manufacturing companies are fundamentally reorienting their business models and operational strategies to include value-added services (Gebauer and Kowalkowski 2012 ; Hyun and Kim 2021 ). Baines and Lightfoot ( 2013 ) and Luoto et al. ( 2017 ) highlight the widespread changes this implies in management, marketing, and operations. The change is so substantial that over 50% of a company’s activities and personnel can be involved in providing these newly implemented services, as indicated by multiple studies cited by Martín-Peña and Ziaee ( 2016 ). This is because research has shown that servitization not only adds value but also increases profitability with relatively low asset investments (Davies et al. 2007 ; Kharlamov and Parry 2021 ).

The types of services offered range from basic to advanced (Gebauer et al. 2013 ; Kindström and Kowalkowski 2014 ; Sousa and Da Silveira 2017 ), with advanced services contributing to greater profitability (Eggert et al. 2014 ) and generating higher customer satisfaction (Mont 2002 ; Ostrom et al. 2010 ), leading to improved competitive positioning (Oliva and Kallenberg 2003 ; Durugbo 2014 ). Baines et al. ( 2011 ) argue that servitization involves creating distinctive and sustainable capabilities (Raddats 2011 ; Kimita et al. 2022 ), requiring not just the provision of goods, but also the innovation of value through added services (Tukker and Tischner 2006 ; García Martín et al. 2019 ; Zighan and Abualqumboz 2022 ), enabling companies to maintain their competitive edge (Tuli et al. 2007 ; Brax and Jonsson 2009 ; Nordin and Kowalkowski 2010 ).

While the goal of servitization is to enrich product offerings and drive competitiveness (Neely et al. 2011 ; Gaiardelli et al. 2014 ; Benedettini et al. 2015 ), companies must avoid the “service paradox,” where the focus on new services undermines existing production capabilities (Gebauer et al. 2005 ; Hyun and Kim 2021 ). To this end, various researchers advocate for a comprehensive analysis covering customer needs, pricing strategies, delivery infrastructure, and organizational change (Manzini and Vezzoli 2003 ; Kohtamäki and Partanen 2016 ; Ziaee et al. 2017 ). In summary, moving away from product-centric thinking and engaging in product and servitization logic.

In this context, Santamaría et al. ( 2012 ) and Rabetino et al. ( 2017 ) underscore three fundamental considerations for a successful servitization strategy: the content, process, and context of organizational change. This involves determining what to change, how to change, and why the change is necessary (Kreye et al. 2015 ).

The complexity of servitization also demands internal and external alignments within companies (Gebauer 2008 ; Alghisi and Saccani 2015 ; Kohtamäki et al. 2019a ; Zhang et al. 2023 ). Internally, this involves harmonizing the organization’s strategy with the service portfolio and aligning this strategy throughout the organization (Oliva and Kallenberg 2003 ; Yan et al. 2020 ). Externally, alignment extends to the service provider network and customer expectations (Ceci and Masini 2011 ; Paiola et al. 2013 ). Similarly, servitization applies in B2B and B2C domains, serving as a differentiator and pathway to future alliances and customer loyalty (Baines et al. 2017 ; Pombo and Franco 2023 ).

On the other hand, technological advancements act as significant facilitators in the transition toward servitization, particularly the digital elements of Industry 4.0 (Dalenogare et al. 2018 ; Paschou et al. 2020 ; Opazo-Basáez et al. 2021 ; Tian et al. 2022 ; Le-Dain et al. 2023 ). This involves both internal and external organizational changes, focusing on disruptive innovations and addressing legal and financial challenges (Bustinza et al. 2018 ; Tronvoll et al. 2020 ; Kolagar et al. 2022 ), leading to what is known as digital servitization.

Digital servitization represents the integration of enabling technologies from Industry 4.0 into the servitization process, generating additional benefits and creating value for the customer (Ibarra et al. 2018 ; Grandinetti et al. 2020 ; Ciasullo et al. 2021 ; Bettiol et al. 2022 ). This digital transformation expands the scope of traditional services, allowing for greater customization and efficiency (Frank et al. 2019 ; Chen et al. 2021 ).

Digitalization facilitates data collection and analysis, improving decision-making, and enabling more predictive and proactive services (Lee et al. 2014 ; Chen et al. 2022a ; Rakic et al. 2022 ). Moreover, data-based digital capabilities are fundamental for the success of digital servitization, as they enhance both product support services and customer support services (Chen et al. 2023 ).

Digital servitization also promotes value co-creation and collaboration among manufacturers, suppliers, and customers, optimizing service delivery and strengthening relationships (Coreynen et al. 2017 ; Vendrell-Herrero et al. 2017 ; Kohtamäki et al. 2020b ; Sjödin et al. 2020 ). The business models of digital servitization are also influenced by Industry 4.0 technologies, such as Internet of Things and Big Data, enabling the development of more integrated and customer-centric solutions (Naik et al. 2020 ; Bortoluzzi et al. 2022 ; Minaya et al.  2023 ).

Furthermore, an integral aspect of the servitization landscape, especially in the digital era, is the evolution of Product-Service Systems (PSS). PSS represents a strategic approach that shifts the focus from selling products to offering a combination of products and services designed to fulfill specific customer needs more efficiently (Tukker and Tischner 2006 ; Baines et al. 2017 ). This transition to PSS reflects a broader industry movement toward sustainable and customer-centric business models, where the value proposition extends beyond the physical product to include personalized services. The advent of Industry 4.0 technologies has further propelled this evolution, leading to the development of Smart PSS. Smart PSS integrates digital technologies, such as the Internet of Things, Big Data, and Artificial Intelligence to enhance service delivery, improve customer experience and enable new forms of value creation (Chowdhury et al. 2018 ; Bortoluzzi et al. 2022 ). The adoption of these advanced technologies within PSS frameworks represents a significant leap in how companies’ approach servitization, allowing for greater customization, efficiency, and proactive engagement with customers. Therefore, understanding the role and impact of PSS, particularly Smart PSS, is crucial for comprehending the full scope of digital servitization and its implications for future business strategies.

4.2 Integrating smart product-service systems (smart PSS) into digital servitization: evolution, challenges, and opportunities

Product-Service Systems (PSS) epitomize an evolution in business models, integrating goods and services to fulfill customer needs sustainably and effectively (Galbraith 2002 ; Gebauer et al. 2011 ; Oliveira et al. 2015 ; Haase et al. 2017 ; Gaiardelli et al. 2021 ; Zhou and Song 2021 ). Tukker ( 2004 ) categorizes PSS into product oriented, use oriented, and result oriented, with each type offering distinct benefits, such as improved profit margins and differentiation from competitors (Tukker and Tischner 2006 ; Reim et al. 2015 ; Baines et al. 2017 ; Rabetino et al. 2017 ). Service-oriented PSS prioritize personalized customer experiences, requiring greater customer involvement (Matthyssens and Vandenbempt 2010 ; Cusumano et al. 2014 ; Zighan and Abualqumboz 2022 ).

The advent of Industry 4.0 technologies has given rise to Smart PSS, enhancing traditional PSS frameworks with digital capabilities and aligning with digital servitization’s goals to maximize customer value and competitive advantage (Chowdhury et al. 2018 ; Zheng et al. 2019 ; Wang et al. 2021 ; Bortoluzzi et al. 2022 ; Chen et al. 2023 ). Smart PSS incorporate Internet of Things, Big Data, and Artificial Intelligence to offer tailored services and predictive maintenance, thus improving product reliability and customer experience. However, transitioning to Smart PSS necessitates overcoming internal challenges, such as developing digital capabilities and adapting organizational culture, and external challenges like aligning strategies with customer and supplier expectations (Alghisi and Saccani 2015 ; Baines and Shi 2015 ; Ceci and Masini 2011 ; Mosch et al. 2021 ).

Business models in the context of Smart PSS vary from product centered to service oriented, depending on the company’s servitization maturity and technological capacity, leading to greater competitive differentiation and new market opportunities (Kowalkowski et al. 2017 ; Zheng et al. 2019 ; Baines et al. 2020 ; Chen et al. 2021 ). Implementing Smart PSS calls for a holistic approach, from strategic planning to system design and operational management, with a focus on how digital capabilities enhance PSS offerings and the overall value chain (Coreynen et al. 2017 ; Zheng et al. 2018 ).

