Research evaluation and journal quality weights

Research evaluations based on quality weighted publication output are often criticized on account of the employed journal quality weights. This study shows that evaluations of entire research organizations are very robust with respect to the choice of readily available weighting schemes. We document this robustness by applying rather different weighting schemes to otherwise identical rankings. Our unit of analysis consists of German, Austrian and Swiss university departments in business administration and economics.     

Reflections on the distinctiveness of European management scholarship

Management scholarship and the journal publication process has been increasingly criticised for being overly elitist and largely irrelevant to the needs of business. There is some justification for such criticisms. Yet, paradoxically, university business schools must resist the urge to be superficially relevant in order to be genuinely useful. I argue here that the very best of management research scholarship relies on a ‘scholarship of common sense’ that actively mirrors the very best of business and management practices. Artistic rigour, much more than technical rigour is needed. Openness, empirical sensitivity and the capacity for achieving ‘flying leaps’ of imagination, are to be preferred to procedural adherence in the research process. This alternative understanding of academic rigour and the intellectual richness and diversity of perspectives associated with it is clearly more evident in the British and European intellectual traditions. Such a European-styled management scholarship can help in actively reshaping the intellectual landscape, priorities and parameters of management research by encouraging the kind of scholarly contributions that is not simply technically rigorous, but imaginatively interesting and often counterintuitive.     

On the Power and Poverty of Critical (Self) Reflection in Critical Management Studies: A Comment on Ford,Harding and Learmonth

Ford, Harding and Learmonth in their paper in the March 2010 special issue of the British Journal of Management ask ‘who is it that would make business schools more critical?’ Commenting on their paper, I argue that although they raise a very important question they do not deliver rigorous answers because their critical reflexive gaze fails to fall upon the mechanisms of hierarchy and exclusion that operate within the critical management studies (CMS) community. First the reflexivity debate in CMS and Ford, Harding and Learmonth's contribution to this debate is explored. Next institutionalized orthodoxies in CMS, such as the tendency to close ranks for those with different perspectives and the lack of demographic diversity, are problematized, and Ford, Harding and Learmonth's contribution is situated across these orthodoxies. Finally, the commentary offers some alternatives and solutions for CMS to take the step further from verbalism to critical praxis. It is suggested that the solution lies in exercising critical self‐reflection which acknowledges the embeddedness of CMS in structures and relations of power and hegemony and recognizes the role of CMS scholars in sustaining and reproducing these structures in their own institutions and communities.     

中国管理科学学科发展态势计量分析

本文从国家自然科学基金资助情况和在国际重要期刊上发表论文情况两个维度，梳理中国管理科学2009-2018年的发展态势。研究结果显示国家自然科学基金是管理科学研究资助的主渠道，资助项数和资助金额稳步增加。中国学者在国际重要期刊上发表的论文数量增长迅速，从2009年的1314篇增长到2018年的6309篇，年均增长19.04%。此外，第一作者或通讯作者论文占比也从2009年的69.03%增长到2018年的88.57%。2009-2018年中国学者的发文总量居世界第三，2018年单年发文量居世界第二，国际合作论文数稳步增长，表明近年来中国管理科学研究呈现出快速发展态势。结合基金资助和发表论文的增速来看，发文量的年均增长率高于基金资助的增长率，并且受资助论文数量和占比逐年增加，表明国家自然科学基金对中国管理科学研究的资助效果明显。     

The shifting landscape of LGBT organizational research

Over the past generation, sexual minorities—particularly lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons—have gained increased visibility in the public arena. Yet organizational research has lagged behind in recognizing and studying this category of organizational members. This article offers a critical review of this growing body of research. More specifically, we identify and discuss four dominant scholarly frames that have informed LGBT organizational research from the late nineteenth century to date. The frames include a “medical abnormality,” “deviant social role,” “collective identity,” and “social distinctiveness” view of sexual minorities. We argue that these frames have profoundly shaped the scope and range of organizational scholarship devoted to sexual minorities by showing that scholars using such contrasted frames have been drawn to very different research questions with respect to sexual minorities. We document and discuss the main and contrasted questions asked within each of these frames and show how they have both enabled and constrained LGBT organizational research. We conclude by calling for more attention to the frames organizational scholars adopt when studying sexual minorities, but also for more research on both minority and majority sexual orientations in organizations.     

