Research Ideafind, shape or leave one
Share an ideaSign in

Permanent record

RIR-3058 · Logged 14 October 2026

Do future-research suggestions in African management journals ever get taken up?

Future-research sections are meant to guide later work, yet they often mirror the study's own limitations, and little is known about whether anyone follows them. The idea estimates how often future-research statements in African management journals are taken up in later work, and whether specific statements are taken up more than limitation restatements.

Open to researchQuality 84/100Prior-standard auditP4 provenance
Report legal or privacy concern

In plain words

At the end of most papers, authors suggest what should be studied next. This study would check how often anyone actually does it in African management research, and whether specific suggestions fare better than ones that just restate the study's weaknesses.

Primary research question

What share of future-research statements in African management journal articles are taken up in later citing work, and are specific statements taken up more often than statements that restate the study's limitations?

Knowledge gap

What remains worth asking

Brutus et al. (2013) showed that future directions in management journals closely track reported limitations and called for research on how these sections are used. Suray et al. (2024) measured uptake in one computer-security conference. No uptake estimate exists for management research or for African journals.

Potential contribution

Why it may matter

An uptake rate would show whether future-research sections help early-career researchers find topics, and which ways of writing them make them useful.

Academic placement

Academic fields and topic tags

5.2Economics and business5.8Media and communications
Management studiesResearch evaluationScholarly communication

Study frame: A cohort of articles from African management journals over a defined period, their future-research statements, and the literature that later cites them. · Method signals: Content analysis, Citation analysis, Descriptive statistics

Possible study pathways

One question, different levels

Honours

Code the future-research statements in one journal for one year and check a sample of citing papers for uptake.

Research master’s

Compare uptake across several journals and test whether specific statements are taken up more often than limitation restatements.

Doctoral

Combine uptake analysis with interviews of authors who took up, or ignored, earlier suggestions.

originality
Moderate
methodology
Moderate
Data access
Accessible
ethics
Accessible

Quality and audit

84/100 quality

Safeguard-based audit was not recorded under the prior standard.

  • Directly answers a direction the source authors propose
  • A ready method exists from another field
  • Accessible data for student projects
Current safeguards were not recorded

This older record can be checked against the current standard on request. It changes only if every academic gate and independent safeguard passes.

Sign-in required · uses one AI credit

Provenance

Research Idea curation

  • DOI and bibliographic metadata independently resolved through Crossref
  • The source's future-research section asks how these sections are used
  • Narrowed to African management journals by the curator

The public contributor code contains no name or account email.

APA 7 source

Brutus, S., Aguinis, H., & Wassmer, U. (2013). Self-reported limitations and future directions in scholarly reports: Analysis and recommendations. Journal of Management, 39(1), 48–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312455245

Future research section, p. 71

Open source ↗

Continue exploring

Related research ideas

RIR-3060

Do AI quality scores agree with South African experts on South African research?

Language-model scores of research quality correlate only weakly with expert judgement at the level of single articles, and the strength of that link varies by field. Evidence from African research systems is almost absent. The idea compares AI quality scores for South African articles with blinded expert ratings and tests whether prompting for national relevance changes the agreement.

RIR-3057

Where does gap-spotting enter a South African doctorate?

Published research questions in management are overwhelmingly framed as filling gaps in the literature rather than as challenges to underlying assumptions. Because this pattern has been established from finished texts, it is not known where in the doctoral and publication process a question changes form. The idea traces South African doctoral questions from proposal to thesis to journal article to locate that change and the actors and rules behind it.

RIR-3056

Mapping Strategy and Futures Methods: Relationships, Applications, Limits and Frontiers for Strategic Foresight

The contributor proposes a literature-based mapping of the methods associated with strategy and futures, asking what each comprises, how they complement one another, when they are used, and what is considered ineffective. The intended output is a structured guide for theorists and practitioners that identifies both existing resources and open research and practical frontiers for strategic foresight. The idea treats strategic foresight as a field whose methodological architecture can be described, compared and critically assessed.

RIR-3055

Transformative Business Process Redesign: Moving Beyond Automation to AI-Native Workflows

This research explores methodologies for fundamentally restructuring business processes to leverage the unique capabilities of artificial intelligence, rather than merely accelerating existing, legacy workflows. It seeks to identify the conceptual and operational shifts required to transition from AI-assisted automation to AI-native process design.

This registered research direction is a starting point for academic work. It does not claim to be a completed proposal or to establish novelty.

Explore more ideas →