Meta-analytic Reviews in the Organizational Sciences: Two Meta- analytic Schools on the Way to MARS (the Meta-analytic Reporting Standards)

Purpose The purpose of this study was to review the Meta-Analysis Reporting Standards (MARS) of the American Psychological Association (APA) and highlight opportunities for improvement of meta-analytic reviews in the organizational sciences. Design/Methodology/Approach The paper reviews MARS, describes ‘‘best’’ meta-analytic practices across two schools of meta-analysis, and shows how implementing such practices helps achieve the aims set forth in MARS. Examples of best practices are provided to aid readers in finding models for their own research. Implications/Value Meta-analytic reviews are a primary avenue for the accumulation of knowledge in the organizational sciences as well as many other areas of science. Unfortunately, many meta-analytic reviews in the organizational sciences do not fully follow professional guidelines and standards as closely as they should. Such deviations from best practice undermine the transparency and replicability of the reviews and thus their usefulness for the generation of cumulative knowledge and evidencebased practice. This study shows how implementing ‘‘best’’ meta-analytic practices helps to achieve the aims set forth in MARS. Although the paper is written primarily for organizational scientists, the paper’s recommendations are not limited to any particular scientific domain.