Enhancing the Practical Relevance of Research

This article seeks to encourage scholars to conduct research that is more relevant to the decisions faced by managers and policymakers, and addresses why research relevance matters, what relevance means in terms of a journal article, and how scholars can increase the relevance of their research. I define relevant research papers as those whose research questions address problems found (or potentially found) in practice and whose hypotheses connect independent variables within the control of practitioners to outcomes they care about using logic they view as feasible. I provide several suggestions for how scholars can enhance research relevance, including engaging practitioners in on‐campus encounters, at managerial conferences, and at crossover workshops; conducting site visits and practitioner interviews; working as a practitioner; and developing a practitioner advisory team. I describe several ways that scholars can convey relevant research insights into practitioners, including presenting at practitioner conferences, writing for practitioners in traditional crossover journals and in shorter pieces like op‐eds and blogs, and attracting the interest of those who write columns, blogs, and articles about research for practitioners. I conclude by describing a few ways that academic institutions can encourage more relevant research, focusing on journals, professional societies, and doctoral programs.     

Unveiling the Canvas Ceiling: A Multidisciplinary Literature Review of Refugee Employment and Workforce Integration

Increasing levels of displacement and the need to integrate refugees in the workforce pose new challenges to organizations and societies. Extant research on refugee employment and workforce integration currently resides across various disconnected disciplines, posing a significant challenge for management scholars to contribute to timely and relevant solutions. In this paper, we endeavour to address this challenge by reviewing and synthesizing multidisciplinary literature on refugee employment and workforce integration. Using a relational framework, we organize our findings around three levels of analysis – institutional, organizational and individual – to outline the complexity of factors affecting refugees’ employment outcomes. Based on our analysis, we introduce and elaborate on the phenomenon of the canvas ceiling ? a systemic, multilevel barrier to refugee workforce integration and professional advancement. The primary contributions of this paper are twofold. First, we map and integrate the multidisciplinary findings on the challenges of refugee workforce integration. Second, we provide management scholarship with a future research agenda to address the knowledge gap identified in this review and advance practical developments in this domain.     

Promoting Scholarship that Matters: The Uselessness of Useful Research and the Usefulness of Useless Research

Our ambition in this essay is to challenge received wisdoms about the importance of ‘useful’ management scholarship. Suggesting that usefulness and uselessness are contingent on issues of temporality and power, we advocate caution in assigning terms such as useful and relevant – they are inherently problematic, we argue, and should be viewed more as ideology than as empirical statements. We conclude by a call for reflexivity about what it is we are doing when we do ‘useful’ research, along with a greater concern for the values for which business schools stand.     

Corporate Citizenship and Managerial Motivation: Implications for Business Legitimacy

In 2000, Business and Society Review published a Special Issue of the journal to explore scholars’ ideas about how the practice of corporate citizenship would evolve in the 21st century. Contributors to the volume predicted a change in business motives for engaging in social initiatives, suggesting that managers would begin to see corporate citizenship as a strategic necessity to preserve organizational legitimacy in the face of changing social values. This article uses data from a study of corporate citizenship practices in over 500 Norwegian companies to explore the validity of the Special Issue predictions. We begin by reviewing the foundations of organizational legitimacy theory and examine recent research documenting the growing importance of corporate citizenship for assessments of business legitimacy. We describe our study methods, present our results, and discuss the implications of our findings in this context.     

Escape from organizational nihilism: Leadership core values for Business Excellence

An earlier contribution to this journal focused on Leadership for Business Excellence, as reflected in business and performance excellence models which provide the criteria for various international quality prizes. Consideration of leadership in such models is bent toward competencies and their deployment and, also, to involvement in non-delegable activities deemed critical to the organization's competitive position. Herein a leadership core value set is developed, deployment of which can contribute to systemic leadership throughout the organization. Two subsequent contributions to this journal will examine leadership core value deployment and assessment of Leadership for Business Excellence.     

The Strategic Management of Innovation: A Systematic Review and Paths for Future Research

Strategic management scholars have long emphasized the importance of innovation for a firm's competitive advantage and performance. However, the current state of knowledge about the strategic management of innovation is characterized by conflicting theoretical predictions, persisting knowledge gaps and theoretical inconsistencies. Adopting a ‘systematic’ approach to reviewing the literature, this paper combines different quantitative methods – co‐word analysis, cluster analysis and frequency analysis – to review 342 articles on the strategic management of innovation published in seven journals from 1992 to 2010. On the basis of these analyses, suggestions are developed for future research which could help to promote future theory development and provide relevant material for policy decisions that managers and executives have to make when they manage innovation.     

RANKINGS OF ACADEMIC JOURNALS AND INSTITUTIONS IN ECONOMICS

We conducted a worldwide ranking of academic institutions that produce research in a list of thirty top research journals in economics. We also computed journal rankings for the same period and hence we do not rely on weights that were computed for research carried out in earlier periods. The United States is clearly the dominant force in the top‐fifty group, but European academic institutions are well represented in the group of the top 200 universities worldwide as are universities from Asia and the Far East in particular. (JEL: A14, A10)     

Scholarship and decision cases: pedagogy and standards for publication

Case studies represent an important form of scholarly output for educators of agribusiness management. This article defines scholarship with respect to case writing.First, it explains how case studies are scholarship in the educational process. The pedagogical foundation of the case method is this method’s effectiveness in developing the critical thinking skills of students. This in turn enhances learning and advances scholarly understanding.Second, it examines criteria that are used to assess the quality of cases and their accompanying teaching notes when being considered for journal publication. The standards of the International Food and Agribusiness Management Review are used to illustrate these criteria. Only by reaching these standards of scholarship will teaching notes and cases be of the quality needed to ensure that their use in the case method will develop the scholarly capabilities expected of graduates in agribusiness management.     