In sum, the transition from traditional servitization to digital servitization, through the deployment of Smart PSS, marks a critical shift in value creation and sustaining customer loyalty, propelled by Industry 4.0 innovations (Vandermerwe and Rada 1988 ; Frank et al. 2019 ; Pinillos et al. 2022 ; Raddats et al. 2022 ; Schroeder et al. 2022 ; Chen et al. 2023 ; Martín-Peña et al. 2023 ). Realizing the potential of digital servitization demands an understanding of technological capabilities, fostering innovation, and market adaptability (Kohtamäki et al. 2019b ; Zhang et al. 2023 ). Successful digital servitization and Smart PSS rely on integrating technology with strategic vision and customer centricity, cultivating a business model focused on collaboration, innovation, and value co-creation (Naik et al. 2020 ; Chen et al. 2021 ; Zhou et al. 2021 ; Kolagar et al. 2022 ).

4.3 Digital servitization: crafting superior value in the modern era

As previously noted, servitization, as it evolves into digital servitization, catalyzes a profound and strategic transformation of business models and operational paradigms, emphasizing the importance of both internal and external strategic alignments. This process not only optimizes existing service offerings but also unlocks significant potential for service innovation and market competitiveness. Specifically, the integration of advanced technologies in digital servitization allows companies to create superior and customized value for their customers. This expanded value creation is achieved through a synergistic combination of technological resources and human capabilities, facilitating more predictive, personalized, and proactive services. Thus, digital servitization emerges as an essential and transformative step in business strategy, driving not only efficiency and strategic alignment but also fostering innovation and strengthening competitive positioning in the market.

Digital servitization, a contemporary evolution of traditional servitization, integrates Industry 4.0 technologies into the service domain, creating significant value for the customer. This value manifests in several key dimensions, all driven by digitalization and the emerging capabilities it offers.

Enhanced personalization and customer experience. The ability to collect and analyze large volumes of data using digital technologies enables companies to better understand the needs and preferences of their customers (Tao and Qi 2017 ; Chen et al. 2023 ). This leads to the creation of more personalized service offerings, tailored specifically to individual customer requirements. For instance, data analytics capabilities enhance servitization by enabling service personalization, which is fundamental for improving customer satisfaction and fostering long-term loyalty (Chen et al. 2022b ).

Efficiency and proactivity in service delivery. Digital servitization allows companies to be more efficient and proactive in delivering services. Technologies like the Internet of Things and Artificial Intelligence facilitate remote monitoring and predictive maintenance, anticipating problems before they occur and minimizing downtime (Lee et al. 2014 ; Tao and Qi 2017 ; Raddats et al. 2022 ). This not only improves product reliability but also reduces costs for the customer.

Creation of new opportunities and business models. The integration of digital services opens new avenues for innovative business models. For example, companies can offer usage-based solutions or subscriptions, where customers pay for performance or outcomes rather than the product itself (Vendrell-Herrero et al. 2017 ; Martín-Peña et al. 2020 ; Bortoluzzi et al. 2022 ). This can result in greater flexibility and more attractive cost options for the customer.

Enhanced customer–supplier relationships. Digital servitization fosters greater collaboration and value co-creation between suppliers and customers (Coreynen et al. 2017 ; Sjödin et al. 2020 ; Harrmann et al. 2023 ). This is because digital capabilities enable smoother communication and more transparent information exchange, resulting in stronger and more reliable relationships (Davies et al. 2023 ).

Continuous improvement of products and services. Ongoing feedback and data analysis enable continuous improvement of the products and services offered. Companies can quickly adjust their offerings in response to customer feedback or market changes, ensuring that their services remain relevant and of high quality (Chen et al. 2021 ).

Access to new markets. Digital servitization enables companies to access new markets and customer segments. By offering digital solutions, companies can overcome geographical and logistical barriers, reaching customers who were previously inaccessible (Münch et al. 2022 ; Rakic et al. 2022 ).

In summary, digital servitization not only enhances existing service offerings but also opens new opportunities for service innovation, strategic alignment, and market competitiveness. Its successful implementation is key to creating substantial value for the customer, highlighting the importance of a well-planned and executed strategy in the context of modern servitization.

5 Proposed conceptual framework: guiding the transition to digital servitization

Digital servitization represents a pivotal shift in the business landscape, where manufacturing companies evolve into providers of comprehensive solutions that seamlessly integrate products and services, augmented by digital technologies. This transformation is driven by the need for enhanced competitiveness, customer engagement, and value creation in a rapidly changing digital economy.

The development of our DASOBI conceptual framework, designed to guide the transition to digital servitization, is grounded in a rigorous methodological approach, underpinned by a comprehensive systematic literature review. This review meticulously synthesized three decades of academic research and industry insights, incorporating a total of 157 articles. Our comprehensive review process involved a deep analysis of the most influential and relevant publications in the field, among which notable contributions include Alghisi and Saccani ( 2015 ); Ayala et al. ( 2017 , 2019 ); Coreynen et al. ( 2017 ); Tao and Qi ( 2017 ); Vendrell-Herrero et al. ( 2017 ); Bustinza et al. ( 2018 ); Frank et al. ( 2019 ); Baines et al. ( 2020 ); Martín-Peña et al. ( 2020 ); Naik et al. ( 2020 ); Brax et al. ( 2021 ); Gaiardelli et al. ( 2021 ); Kohtamäki et al. ( 2021 ); Bettiol et al. ( 2022 ); Bortoluzzi et al. ( 2022 ); Marcon et al. ( 2022 ); Münch et al. ( 2022 ); Brekke et al. ( 2023 ); Chen et al. ( 2023 ); Chirumalla et al. ( 2023 ); Shen et al. ( 2023 ). These articles were particularly significant for identifying emerging trends, key challenges, and effective strategies in digital servitization. By systematically analyzing this extensive body of literature, we identified critical themes, challenges, strategies, and outcomes associated with the digital servitization journey. This analysis not only highlighted the multifaceted nature of digital servitization but also emphasized the critical importance of aligning strategic considerations, technological capabilities, and stakeholder roles to successfully navigate this complex transition. The structured framework presented herein not only reflects the evolution of the field but also provides clear guidance for manufacturing companies advancing toward more sophisticated and digitalized servitization practices.

The DASOBI framework, while empirically grounded in a comprehensive literature review, also draws extensively on classical and emerging theories to provide a robust theoretical foundation. For instance, diffusion of innovations theory (Rogers 2003 ) elucidates the “Drivers” and “Obstacles” in the adoption of digital servitization by explaining the rate and process through which new technological innovations spread within industries. Furthermore, the resource-based view (Barney 1991 ) is instrumental in understanding the “Strategies” component of the framework, emphasizing the importance of internal capabilities and resources in gaining a competitive advantage through digital transformation. These theoretical integrations not only enhance the academic rigor of our framework but also offer a deeper understanding of the multifaceted nature of digital servitization.

Therefore, the proposed DASOBI (Drivers, Actors, Strategies, Obstacles, Benefits, and Impact) model emerges as a synthesis of empirical evidence and theoretical insights, designed to offer a coherent and actionable guide for organizations seeking to embrace digital servitization.

This conceptual framework delineates a roadmap for organizations to navigate this complex transition. The framework identifies the core components essential for a successful journey toward digital servitization:

Underlying reasons for the shift (Drivers). Recognizing the strategic imperatives for transitioning toward a digital servitization model is critical. This includes understanding market dynamics, competitive pressures, and technological advancements driving this change.

Key actors involved (Actors). Successful digital servitization necessitates the involvement and alignment of various stakeholders, including internal teams, customers, technology partners, and suppliers. Their roles, expectations, and contributions are pivotal in shaping the servitization journey.

Strategic considerations and tools (Strategies). This encompasses adopting strategic frameworks, methodologies, and digital tools that are conducive to servitization. These tools and strategies should facilitate the integration of digital technologies with traditional product-service offerings, ensuring a seamless transition.

Potential challenges and obstacles (Obstacles). Identifying and addressing challenges such as cultural resistance, skill gaps, technological complexities, and integration issues with existing processes is crucial. Proactive strategies and contingency plans are essential to mitigate these barriers.

Anticipated benefits of the transition (Benefits). The transition to digital servitization should bring about significant benefits, including enhanced customer value, increased revenue streams, and improved competitive positioning. This component focuses on quantifying these benefits and aligning them with organizational goals.

Expected outcomes and impact (Impact). The final component of the framework revolves around the tangible outcomes and impacts of digital servitization. This includes enhanced customer satisfaction, increased market share, and improved operational efficiency.

