Enduring doubts about the value of IS investments reveal that IS
researchers have not fully managed to identify and to explain the economic benefits of IS. This paper assumes that literature reviews, which represent a powerful instrument for the identification and synthesis of knowledge, have not tapped their full potential to address this issue due to deficiencies in methodology. The analysis of 18 literature reviews published in pertinent academic outlets during the past 20 years shows such deficiencies. Two of the most critical weaknesses identified are (1) the lack of theory use in most reviews and (2) a weak linkage of reviews, resulting in little progress in theory and framework development. The systematic identification of these weaknesses and the extraction of promising methodological examples from past literature are the main contributions of this work, which supports the composition of more effective literature reviews in future research.