Qualitative and historiometric methods in leadership research: A review of the first 25 years of The Leadership Quarterly

In the spirit of the 25th anniversary edition of The Leadership Quarterly, as the world's premier outlet for leadership research, we have reviewed qualitative and historiometric research across those 25 years. Qualitative research is a complex and cluttered area of scholarship. This is not because there is an inherent confusion about it. Rather, it is because ‘qualitative’ research is a cover-all term for a wide range of research strategies, paradigms, parent disciplines, sources of data, and methods of analysis for them. More so than in previous journal review articles, we explored variation in qualitative analysis as well as variety in qualitative data. In terms of methodologies, our efforts concentrated on case study, content analysis, grounded theory and historiometrics. We also examined trends toward post-positivism, post-modernity and liquid modernity, and their resultant benefits for researching leadership. Future directions for leadership research are posited.     

Revisiting Institutional Voids: Advancing the International Business Literature by Leveraging Social Sciences

Institutions are vital for solving collective action problems and enabling functioning markets. Based on this notion, the institutional voids literature has offered a dynamic research agenda for international business scholarship. In this perspective article, we leverage work from political science, development economics, legal studies, and anthropology to: (a) expose hidden assumptions about institutional voids in the management literature; (b) propose new directions for research based on our revised assumptions; and (c) provide direction-specific theoretical constructs from other social sciences to stimulate theory-building and empirical inquiry into institutional voids. We develop a framework that identifies four revised assumptions about institutional voids research that we derive from current studies and elaborate on eight theoretical constructs from other social sciences that exemplify the revised assumptions and generate future research questions for international business scholars.     

On theorizing and methodological fetishism

We posit that our scholarship is developed on the basis of ontological, epistemological and methodological dogmas which impede further progress. In particular, we problematize the theorizing and methodological fetishism that exist across both quantitative and qualitative traditions and we propose some ways to overcome them. In this way we join relevant discussions which question the value, relevance and legitimacy of our research endeavors – while being confident that a more thoughtful, collective reflection will propel management scholarship to become stronger and more nuanced.     

Management Research and Literary Criticism

This paper is concerned with analysing the role of rhetoric and literary criticism in research and scholarship. It is argued that critical debate and dialogue are the hub of the process of research and scholarship and that social science and literature have more in common than is normally recognized. Most of these debates are carried out in writing and involve elaborate writing and reading of texts – or literature as we prefer to call it. We argue the case that management researchers may have something to learn from literary criticism. A model of literary criticism comprising four different modes of criticism – mimetic, expressive, pragmatic and objective – is described and the implications for management research are suggested. The paper concludes with a number of reflections on what can be gained from this type of analysis and on the role of reflexivity in the research process.     

Top Management Team Diversity: A Review of Theories and Methodologies

This paper reviews empirical research on top management team (TMT) diversity. A number of scholars have concluded that upper echelons findings, in particular in terms of the consequences of TMT heterogeneity, have been inconclusive. This review conducts an in‐depth analysis of conceptual and methodological issues related to upper echelons diversity studies and offers some directions for future research. Sixty journal articles, published in ten top international journals over a 22‐year period (1984–2005), were analyzed. The results suggest that upper echelons research is increasingly multidisciplinary in nature; however, in‐depth inquiries into the antecedents of TMT composition and the multilevel contextual influences on the implications of TMT heterogeneity are still needed. This review finds that clarity about level of analysis, both theoretically and empirically, remains an important issue in the field and thus a multilevel approach is strongly encouraged. Moreover, the complexity of diversity as a theoretical construct needs to be acknowledged and operationalized accordingly in upper echelons studies.     

2011年我国管理科学青年学者取得的巨大成就

根据管理科学与工程学科(管理科学部一处)2010年的《年度进展报告》中获资助者所提交的材料,总结了生产运作管理领域、服务运作管理领域、金融工程领域和技术管理领域等4个领域中我国学者以第1作者或通讯作者在学界公认的管理科学顶级期刊上发表的论文.这是我国管理科学与工程学科学者和国家自然科学基金委管理科学一处对十一五的阶段性总结,是个良好的开端.通过国家自然科学基金和国内学者共同的不懈努力,可望我国管理科学与工程领域的研究和实践会在十二五期间迈上新台阶.