In the digital servitization framework, the transition toward digital servitization, driven by market dynamics, competitive pressures, and technological advancements, is intrinsically linked to the roles and contributions of key stakeholders, such as internal teams, customers, and technology partners. Strategic considerations and tools must be selected in light of potential challenges, like cultural resistance and skill gaps, ensuring alignment with stakeholder capabilities and expectations for a seamless integration of digital technologies with traditional offerings. This strategic alignment is pivotal in overcoming obstacles and realizing anticipated benefits, such as enhanced customer value and competitive positioning. These benefits, in turn, lead to tangible outcomes, like improved customer satisfaction and operational efficiency, which feedback into the market, influencing ongoing strategic imperatives and shaping the evolution of digital servitization strategies. This dynamic interplay highlights a continuous feedback loop where outcomes inform underlying reasons, reinforcing the need for adaptability and strategic foresight in the digital servitization journey.

The contribution of the DASOBI framework to the existing literature is manifold. By synthesizing empirical findings with theoretical insights from servitization and digital transformation research, this framework addresses identified gaps, such as the integration of digital technologies in traditional servitization models and the management of organizational changes associated with such transitions (Baines and Lightfoot 2013 ; Vargo and Lusch 2008 ). Specifically, the DASOBI framework aids in conceptualizing how companies can strategically navigate the complexities of digital servitization, providing a structured approach that is missing in previous studies. This not only extends the theoretical discourse around servitization but also sets a foundation for future research to explore the dynamic interactions between digital technologies and service strategies in manufacturing sectors.

In conclusion, this conceptual framework serves as a comprehensive guide for firms embarking on the digital servitization journey. It provides a structured approach to understanding and implementing the necessary changes, ensuring a smooth transition and realization of the potential benefits of digital servitization. Figure  6 summarizes this meticulously formulated model (DASOBI), referred to as the Drivers (underlying reasons for the shift), Actors (key actors involved), Strategies (strategic considerations and tools), Obstacles (potential challenges and obstacles), Benefits (anticipated benefits of the transition), and Impact (expected outcomes and impact) of Digital Servitization Strategy, offers a robust framework for scholarly exploration, grounded in an exhaustive review of extant literature.

Source: Authors’ own work

Conceptual theoretical model for the analysis of Digital Servitization.

The DASOBI framework orchestrates the shift from traditional service strategies to digitally-enhanced service offerings, underpinned by the alignment of core elements: Drivers, Actors, Strategy, Obstacles, Benefits, and Impact. The model emphasizes a strategic approach, incorporating digital catalytic factors to augment adaptability, customer-centric analytics, and the pursuit of novel revenue streams through digital innovations.

Within this framework, the digital knowledge and capability development are crucial. Firms must harness Big Data to distill customer insights, leverage Artificial Intelligence for identifying opportunities, and increase the flexibility of their service offerings via digital platforms. The role of digital service providers is pivotal, offering expertise to mitigate transition risks, assure service quality, and bolster productivity with cutting-edge technological solutions.

However, the shift is not without its challenges. The resistance to digital transformation and the complexity of measuring profitability in the digital service landscape can impede progress. Moreover, the implications of Industry 4.0 are profound, necessitating organizational restructuring, workforce upskilling, and technological investments to realize the potential of digital servitization.

The anticipated benefits of this digital shift are manifold. Enhanced customer understanding through sophisticated data analytics, improved market positioning through digital innovation, and elevated creative capability with advanced technology are but a few of the advantages. Furthermore, embracing Industry 4.0 technologies within digital servitization amplifies these benefits, leading to superior product quality via smart manufacturing, greater adaptability in production, and increased operational efficiency ensuring timely delivery.

In summary, the DASOBI model meticulously integrates the transition to digital servitization with the digital economy’s imperatives, presenting a coherent roadmap for firms aspiring to harness the full spectrum of benefits offered by Industry 4.0 innovations.

6 Conclusions, limitations, and further research

This study embarked on an exhaustive journey through three decades of literature on servitization and its evolution toward digital servitization within the manufacturing sector. Through a systematic literature review, we explored the strategic transformation that involves integrating advanced services and digital technologies into product offerings, a change driven by the need to enhance competitiveness, customer engagement, and value creation in a rapidly evolving digital economy.

Our research findings have identified key drivers, actors, strategies, challenges, and benefits associated with the transition toward digital servitization. The DASOBI conceptual framework tries to provide a structured guide for understanding and managing this complex transition. This framework emphasizes the importance of recognizing the underlying reasons for adopting digital servitization models, the necessity of aligning and collaborating with diverse stakeholders, and the use of specific strategies to overcome the inherent challenges of this process.

Despite this study’s contribution to the body of knowledge on digital servitization, we acknowledge several limitations. The geographical concentration of the research activity analyzed might limit the generalizability of our findings across diverse cultural and economic contexts. The rapid evolution of digital technologies and business models also suggests that the relevance of our discoveries could be challenged by future developments. Additionally, our research focused primarily on manufacturing firms, which limits the applicability of the findings to other sectors.

These limitations open several avenues for future research. It is imperative to validate and test the generalizability of the DASOBI framework across various organizational and industry contexts. Further research is also needed to develop specific metrics that can measure the impacts of digital servitization. Longitudinal studies could provide a deeper understanding of how servitization strategies influence business outcomes over time.

This study contributes to the academic discussion by clarifying and deepening the concept of servitization and its intersection with digitalization, offering an integrative view that can assist manufacturing firms in navigating the complex landscape of servitization and digital servitization. Although we have tried to establish a solid foundation for future research, it is evident that the field of digital servitization remains dynamic and evolving, requiring ongoing examination to fully comprehend its impact on business strategy and practice.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Alghisi A, Saccani N (2015) Internal and external alignment in the servitization journey—overcoming the challenges. Prod Plann Control 26:1219–1232. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2015.1033496

Article   Google Scholar  

Ayala NF, Paslauski CA, Ghezzi A, Frank AG (2017) Knowledge sharing dynamics in service suppliers’ involvement for servitization of manufacturing companies. Int J Prod Econ 193:538–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.08.019

Ayala NF, Gerstlberger W, Frank AG (2019) Managing servitization in product companies: the moderating role of service suppliers. Int J Oper Prod Manag 39(1):43–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2017-0484

Baines T, Lightfoot H (2013) Servitization of the manufacturing firm: exploring the operations practices and technologies that deliver advanced services. Int J Oper Prod Manag 34(1):2–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-02-2012-0086

Baines T, Shi VG (2015) A Delphi study to explore the adoption of servitization in UK companies. Prod Plann Control 26:1171–1187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2015.1033490

Baines T, Lightfoot HW, Evans S, Neely A et al (2007) State-of-the-art in product-service systems. J Eng Manuf 221(10):1543–1552. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544054JEM858

Baines T, Lightfoot H, Benedettini O, Kay JM (2009a) The servitization of manufacturing: a review of literature and reflection on future challenges. J Manuf Technol Manag 20(5):547–567. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380910960984

Baines T, Lightfoot H, Peppard J, Johnson M et al (2009b) Towards an operations strategy for product-centric servitization. Int J Oper Prod Manag 29(5):494–519. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570910953603

Baines T, Lightfoot H, Smart P (2011) Servitization within manufacturing: exploring the provision of advanced services and their impact on vertical integration. J Manuf Technol Manag 22(7):947–954. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410381111160988

Baines T, Ziaee Bigdeli A, Bustinza OF, Shi VG et al (2017) Servitization: revisiting the state-of-the-art and research priorities. Int J Oper Prod Manag 37(2):256–278. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-06-2015-0312

Baines T, Ziaee Bigdeli A, Sousa R, Schroeder A (2020) Framing the servitization transformation process: a model to understand and facilitate the servitization journey. Int J Prod Econ 221:1–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.07.036

Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

Google Scholar  

Barquet APB, De Oliveira MG, Amigo CR, Cunha VP, Rozenfeld H (2013) Employing the business model concept to support the adoption of product-service systems (PSS). Ind Mark Manag 42(5):693–704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.05.003

Bastl M, Johnson M, Lightfoot H, Evans S (2012) Buyer-supplier relationships in a servitized environment. Int J Oper Prod Manag 32(6):650–675. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443571211230916

Benedettini O, Neely A, Swink M (2015) Why do servitized firms fail? A risk-based explanation. Int J Oper Prod Manag 35(6):946–979. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-02-2014-0052

Bettiol M, Capestro M, Di Maria E, Micelli S (2022) Overcoming pandemic challenges through product innovation: the role of digital technologies and servitization. Eur Manag J 40(5):707–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2022.05.003

