Business Literature Review for Research Gaps
Budget: €8 – €30 EUR
I’m undertaking a business study and want a concise, well-structured literature review that pinpoints the current gaps in research. The literature review must draw exclusively from reputable academic journals and relevant books; industry reports aren’t required this time.
Scope
• Search, screen, and summarise the most recent peer-reviewed articles and authoritative books related to the topic I will share once we begin.
• Organise findings thematically, highlighting where scholars agree, where debates remain unresolved, and—most critically—where clear research gaps persist.
• Conclude with a short annotated list of the most promising gap areas that could guide future empirical work.
Deliverables
1. A 2,000word literature review in Word format, with in-text citations (APA 7th).
2. A full harvard reference list.
3. An Excel or Google Sheet containing the search strings, databases consulted (e.g., Scopus, Web of Science), and notes on why each source was included or excluded.
Acceptance Criteria
• At least 30 high-quality academic sources and 5 seminal books.
• Logical flow with headings that clearly map to identified gaps.
• Zero plagiarism and Grammarly-checked prose.
If you have strong experience synthesising scholarly material and spotting unexplored angles, I’d love to collaborate.
Scope
• Search, screen, and summarise the most recent peer-reviewed articles and authoritative books related to the topic I will share once we begin.
• Organise findings thematically, highlighting where scholars agree, where debates remain unresolved, and—most critically—where clear research gaps persist.
• Conclude with a short annotated list of the most promising gap areas that could guide future empirical work.
Deliverables
1. A 2,000word literature review in Word format, with in-text citations (APA 7th).
2. A full harvard reference list.
3. An Excel or Google Sheet containing the search strings, databases consulted (e.g., Scopus, Web of Science), and notes on why each source was included or excluded.
Acceptance Criteria
• At least 30 high-quality academic sources and 5 seminal books.
• Logical flow with headings that clearly map to identified gaps.
• Zero plagiarism and Grammarly-checked prose.
If you have strong experience synthesising scholarly material and spotting unexplored angles, I’d love to collaborate.