Download data is not yet available.
In the editorial of this fourth edition of the Brazilian Business Review of 2017, I would like to announce an important result achieved by the journal: The qualification in the A2 extract of Qualis Capes. This result could not have been achieved without the support of all editorial staff, reviewers and authors, Who devote their efforts to the arduous task of offering our readers articles that do indeed contribute to the advancement of administration science. To you all, thank you very much.
In fact, following this contributions subject for the advancement of science, I would like to propose a reflection, nothing new, but necessary, about the role of the sense of continuity in science. The construction of scientific knowledge is carried out from the theoretical and empirical contributions of researchers in search of possible answers to relevant questions. Given this, it is extremely important that when designing an article, that we start from a stage of literature development and proposing a step forward that allows this depersonalized body of knowledge to move forward. This proposition, when based on the body of relevant literature on the topic addressed, allows more specific elaborations than the smokescreen we notice in recurrent vague phrases, the famous “There is a gap in the sense that few studies have addressed the issue (...)”.Do we need many? No. Instead of a vague phrase, we need a clearer and more direct articulation as to how the study in question may bring novelties to the community of interest.
When this process, which is reflected in a clear explanation of what is usually called a theoretical gap, is articulated in the literature, The reader can gain a better understanding of how that article adds to what we already knew. To do this, it is obviously likely that we have to refer to recent articles. This is not because there must be a goal of articles published in the last X amount of years, but because it is important to connect with the research community that has already been involved with the topic of interest.
A clear theoretical gap greatly facilitates the work of writing a thought-provoking Discussion and Conclusion. In the Discussion, it is necessary to explain how the results allow to illuminate new aspects of the studied phenomena, which may lead to a reaffirmation, contestation or problematization of previous understandings. In the Conclusion, we pointed out new steps that were outside the delimitation of the presented work. It is important that this indication of further steps to be extended beyond some objective suggestions as “replicate elsewhere”, “get a larger sample” or even “to adopt a cross section”. There is no problem in these actual indications, as long as there is a clear reason for each of them. Discussion and conclusion do not point back (they are not a summary of the Results session), but it rather connects what we find with what we already knew, in order to point to the future.
By understanding that we are members of a worldwide community of people who seek to say something about certain topics of interest, we understand the principles underlying recurring advice to cite recent references, point out a gap, suggest limitations and suggestions for future. And we also understand that it is important to present these elements in a thoughtful manner. Otherwise, we will have something that looks like an article, smells like an article, but it is not exactly what is expected of an article.
Every two months, we present to you six articles that were submitted to the Brazilian Business Review which are the ones who best met those requirements. Thus, in this edition, we introduced six new studies. We start with the article “The Competitive Structure and Strategic Positioning of the Banking Industry in the Face of Major Environmental Disorders: A Study of Brazilian Banks” by Gisele Walczak Galilea and William Eid Junior. Then we present “An Overview of Social Innovation Research: A Guide for Future Studies”, authored by Manuela Rösing Agostini, Luciana Marques Vieira, Rosana da Rosa Portella Tondolo and Vilmar Antonio Gonçalves Tondolo. Then, Nelson Roberto Furquim presents us his study “Impact of Innovative Products on the Growth of the Metal Zinc Market in Brazil”.
The edition is finished with three other studies. We present the article by Sidney Costa and Felipe Mendes Borini, titled “Global Innovation in Foreign Subsidiaries: The Impact of Entrepreneurial Guidance and Business Networks” and the study “Sustainability Assessment of Ethanol Production in Brazil: A Model in Systems Dynamics”, by Arnoldo Jose de Hoyos Guevara, Orlando Roque da Silva, Haroldo Lhou Hasegawa and Délvio Venanzi. The edition ends with the article “TOURQUAL: Proposal for a Protocol for Evaluation of the Quality of Services in Tourist Attractions”, by Tiago Savi Mondo and Gabriela Gonçalves Silveira Fiates.
Good reading to everyone!
Brazilian Business Review
How to Cite
Felix, B. (2018). Editorial. Brazilian Business Review, 14(4). Retrieved from http://bbronline.com.br/index.php/bbr/article/view/79