Bortoluzzi G, Chiarvesio M, Romanello R, Tabacco R, Veglio V (2022) Servitisation and performance in the business-to-business context: the moderating role of Industry 4.0 technologies. J Manuf Technol Manag 33(9):108–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-08-2021-0317

Brady T, Davies A, Gann D (2005) Creating value by delivering integrated solutions. Int J Proj Manag 23(5):360–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.01.001

Brax SA (2005) A manufacturer becoming service provider—challenges and a paradox. Manag Serv Qual 15(2):142–155. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604520510585334

Brax SA, Jonsson K (2009) Developing integrated solution offerings for remote diagnostics: a comparative case study of two manufacturers. Int J Oper Prod Manag 29(5):539–560. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570910953621

Brax SA, Calabrese A, Levialdi Ghiron N, Tiburzi L, Gronroos C (2021) Explaining the servitization paradox: a configurational theory and a performance measurement framework. Int J Oper Prod Manag 41(5):517–546. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2020-0535

Brekke T, Lenka S, Kohtamaki M, Parida V, Solem BAA (2023) Overcoming barriers to transformation in manufacturing firms. A path-dependence perspective of digital servitization. Rev Manag Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00641-0

Bustinza OF, Bigdeli AZ, Baines T, Elliot C (2015) Servitization and competitive advantage: the importance of organizational structure and value chain position. Res Technol Manag 58:53–60. https://doi.org/10.5437/08956308X5805354

Bustinza OF, Gomes E, Vendrell-Herrero F, Tarba SY (2018) An organizational change framework for digital servitization: evidence from the Veneto region. Strateg Change 27:111–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2186

Calabrese A, Levialdi Ghiron N, Tiburzi L, Baines T, Ziaee Bigdeli A (2019) The measurement of degree of servitization: literature review and recommendations. Prod Plann Control 30:1118–1135. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2019.1592260

Ceci F, Masini A (2011) Balancing specialized and generic capabilities in the provision of integrated solutions. Ind Corp Change 20(1):91–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtq069

Chen Y, Visnjic I, Parida V, Zhang Z (2021) On the road to digital servitization—the (dis)continuous interplay between business model and digital technology. Int J Oper Prod Manag 41(5):694–722. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2020-0544

Chen M, Pu X, Zhang M, Cai Z et al (2022a) Data analytics capability and servitization: the moderated mediation role of bricolage and innovation orientation. Int J Oper Prod Manag 42(4):440–470. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-10-2021-0663

Chen Y, Wu Z, Yi W, Wang B et al (2022b) Bibliometric method for manufacturing servitization: a review and future research directions. Sustainability 14:1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148743

Chen L, Dai Y, Ren F, Dong X (2023) Data-driven digital capabilities enable servitization strategy—from service supporting the product to service supporting the client. Technol Forecast Soc Change 197:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122901

Chirumalla K, Leoni L, Oghazi P (2023) Moving from servitization to digital servitization: identifying the required dynamic capabilities and related microfoundations to facilitate the transition. J Bus Res 158:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113668

Chowdhury S, Haftor D, Pashkevich N (2018) Smart product-service systems (Smart PSS) in industrial firms: a literature review. Procedia CIRP 73:26–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.333

Ciasullo MV, Polese F, Montera R, Carrubbo L (2021) A digital servitization framework for viable manufacturing companies. J Bus Ind Mark 36(13):142–160. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-07-2020-0349

Coreynen W, Matthyssens P, Van Bockhaven W (2017) Boosting servitization through digitization: pathways and dynamic resource configurations for manufacturers. Ind Mark Manag 60:42–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.04.012

Cusumano MA (2008) The changing software business: moving from products to services. Computer 41:20–27. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2008.29

Cusumano MA, Kahl SJ, Suárez FF (2014) Services, industry evolution, and the competitive strategies of product firms. Strateg Manag J 36:559–575. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2378868

Dalenogare LS, Benitez GB, Ayala NF, Frank AG (2018) The expected contribution of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance. Int J Prod Econ 204:383–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.08.019

Davies A, Brady T, Hobday M (2007) Organizing for solutions: systems seller vs. systems integrator. Ind Mark Manag 36(2):183–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2006.04.009

Davies P, Bustinza OF, Parry G, Jovanovic M (2023) Unpacking the relationship between digital capabilities, services capabilities, and firm financial performance: a moderated mediation model. Ind Mark Manag 115:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.09.005

Díaz-Garrido E, Pinillos MJ, Soriano-Pinar I, García-Magro C (2018) Changes in the intellectual basis of servitization research: a dynamic analysis. J Eng Technol Manag JET M 48:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2018.01.005

Durugbo C (2014) Strategic framework for industrial product-service co-design: findings from the microsystems industry. Int J Prod Res 52:2881–2900. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.857054

Eggert A, Hogreve J, Ulaga W, Muenkhoff E (2014) Revenue and profit implications of industrial service strategies. J Serv Res 17:23–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670513485823

Favoretto C, Mendes G, Oliveira M, Cauchick-Miguel P, Coreynen W (2022) From servitization to digital servitization: how digitalization transforms companies’ transition towards services. Ind Mark Manag 102:104–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.01.003

Frank AG, Mendes GHS, Ayala NF, Ghezzi A (2019) Servitization and Industry 4.0 convergence in the digital transformation of product firms: a business model innovation perspective. Technol Forecast Soc Change 141:341–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.01.014

Gaiardelli P, Songini L, Saccani N (2014) The automotive industry: heading towards servitization in turbulent times. Servitization in Industry. Springer, Cham

Gaiardelli P, Pezzotta G, Rondini A, Romero D et al (2021) Product-service systems evolution in the era of Industry 4.0. Serv Bus 15:177–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-021-00438-9

Galbraith JR (2002) Organizing to deliver solutions. Organ Dyn 31(2):194–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00101-8

García Martin PC, Schroeder A, Bigdeli AZ (2019) The value architecture of servitization: expanding the research scope. J Bus Res 104:438–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.010

Gebauer H (2008) Identifying service strategies in product manufacturing companies by exploring environment—strategy configurations. Ind Mark Manage 37(3):278–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.05.018

Gebauer H, Fleisch E (2007) An investigation of the relationship between behavioral processes, motivation, investments in the service business and service revenue. Ind Mark Manag 36(3):337–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.09.005

Gebauer H, Kowalkowski C (2012) Customer-focused and service-focused orientation in organizational structures. J Bus Ind Mark 27(7):527–537. https://doi.org/10.1108/08858621211257293

Gebauer H, Elgar F, Thomas F (2005) Overcoming the service paradox in manufacturing companies. Eur Manag J 23:14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2004.12.006

Gebauer H, Gustafsson A, Witell L (2011) Competitive advantage through service differentiation by manufacturing companies. J Bus Res 64(12):1270–1280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.01.015

Gebauer H, Paiola M, Saccani N (2013) Characterizing service networks for moving from products to solutions. Ind Mark Manag 42:31–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2012.11.002

Grandinetti R, Ciasullo MV, Paiola M, Schiavone F (2020) Fourth industrial revolution, digital servitization and relationship quality in Italian B2B manufacturing firms. Explor Study TQM J 32(4):647–671. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-01-2020-0006

Haase RP, Pigosso DCA, McAloone TC (2017) Product/service-system origins and trajectories: a systematic literature review of PSS definitions and their characteristics. Procedia CIRP 64:157–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.053

Harrmann LK, Eggert A, Böhm E (2023) Digital technology usage as a driver of servitization paths in manufacturing industries. Eur J Mark 57(3):834–857. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-11-2021-0914

Hertzberg S, Rudner L (1999) Quality of researchers’ searches of the ERIC database. Educ Policy Anal Arch. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v7n25.1999

Hyun M, Kim J (2021) Challenge or opportunity? A case of tire rental servitization from financial and channel perspectives. Serv Bus 15:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-020-00433-6

Ibarra D, Ganzarain J, Igartua JI (2018) Business model innovation through Industry 4.0: a review. Procedia Manuf 22:4–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROMFG.2018.03.002

Johnson M, Mena C (2008) Supply chain management for servitised products: a multi-industry case study. Int J Prod Econ 114:27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.09.011

Johnstone S, Dainty A, Wilkinson A (2009) Integrating products and services through life: an aerospace experience. Int J Oper Prod Manag 29(5):520–538. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570910953612

Kamp B, Alcalde H (2014) Servitization in the basque economy. Strateg Change 23:359–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.1982

