Abbasi, A and Mohamadi, S (2022) The investigation of research trends in supply chain management: An integrated method of meta-methodology and co-word analysis. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(9), pp. 1775-1794. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
The present study aimed to identify the most important achievement in the area of the supply chain (SC) during the past two decades using meta-methodology, co-word analysis, as well as systematic review and in-depth analysis. The results indicated the sustainability and resilience of SC are hot topics. Therefore, the need for qualitative and longitudinal studies and the use of methods such as ethnography or historical analysis are understood well in this respect. The current study had a holistic approach to SC, and thus simultaneously covered the relevant areas and provided an appropriate strategy for identifying the missing circles in the SC field using the meta-study and scientometric instruments. In general, the present study identified the research gaps in this field, and other studies can use them as a guideline in order to choose future research areas.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | co-word analysis; meta-methodology; supply chain management |
| Index terms: | ethnography, methodology, investigation, holistic approach, strategy, co-word analysis, systematic literature review |
| Subjects: | research methods, data collection methods, data analysis and analytics, management, qualitative and interpretive research, business, research evaluation and metrics |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 CTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here