No More Cursory Summaries: Rethinking Literature Reviews in Construction Management

iterature reviews are an ideal starting point for scholarly research in construction management. However, when conducting and presenting them, researchers should carefully consider what these reviews are intended to deliver. Are they meant as standalone contributions to knowledge or merely as catalogues of summaries for internal use during initial research phases? To examine this, we (ironically) analyse literature reviews published during the past two decades of the ARCOM conference. Our analysis of intended purposes, methods and outcomes reveals that the role of review articles is frequently reduced to cursory summaries of thematically loosely coupled domains. Few critically engage with existing knowledge, and many fail to generate novel insights. Drawing on the philosophical tenet of mereology, we illustrate that assembling fragmented pieces of knowledge into summaries results in a whole with limited value. We argue that literature reviews derive significance when their components collectively serve distinct functions, such as exposing controversial positions, challenging assumptions, and bridging research fields. By reframing literature reviews as composite objects, we aim to trigger debates on the forms and necessity of literature reviews within our community