867803

editorial2019
HRDXXX10.1177/1534484319867803Human Resource Development ReviewEditorial

Editorial
Human Resource Development Review
2019, Vol. 18(3) 291­–293
Enhancing Research © The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
Significance by Addressing sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1534484319867803
https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484319867803
“Why” journals.sagepub.com/home/hrd

As the editor of Human Resource Development Review (HRDR), I have the privilege
to read a large number of manuscripts. In the process of reviewing these potential
publications, I have found myself constantly asking why some research projects were
conducted in the first place. My question was prompted by two issues I noticed: (a) the
authors did not provide adequate justification for the need for their research and (b) the
justification provided by many authors is not compelling. These are among the top
reasons that cause a manuscript to be rejected. In fact, based on my experience as a
journal editor, manuscript reviewer, and research professor, I find it a common strug-
gle among many scholars, particularly novice researchers and graduate students, to
address the “why” aspect of research. Even when they understand conceptually the
importance of their research, the authors may still fail to make a convincing justifica-
tion in writing. Therefore, in this editorial, I share an approach I have personally used,
which has enabled me to identify research gaps and make a stronger case for my
research. This approach involves asking five questions, which I will elaborate on, one
by one.

Question 1: What Is the Practical Significance of Your

Research Topic?
I am a firm believer that impactful research must address issues of practical concern.
By this, I mean research that is relevant to the real world. This requires you to think
carefully about your topic in the first place. Often times, the topics we choose to
study are motivated by our personal interest and/or professional experience.
However, just because you are personally passionate about a phenomenon does not
mean it is worth researching. One simple way to find out if your topic is meaningful
is to do a quick online scan to see if your topic represents one of the current research
trends or top concerns in the world of practice. If you receive a large number of
results, you know you may face a bigger challenge to “build your case.” However, if
you get few or no hits, you might want to redress your decision to proceed why your
topic has not received much attention. Another way that may help you determine the
significance of your topic is to look at pop literature. For example, Deloitte has con-
ducted an annual global human capital trends survey since 2013. Each survey has led
to a list of human resource (HR) trends identified by leaders across the world. These
292 Human Resource Development Review 18(3)

trends represent concerns that matter most to businesses and industries and shed
light on critical issues for future research.

Question 2: What Gaps Do You See Conceptually?

Once you determine there is a need for investigating your topic, the next question you
may ask yourself is if there are knowledge gaps related to your research topic. This is
when you decide what subject matters or aspects of your topic have been well studied,
inadequately studied, or not studied at all. For example, “employee engagement” is a
hot topic that has received a lot of scholarly attention in recent years, and a number of
submissions to HRDR focus on examining this phenomenon. However, different
authors have looked at this concept from different angles. Some studied antecedents of
engagement, some explored engagement outcomes, and some looked at the opposite
side of engagement—disengagement. By building a holistic understanding of the lit-
erature on your topic area, you will be able to see what dimensions of the concept have
been studied, and therefore, identify areas that warrant further investigation.

Question 3: What Gaps Do You See Theoretically?

This question deals with the theoretical underpinning of a research study. In other
words, what theories or theoretical frameworks have been used to guide the research
on your topic? Answers to this question can be very helpful not only in testing the rigor
of existing theories, but more importantly, in building new theories. In an applied field
such as human resource development (HRD) where sound theories are in great need,
any effort made toward theory development is meaningful. For example, in reviewing
work–life balance literature, you may find that most previous studies on this issue
were guided by career theories. However, few studies looked at this issue through a
cultural lens—whether national or institutional culture has a direct impact on work–
life balance. If this is the case, a study of work–life balance from a cultural perspective
is likely to generate new insights.

Question 4: What Gaps Do You See Methodologically?

This question addresses the “how” aspect of research: How has your selected topic
been studied by other researchers? This question consists of two aspects: research
design (methodology) and research methods (techniques used for data collection and
analysis). For example, in your review of literature, you may find quantitative
approaches have dominated the study of your topic, or you may find a lack of diverse
methods used for data collection or analysis. In addition, you may find your topic has
been primarily investigated conceptually, not empirically. Another element is research
sampling in terms of the context and population. In other words, where has your topic
been studied? The context can be local, regional, national or cross-national. It may
also focus on a specific sector (e.g., government, academic, and business) or a certain
type of organization (e.g., private business, university, and charity). In terms of the
Editorial 293

sample population, you may find most of the studies on your topic focus on business
professionals in the U.S. corporations, or male professionals, with little attention to
professionals in other occupations or countries, or career women. Identifying the pat-
tern in research methodologies and methods will help you determine what unique
approaches you can adopt to generate different or additional data.

Question 5: What Do We Already Know About Your

Topic?
To answer this question, you need to analyze findings from various studies on your
topic. Use workplace incivility as an example. Based on my research, I have found that
most of studies on this topic focus on the causes and consequences of workplace inci-
vility. However, very few studies revealed strategies to prevent the occurrence of
uncivil incidents, or strategies to minimize the impact of negative experiences.
Furthermore, it is widely recognized that incivility can be triggered by power distance,
meaning, people in power tend to demonstrate uncivil behaviors to people with less
power. Therefore, many incivility studies have focused on subordinates being treated
uncivilly by their supervisors; very few scholars have looked at this phenomenon from
other perspectives, for example, what is a supervisor’s experience of being mistreated
by his or her subordinates? What is a faculty’s experience of being mobbed by a group
of students? Questions like these can help generate different insights into the same
topic, thus expanding the current knowledge base.

The five questions above are not all inclusive; I am sure that there are other ques-
tions you can ask to help you justify the significance of your research. What I have
shared in this editorial is one method I have used to help me determine if a new
research project is worth pursuing. These five questions have helped me think in
advance about the potential contribution of my work in terms of theory, research, and
practice—both the “why” and “so what” questions. By answering these questions, I
am better prepared to deal with the challenges raised later on by readers of my research
work. To make your research product publishable, I invite you to take time to do the
homework upfront by asking yourself critical questions like the ones I proposed above.
The more you know how to answer these questions, the better you will be able to
articulate the significance of your research, and the more likely your work will be
considered for publication.

Jia Wang
Editor-in-Chief, Human Resource Development Review
Texas A&M University, College Station, USA