Evaluating Business and Competitive Intelligence Research
This paper critically reviews three articles published in the Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management. The first article examines factors for assessing competitive intelligence (CI) performance and the difficulties of measuring CI return on investment. The second provides an overview and evaluation of measurement approaches for business intelligence (BI) and competitive intelligence, finding most existing methods flawed. The third explores the drivers behind increasing global demand for business intelligence. Across all three articles, the reviewer identifies a common limitation: each functions more as a literature overview or introductory survey than as original empirical research, making them more suitable as student reference material than as contributions to academic scholarship.
- Introduction: Frames the three-article review scope
- CI Performance Assessment: Blenkhorn and Fleisher: Critiques CI ROI measurement survey study
- BI and CI Measurement Approaches: Buchda: Evaluates overview of BI effectiveness methods
- Global Demand for Business Intelligence: Herzog: Assesses Herzog's BI demand literature review
- Overall Evaluation and Recommendations: Recommends articles for students, not academics
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Each article review follows a consistent structure: purpose, methodology, findings, strengths, and weaknesses — making the critique easy to follow and compare across sources.
- The reviewer maintains an objective, academic tone throughout, offering balanced assessments rather than purely negative or positive judgments.
- The concluding recommendation is nuanced, distinguishing between the articles' limited value for academic audiences and their genuine usefulness as student-oriented overviews.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates critical source evaluation — a core academic skill in which the writer moves beyond summarizing content to assess methodological rigor, evidential support, and the practical or theoretical contribution of each source. This is especially evident in the critique of Blenkhorn and Fleisher's survey methodology and Herzog's failure to support claims with quantitative evidence.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized as a sequential multi-article review. Each of the three articles receives its own dedicated section following a summary-then-critique format. A brief introduction frames the subject area, and a short concluding paragraph synthesizes the reviewer's overall assessment and audience recommendation. The Works Cited section follows MLA citation style.
Introduction
This review examines three articles published in the Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management (Vol. 4, No. 2, 2007). Each article addresses a different dimension of competitive intelligence and business intelligence — performance assessment, measurement approaches, and global demand — and each is evaluated here for its research quality, methodological rigor, and contribution to the academic literature.
Works Cited
Blenkhorn, D. & Fleisher, C. (2007). Performance assessment in competitive intelligence: An exploration, synthesis and research agenda. Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management, Vol. 4 (2), 4–22.
Buchda, S. (2007). Rulers for business intelligence and competitive intelligence: An overview and evaluation of measurement approaches. Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management, Vol. 4 (2), 23–54.
Herzog, J. (2007). Why is there increasing global demand for business intelligence? Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management, Vol. 4 (2), 55–71.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.