Kamp B, Parry G (2017) Servitization and advanced business services as levers for competitiveness. Ind Mark Manag 60:11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.12.008

Kanninen T, Penttinen E, Tinnilä M, Kaario K (2017) Exploring the dynamic capabilities required for servitization: the case process industry. Bus Process Manag J 23(2):226–247. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03-2015-0036

Kans M, Ingwald A (2016) Business model development towards service management 4.0. Procedia CIRP 47:489–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROCIR.2016.03.228

Khanra S, Dhir A, Parida V, Kohtamäki M (2021) Servitization research: a review and bibliometric analysis of past achievements and future promises. J Bus Res 131:151–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.03.056

Kharlamov AA, Parry G (2021) The impact of servitization and digitization on productivity and profitability of the firm: a systematic approach. Prod Plann Control 32:185–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1718793

Kimita K, McAloone T, Ogata K, Pigosso D (2022) Servitization maturity model: developing distinctive capabilities for successful servitization in manufacturing companies. J Manuf Technol Manag 33(9):61–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-07-2021-0248

Kindström D, Kowalkowski C (2014) Service innovation in product-centric firms: a multidimensional business model perspective. J Bus Ind Mark 29(2):96–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-08-2013-0165

Kohtamaki M, Henneberg SC, Martinez V, Kimita K, Gebauer H (2019a) A configurational approach to servitization: review and research directions. Serv Sci 11(3):1–29. https://doi.org/10.1287/serv.2019.0245

Kohtamaki M, Rabetino R, Einola S, Parida V, Patel P (2021) Unfolding the digital servitization path from products to product-service-software systems: practicing change through intentional narratives. J Bus Res 137:379–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.027

Kohtamäki M, Partanen J (2016) Co-creating value from knowledge-intensive business services in manufacturing firms: the moderating role of relationship learning in supplier-customer interactions. J Bus Res 69(7):2498–2506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.019

Kohtamäki M, Parida V, Oghazi P, Gebauer H, Baines T (2019b) Digital servitization business models in ecosystems: a theory of the firm. J Bus Res 104:380–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.06.027

Kohtamäki M, Einola S, Rabetino R (2020a) Exploring servitization through the paradox lens: coping practices in servitization. Int J Prod Econ 226:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107619

Kohtamäki M, Parida V, Patel P, Gebauer H (2020b) The relationship between digitalization and servitization: the role of servitization in capturing the financial potential of digitalization. Technol Forecast Soc Change 151:1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119804

Kolagar M, Parida V, Sjödin D (2022) Ecosystem transformation for digital servitization: a systematic review, integrative framework, and future research agenda. J Bus Res 146:176–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.067

Kowalkowski C, Gebauer H, Kamp B, Parry G (2017) Servitization and deservitization: overview, concepts, and definitions. Ind Mark Manag 60:4–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.12.007

Kreye ME, Roehrich JK, Lewis MA (2015) Servitizing manufacturers: the impact of service complexity and contractual and relational capabilities. Prod Plann Control 26:1233–1246. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2015.1033489

Le-Dain MA, Benhayoun L, Matthews J, Liard M (2023) Barriers and opportunities of digital servitization for SMEs: the effect of smart product-service system business models. Serv Bus 17:359–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-023-00520-4

Lee J, Kao HA, Yang S (2014) Service innovation and smart analytics for Industry 4.0 and big data environment. Procedia CIRP 16:3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.02.001

Leoni L, Aria M (2021) A thirty-year bibliometric analysis on servitization. Int J Serv Sci Manag Eng Technol 12(3):73–95. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSSMET.2021050105

Levitt T (1972) Production-line approach to service. Harv Bus Rev 50:41–52

Lightfoot H, Baines T, Smart P (2013) The servitization of manufacturing: a systematic literature review of interdependent trends. Int J Oper Prod Manag 33(11/12):1408–1434. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-07-2010-0196

Lindman M, Pennanen K, Rothenstei J, Scozzi B, Vincze Z (2016) The value space: how firms facilitate value creation. Bus Process Manag J 22(4):736–762. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-09-2015-0126

Luoto S, Brax SA, Kohtamäki M (2017) Critical meta-analysis of servitization research: constructing a model-narrative to reveal paradigmatic assumptions. Ind Mark Manag 60:89–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.04.008

Manzini E, Vezzoli C (2003) A strategic design approach to develop sustainable product service systems: examples taken from the ‘environmentally friendly innovation’ Italian prize. J Clean Prod 11(8):851–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00153-1

Marcon É, Marcon A, Ayala NF, Frank AG et al (2022) Capabilities supporting digital servitization: a multi-actor perspective. Ind Mark Manag 103:97–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.03.003

Martínez V, Bastl M, Kingston J, Evans S (2010) Challenges in transforming manufacturing organizations into product-service providers. J Manuf Technol Manag 21(4):449–469. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410381011046571

Martín-Peña ML, Ziaee Bigdeli A (2016) Servitization: academic research and business practice. Univ Bus Rev 49:18–31

Martín-Peña ML, Pinillos MJ, Reyes LE (2017) The intellectual basis of servitization: a bibliometric analysis. J Eng Technol Manag JET M 43:83–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2017.01.005

Martín-Peña ML, Díaz-Garrido E, Sánchez-López JM (2018) The digitalization and servitization of manufacturing: a review on digital business models. Strateg Change 27:91–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2184

Martín-Peña ML, Sánchez-López JM, Díaz-Garrido E (2020) Servitization and digitalization in manufacturing: the influence on firm performance. J Bus Ind Mark 35(3):564–574. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-12-2018-0400

Martín-Peña ML, Sanchez-Lopez JM, Kamp B, Gimenez-Fernandez EM (2023) The innovation antecedents behind the servitization-performance relationship. R D Manag 53:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12586

Mathieu V (2001) Service strategies within the manufacturing sector: benefits, costs and partnership. Int J Serv Ind Manag 12(5):451–475. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006093

Matthyssens P, Vandenbempt K (2010) Service addition as business market strategy: identification of transition trajectories. J Serv Manag 21(5):693–714. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231011079101

Minaya PE, Avella L, Trespalacios JA (2023) The effects of digital servitization on business competitiveness: A case study of Spanish manufacturers. J Int Entrep 21:180–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-023-00333-6

Momeni K, Raddats C, Martinsuo M (2023) Mechanisms for developing operational capabilities in digital servitization. Int J Oper Prod Manag 43(13):101–127. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-04-2022-0259

Mont O (2002) Clarifying the concept of product-service system. J Clean Prod 10(3):237–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(01)00039-7

Mosch P, Schweikl S, Obermaier R (2021) Trapped in the supply chain? Digital servitization strategies and power relations in the case of an industrial technology supplier. Int J Prod Econ 236:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108141

Müller JM, Buliga O, Voigt KI (2021) The role of absorptive capacity and innovation strategy in the design of Industry 4.0 business models—a comparison between SMEs and large enterprises. Eur Manag J 39(3):333–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.01.002

Münch C, Marx E, Benz L, Hartmann E, Matzner M (2022) Capabilities of digital servitization: evidence from the socio-technical systems theory. Technol Forecast Soc Change 176:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121361

Naik P, Schroeder A, Kapoor K, Ziaee Bigdeli A (2020) Behind the scenes of digital servitization: actualising IoT-enabled affordances. Ind Mark Manag 89:232–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.03.010

Neely A, Benedettini O, Visnjic I (2011) The servitization of manufacturing: further evidence. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, pp 1–11

Nordin F, Kowalkowski C (2010) Solutions offerings: a critical review and reconceptualization. J Serv Manag 21(4):441–459. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231011066105

Oliva R, Kallenberg R (2003) Managing the transition from products to services. Int J Serv Ind Manag 14(2):160–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230310474138

Oliveira MG, Mendes GH, Rozenfeld H (2015) Bibliometric analysis of the product-service system research field. Procedia CIRP 30:114–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.02.139

Opazo-Basáez M, Vendrell-Herrero F, Bustinza OF (2021) Digital service innovation: a paradigm shift in technological innovation. J Serv Manag 33:97–120. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-11-2020-0427

Ostrom AL, Bitner MJ, Brown SW, Burkhard KA et al (2010) Moving forward and making a difference: research priorities for the science of service. J Serv Res 13:4–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670509357611

Paiola M, Gebauer H (2020) Internet of things technologies, digital servitization and business model innovation in BtoB manufacturing firms. Ind Mark Manag 89:245–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.03.009

Paiola M, Saccani N, Perona M, Gebauer H (2013) Moving from products to solutions: strategic approaches for developing capabilities. Eur Manag J 31(4):390–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2012.10.002

Parida V, Sjödin DR, Wincent J, Kohtamäki M (2014) Mastering the transition to product-service provision: insights into business models, learning activities, and capabilities. Res Technol Manag 57:44–52. https://doi.org/10.5437/08956308X5703227

Paschou T, Rapaccini M, Adrodegari F, Saccani N (2020) Digital servitization in manufacturing: a systematic literature review and research agenda. Ind Mark Manag 89:278–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.02.012

Pessôa MVP, Becker JMJ (2017) Overcoming the product-service model adoption obstacles. Procedia CIRP 64:163–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.062

Pettigrew AM (1988) The management of strategic change. B. Blackwell, Oxford

Pinillos MJ, Díaz-Garrido E, Martín-Peña ML (2022) The origin and evolution of the concept of servitization: a co-word and network analysis. J Bus Ind Mark 37(7):1497–1514. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-02-2021-0120

Pombo D, Franco M (2023) A qualitative investigation of infusing products with service via strategic alliances among SMEs: a case of servitization. Serv Bus 17:529–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-023-00530-2

Pye A, Pettigrew A (2005) Studying board context, process and dynamics: some challenges for the future. Brit J Manag 16:27–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00445.x

Qi Y, Mao Z, Zhang M, Guo H (2020) Manufacturing practices and servitization: the role of mass customization and product innovation capabilities. Int J Prod Econ 228:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107747

Rabetino R, Kohtamäki M, Gebauer H (2017) Strategy map of servitization. Int J Prod Econ 192:144–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.11.004

Rabetino R, Kohtamäki M, Brax SA, Sihvonen J (2021) The tribes in the field of servitization: discovering latent streams across 30 years of research. Ind Mark Manag 95:70–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.04.005

Rabetino R, Kohtamäki M, Huikkola T (2023) Digital service innovation (DSI): a multidisciplinary (re)view of its origins and progress using bibliometric and text mining methods. J Serv Manag. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-12-2022-0375

Raddats C (2011) Aligning industrial services with strategies and sources of market differentiation. J Bus Ind Mark 26(5):332–343. https://doi.org/10.1108/08858621111144398

Raddats C, Baines T, Burton J, Story VM, Zolkiewski J (2016) Motivations for servitization: the impact of product complexity. Int J Oper Prod Manag 36(5):572–591. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-09-2014-0447

Raddats C, Zolkiewski J, Story VM, Burton J et al (2017) Interactively developed capabilities: evidence from dyadic servitization relationships. Int J Oper Prod Manag 37(3):382–400. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2015-0512

Raddats C, Kowalkowski C, Benedettini O, Burton J, Gebauer H (2019) Servitization: a contemporary thematic review of four major research streams. Ind Mark Manag 83:207–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.03.015

Raddats C, Naik P, Ziaee Bigdeli A (2022) Creating value in servitization through digital service innovations. Ind Mark Manag 104:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.04.002

Rakic S, Pero M, Sianesi A, Marjanovic U (2022) Digital servitization and firm performance: technology intensity approach. Eng Econ 33(4):398–413. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.33.4.29649

Reim W, Parida V, Örtqvist D (2015) Product-Service Systems (PSS) business models and tactics—a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 97:61–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2014.07.003

Reim W, Sjödin DR, Parida V (2019) Servitization of global service network actors—a contingency framework for matching challenges and strategies in service transition. J Bus Res 104:461–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.032

Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of innovations. Free Press, New York

Ruiz-Martín A, Díaz-Garrido E (2021) A review of servitization theoretical foundations. J Ind Eng Manag 14(3):496–519. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3466

Sandström S, Edvardsson B, Kristensson P, Magnusson P (2008) Value in use through service experience. Manag Serv Qual 18(2):112–126. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604520810859184

Santamaría L, Jesús Nieto M, Miles I (2012) Service innovation in manufacturing firms: evidence from Spain. Technovation 32(2):144–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.08.006

Schroeder A, Baines T, Sakao T (2022) Increasing value capture by enhancing manufacturer commitment-managing the servitization process. IEEE Eng Manag Rev 50(3):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMR.2022.3197075

Shen L, Sun W, Parida V (2023) Consolidating digital servitization research: a systematic review, integrative framework, and future research directions. Technol Forecast Soc Change 191:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122478

Sjödin D, Parida V, Kohtamaki M, Wincent J (2020) An agile co-creation process for digital servitization: a micro-service innovation approach. J Bus Res 112:478–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.009

Sousa R, Da Silveira G (2017) Capability antecedents and performance outcomes of servitization: differences between basic and advanced services. Int J Oper Prod Manag 37(4):444–467. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-11-2015-0696

Spring M, Araujo L (2013) Beyond the service factory: service innovation in manufacturing supply networks. Ind Mark Manag 42:59–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2012.11.006

Tao F, Qi Q (2017) New IT driven service-oriented smart manufacturing: framework and characteristics. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern -Syst 49:81–91. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2017.2723764

Thomé AMT, Scavarda LF, Scavarda AJ (2016) Conducting systematic literature review in operations management. Prod Plann Control 27(5):408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2015.1129464

Tian J, Coreynen W, Matthyssens P, Shen L (2022) Platform-based servitization and business model adaptation by established manufacturers. Technovation 118:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102222

Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Brit J Manag 14:207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375

Tronvoll B, Sklyar A, Sorhammar D, Kowalkowski C (2020) Transformational shifts through digital servitization. Ind Mark Manag 89:293–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.02.005

Tukker A (2004) Eight types of product-service system: eight ways to sustainability? Experience from SusProNet. Bus Strategy Environ 13:246–260. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.414

Tukker A (2015) Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy—a review. J Clean Prod 97:76–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2013.11.049

Tukker A, Tischner U (2006) Product-services as a research field: past, present and future. Reflections from a decade of research. J Clean Prod 14(17):1552–1556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.01.022

Tuli KR, Kohli AK, Bharadwaj SG (2007) Rethinking customer solutions: from product bundles to relational processes. J Mark 71(3):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.3.1

Vandermerwe S, Rada J (1988) Servitization of business: adding value by adding services. Eur Manag J 6(4):314–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-2373(88)90033-3

Vargo SL, Lusch RF (2008) Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. J Acad Mark Sci 36(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6

Vendrell-Herrero F, Bustinza OF, Parry G, Georgantzis N (2017) Servitization, digitization and supply chain interdependency. Ind Mark Manag 60:69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.06.013

Visnjic I, Van Looy B (2013) Servitization: disentangling the impact of service business model innovation on manufacturing firm performance. J Oper Manag 31(4):169–180. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2407380

Wang W, Lai K, Shou Y (2018) The impact of servitization on firm performance: a meta-analysis. Int J Oper Prod Manag 38(7):1562–1588. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-04-2017-0204

Wang Z, Chen CH, Zheng P, Li X, Khoo LP (2021) A graph-based context-aware requirement elicitation approach in smart product-service systems. Int J Prod Res 59(2):635–651. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1702227

Windahl C, Lakemond N (2006) Developing integrated solutions: the importance of relationships within the network. Ind Mark Manag 35(7):806–818. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INDMARMAN.2006.05.010

Xing Y, Liu Y, Davies P (2023) Servitization innovation: a systematic review, integrative framework, and future research directions. Technovation 122:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102641

Yan K, Li G, Cheng TCE (2020) The impact of service-oriented organizational design factors on firm performance: the moderating role of service-oriented corporate culture. Int J Prod Econ 228:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107745

Yu Y, Sung TJ (2023) A value-based view of the smart PSS adoption: a study of smart kitchen appliances. Serv Bus 17:499–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-023-00529-9

Zhang W, Banerji S (2017) Challenges of servitization: a systematic literature review. Ind Mark Manag 65:217–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.06.003

Zhang K, Feng L, Wang J, Lin KY, Li Q (2023) Servitization in business ecosystem: a systematic review and implications for business-to-business servitization research. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 35(11):1480–1496. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.2010698

Zheng P, Lin T, Chen C, Xu X (2018) A systematic design approach for service innovation of smart product-service systems. J Clean Prod 201:657–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.101

Zheng P, Liu Y, Tao F, Wang Z, Chen C (2019) Smart product-service systems solution design via hybrid crowd sensing approach. IEEE Access 7:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2939828

Zhou C, Song W (2021) Digitalization as a way forward: a bibliometric analysis of 20 years of servitization research. J Clean Prod 300:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126943

Zhou D, Yan T, Dai W, Feng J (2021) Disentangling the interactions within and between servitization and digitalization strategies: a service-dominant logic. Int J Prod Econ 238:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108175

Ziaee Bigdeli A, Baines T, Bustinza OF, Guang Shi V (2017) Organisational change towards servitization: a theoretical framework. Compet Rev 27(1):12–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-03-2015-0015

Ziaee Bigdeli A, Baines T, Schroeder A, Brown S (2018) Measuring servitization progress and outcome: the case of ‘advanced services.’ Prod Plann Control 29(4):315–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1429029

Zighan S, Abualqumboz M (2022) Dual focus: service-product orientation to manage the change paradox following servitization strategy. Serv Bus 16:29–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-022-00483-y

Download references

Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Management and Business Economics Department, University of Leon, Leon, Spain

Pedro E. Minaya

Business Administration Department, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain

Lucía Avella & Juan A. Trespalacios

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pedro E. Minaya .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Minaya, P.E., Avella, L. & Trespalacios, J.A. Synthesizing three decades of digital servitization: a systematic literature review and conceptual framework proposal. Serv Bus (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-024-00559-x

Download citation

Received : 28 September 2023

Accepted : 16 April 2024

Published : 08 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-024-00559-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Digital servitization
• Industry 4.0
• Product-service system
• Systematic literature review
• Business competitiveness
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Naval Research Program

Research proposal guide - naval research program, research proposal guide.

Once an Initial Research Estimate Form (IREF)  is validated and selected for funding, the next step is to complete a Research Proposal. Proposals must be completed and approved before funding can be authorized and released.

Faculty that have an IREF validated and selected for funding are required to complete the following steps before funding will be authorized and established. More details for each step are provided below; this list can be used as a checklist if desired.

Please notify NRP at [email protected]  if you have any reservations about accepting your funded project (e.g. impending retirement, emergent obligations, etc.).

Jump to section

Eligibility, annual pi training, acknowledgment of terms.

• Technical Proposal/Narrative

Proposal tab

Nps personnel tab, proposal questions tab, proposal data tab, abstracts and attachments tab, proposal budget tab, review process, proposal amendments, troubleshooting.

More events

Events & Deadlines

Quick links, principal investigators.

The Principal Investigator (PI) is the researcher who has primary responsibility for the design, execution, and management of a sponsored research project and is named on the proposal to the sponsoring agency. The PI has the primary responsibility for the fulfillment of the Statement of Work. Even when collaborating with one or more Co-PIs, the PI has the ultimate responsibility for the project and remains the sole individual responsible for managing expenditures in support of the project. 

Only eligible Naval Postgraduate School faculty participating in the mission of NPS may submit proposals and act as a PI/PD/Co-I/Co-PD for sponsored projects. Individuals in a faculty or staff category other than those listed in the SPPGM-22 require a waiver to be eligible. Sponsored Program Policy/Guidance Memo 22 (SPPGM-22): Who can be a PI/PD/Co-I/Co-PD?  (PDF, 4 January 2023) PI/PD/Co-I/Co-PD Justification Memorandum (Waiver Form)  (PDF)

^ Back to top

Training is required for anyone who functions as a PI/PD or has direct access to funds on sponsored projects. Annual PI Training is completed within Sakai, and includes four modules:

• Accountability/Fiscal Law: 13/14 required to pass
• Protection of Human Subjects: 7/8 required to pass
• OPSEC for the PI/PD: pass/fail
• Stewardship: 18/20 required to pass

PIs must pass all modules for training to be complete. Please visit Sponsored Programs Related Annual Online Trainings  to begin.

Please send a screenshot or export of your passing scores to NRP upon successful completion of your Annual PI Training.

All PIs and Co-PIs must digitally sign the Acknowledgment of Terms form . This form must then be uploaded as an attachment to your Research Proposal.

To digitally sign the form, you may need to download and save it to your computer, and open in Adobe Reader. Opening it in your web browser doesn't reliably activate the signature fields.

When uploading as an attachment, go to the Abstracts and Attachments tab in Coeus, and upload the form using the "Supplementary Documentation" category.

Please do not email any documents directly to NRP unless requested to do so.

PDF, 142KB. Last updated November 2023

All PIs must complete a Technical Proposal/Narrative, using the official NRP template.  These documents must be submitted as attachments to your Research Proposal.

• Read all template guidance prior to starting your proposal
• Complete all required template elements
• Supporting TASKS section must include direct correlation/justification for all budget expenses
• Coeus is approved for CUI, but please mark all documents accordingly if applicable
• Remove the first page containing template guidance before submitting to Coeus

Topic Advocate signatures are no longer required. Research Proposals will be routed through the chain for approval by NPS personnel and teams using Coeus. For efficiency purposes and to prevent delays, please  do not bypass  this process.

Word, 57KB. Last updated October 2023

Coeus Proposal Package

Koali Coeus is the system NRP uses to manage and review Research Proposals. To submit a Research Proposal, you will use a Proposal Development Document (PDD).

NRP creates empty PDD shells within Coeus, to pre-populate required information and simplify setup. Each PI will receive a Coeus-generated, automated email prompting you to begin your proposal.

Please email the NRP office at [email protected] with any questions, or if you don't receive your Coeus access email.

• Period of performance and milestone dates, in all proposal documents, must match.
• Proposals are only accepted through Coeus. Incomplete proposal packages will be rejected.
• Spend plans must be realistic as you will be required to execute as scheduled (burn rate).
• Expenses must include direct correlation/justification to the TASKS in your technical proposal.
• If someone is assisting you in preparing your proposal package, give them a link to this page.

This tab will be completed by NRP. Please do not make any changes to the fields present on this tab.

At minimum, you must include the PI and any Co-PIs. You can be a PI on no more than two concurrent NRP projects across all Cycle Years, and no more than one NRP project per Cycle Year.

• Enter the last name, email address, etc. of the person you wish to add. You only need to fill out one field, and the search is not case-sensitive. Click search .
• Click return value  on the far left of the row containing the correct personnel record.
• The top section of the page will now have the person's name, as well as a  Proposal Role  section. Select the appropriate role, then click  add person  below that.

If additional staff/faculty are expected to participate but have yet to be identified, input their positions in your project using To be named  instead of Employee Search .

Please answer all Proposal Questions, including any sub-questions that may appear. If you have any questions about this tab, please contact NRP .

Please fill out all Proposal Data. If you have any questions about this tab, please contact NRP .

To select multiple items in a "select all that apply" list, use  Ctrl  on Windows, or  Cmd  on Mac.

Upload your required attachments including your  Acknowledgment of Terms form  and your Technical Proposal/Narrative  under the categories below:

• Acknowledgment of Terms:  "Supplementary Documentation"
• Technical Proposal/Narrative:  "Technical Proposal/Narrative"
• Budget Justification:  "Budget Justification"
• Equipment Justification:  "Equipment"
• You must upload a waiver for  each  person requiring one

Copy-paste the abstract from your Technical Proposal/Narrative into the  Publicly Releasable Abstract  section, under Enter Abstract . Make sure to click  add  or it will not save to your PDD correctly.

When entering keywords, please enter one keyword per line,  not  a comma-separated list. Keywords are used by other integrated systems and comma-separating them can cause errors in the data integrations.

The quarterly spend plan you enter into Coeus generates your  required  burn rate schedule. This data is reported to the Budget Submission Office (BSO) and the burn rate must be executed as input into Coeus. PIs are expected to plan for salary adjustments within their budget. The authorized project amount is not increased due to promotions or Cost of Living Allowance increases.

Ensure your quarterly spend plan is realistic by accounting for:

• Cost-of-living adjustments
• Raises and promotions
• Reasonable flexibility

Official research proposal budgets must be submitted using the Coeus budget proposal tool. The  FY24 NRP Budget Spreadsheet  is used for budget/spend plan updates during the PoP. The spreadsheet can be used for general offline proposal budget planning purposes but it is highly recommended that you use the  Coeus training instance  to draft your proposal budget.

Your proposal budget is an embedded document within your PDD, and has tabs of its own. NRP has created a quarterly budget shell for you to fill out; open this budget by using the  open  button on the far right of the page.

Using your IREF budget allocations, enter quarterly expenses in the  NPS Labor  and Other Direct Costs  (Non-Labor) tabs. Your PDD's budget must be equal to or less than the budget proposed in your IREF.

If financial expenditure questions arise during budget development or execution, PIs should consult with the NRP SPFA .

How can the money be spent?

• NRP funds are RDT&E BA 6.6 and are appropriated solely for specific selected NRP projects. There must be a direct relationship between funds spent and the selected NRP research project.
• This money cannot be used for academic/curriculum support.
• This money cannot be used for office supplies, printers or cell phones.
• This money cannot be used to hire administrative personnel.

Financial Terms

• Indirect Costs:  The NRP uses NR&DE funds, and indirect cost are not collected. The indirect rate is 0%.
• Fringe  (aka Acceleration or Fully Burdened Rate): Fringe is always included in the cost of payroll regardless of how your payroll is being charged.  Fringe addresses the actual cost of benefits paid by the government for each employee (TSP, FERS, Medicare, FEGLI, TSP Matching, Annual Leave, Sick Leave, Vacation).  NPS recommends using 52.5% for projection purposes.
• Overhead:  The NRP takes a small percentage off the top of the annual budget to run the program. Therefore, no overhead cost needs to be factored into each individual project budget.

Spend Plan Justification

The Description & Purpose field(s) in Coeus for all expenses (Other Direct Costs/Non-Labor) must include a direct correlation/justification to the TASKS in your Technical Proposal/Narrative. Do not use blanket terms.

If your budget includes costs that exceed the NRP allowances, attach a Budget Justification document. Alternatively, you can include line-item Budget Justification notes in your PDD's budget.

• Ensure that quarters with proposed travel include appropriate corresponding labor hours
• For projects with budgets exceeding $175,000, total travel will be capped at $26,250. This cap is for the entire project team: PI, Co-PI, researchers and students who are listed in the approved project proposal.
• People who are not listed in the specific NRP project are not allowed to utilize these funds. Travel percentage and total cap may change in FY25.
• Unique business such as project kick-off meetings, mid-year progress review meetings, final projects delivery meetings, data collection, and/or one conference attendance that are directly tied to the project can be conducted via travel, but all “regular business” should be conducted on Teams. Virtual/online conferences are preferred and encouraged. Labor must be charged to the project at the same time you are on travel.
• Ensure travel and labor expenses align with research completion timelines, to include any travel for the purpose of final debriefing/delivering the final product(s)
• Students:  Student participation is allowed; however, travel requests must state how the travel applies to the associated NRP research.
• DTS form justification box must include: NRP project number, PI Name, detailed purpose of the travel i.e., how the travel is directly related to the NRP project, travel is/is not included in the original proposal.
• All travelers are required to submit a  Travel Report  after each trip.
• Academic purposes
• Thesis development
• Student graduations
• Other research projects
• List all known project personnel. List additional planned but unidentified individuals under "To be named." Notify the NRP SPFA  of project personnel changes immediately to avoid a payroll approval delay.
• Labor is charged using actual benefits and varies per individual. Rates are updated/calculated in Coeus routinely. Consult your SPFA for individual rates. NRP is exempt from other Indirect Costs.
• NRP funds are not appropriate for employee cash awards. All awards using NRP funds will be reversed upon detection.
• The fully burdened amount is listed in Coeus. PIs are expected to plan for salary adjustments within their budget. The authorized project amount is not increased due to promotions or Cost of Living Allowance increases .

External Support

If you are intending/planning to outsource labor/skills that cannot be performed by NPS personnel you must obtain approval from your department chair.

NRP funds cannot be used to hire administrative personnel.

Acquisitions

All purchases must align with the tasks and deliverables cited in your proposal and require a detailed justification to be submitted in ERP. As per the Annual PI Training, purchasing for "the greater good" is not allowed.

Provide an explanation, in plain language, detailing how each purchase contributes to the tasks and deliverables of the project. Blanket terms such as "Mission Essential / Critical" are not a valid justification.

Total purchasing exceeding 25% of your project's total budget will require additional justification.

• Orders should be submitted early in order to contribute to the project deliverable(s), and must be acquired within the project's Period of Performance.
• Acquisitions for computers, equipment, contracts, and MIPRS are  only  approved for the benefit of the selected NRP project. Therefore, each item must be ordered soon enough that it arrives early enough to contribute to the project deliverables.
• PIs may be allowed to purchase equipment with justification (e.g., computers) once every three years, however purchasing peripheral equipment that is considered office equipment is not allowed.
• All equipment must be shipped directly to the warehouse and registered in the NPS property accounting system prior to receipt under the PI’s name. The PI is accountable to produce records during an audit.
• Cell phones & cell phone services
• Printers, ink, and toner
• Office supplies
• Publications (Please contact NRP for NRP-related publication expenses)
• Items considered to be for general purposes
• Checklist of OSHE Related Hazards to Consider
• Include labor, time, and costs for safety controls.
• Include safety and environmental planning and training hours.
• Include funds for safety assessments if needed, protective equipment and physical controls.
• Critical to plan ahead for off-campus activities, UUVs, lithium batteries, RF emitter, hazmat, lasers, etc.

Review  Safety Information Needed from PIs for Project Descriptions

For safety questions or concerns email  [email protected]  or visit the  Safety Review and Planning page on the  Safety website.

Finalizing your budget

Once your budget is complete, save it with the button at the bottom, and use the blue  Return to Proposal  button at the top right. Check the  Final  box for your budget in the  Proposal Budget  tab.

• Coeus User Guide
• Contact NRP
• Contact Coeus Ombudsman
• Contact NRP SPFA for financial expenditure questions
• Budget Spreadsheet

Submit Your Proposal

Once your PDD is completed, run Data Validation .

• Go to the Proposal Actions tab
• On the  Data Validation  section, click the  show  button to expand it
• Click  turn on validation
• Go through each of the  Validation Errors  and  Warnings , and fix them
• Reach out to NRP at  [email protected]  if you need any help

Once your PDD passes validation, please use the  Submit  button at the bottom of the  Proposal Actions  tab to submit it for approval. NRP will receive an automated email from Coeus letting us know when your PDD is ready to review.

See the Troubleshooting guide below for help resolving errors. NRP is also happy to assist; contact us at [email protected] .

Once your PDD is successfully submitted, it goes through several stages of review:

• Your department chair reviews and approves your PDD. If you have Co-PIs listed, their department chairs must review and approve your PDD as well.
• NRP reviews your PDD for completeness, accuracy, and adherence to requirements and guidance.
• NRP's Financial Manager reviews your budget and spending allocations.
• NRP's Program Manager reviews and approves your PDD.
• The Vice Provost for Research and Innovation reviews and approves your PDD.

Once the VPR has approved your PDD, NRP double-checks a few more requirements:

• Completion of your annual PI training
• Completion and submission of all previous Cycle Years' required research deliverables
• Successful approval from the  Human Research Protection Program Office & Institutional Review Board (IRB) , if required

Once these are complete, NRP then issues funding for you to begin your research.

To check your proposal's current status in the review process:

• Log in to Coeus
• In the  Proposals  section of the Coeus homepage, click "Search Proposals"
• In the  Document ID  field, enter the five-digit Document ID of your proposal. If you don't know the Document ID, please reach out to NRP and we can provide that to you.
• Click the  Search  button
• Click "view" on the left of the row your proposal shows up in, in the search results
• Go to the  Proposal Actions  tab
• Open the  Route Log  section by clicking the "show" button on it
• In Action List to Complete:  Approval is required
• In Action List to FYI:  Approval is not required; the person was notified for their situational awareness
• If multiple people are listed within the same approval line, only one of them is required to approve

To make amendments to an approved and finalized PDD, email the Coeus Ombudsman  with your amendment request.

The types of changes that require an amendment through Coeus are:

• Changes to the Period of Performance
• Budget increases
• Changes to the PI or Co-PI(s)
• Topic Advocate changes
• Statement of Work changes

Here are solutions to common problems encountered through the Research Proposal process.

If you're still having trouble, please reach out to NRP . We're happy to help!

PDDs are "checked out" when someone opens them to edit them, and locked until the person editing clicks the  close  button to "check in" the proposal.  Closing the browser tab will not check in the PDD.

If your proposal was locked by someone else, Coeus will display their name at the top of the PDD. Simply email them and request that they open the proposal and close it using the  close  button at the bottom of the page rather than just closing the browser tab.

If you're not able to get a hold of the person your PDD is checked out to, email the Coeus Ombudsman to request an administrator to unlock your PDD.

Reach out to NRP and let us know; we can add them as an authorized user to your PDD.

Opening the PDF in your browser doesn't always activate the signature fields. Download it to your computer and open it in Adobe Reader or Adobe Acrobat. The fields should show up.