Sorry to be a spoilsport, but the world has changed considerably over the years being discussed. We are in an era of triple helix commercialization, “accountability”, impact factors, and “H index”.
These issues come up systematically on many T&P reviews in Europe North America, parts of Africa, and increasingly in Asia. Comparative rankings of Universities, business schools and journals were not as central 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago, as they are now. Just attend any annual editorial board of any journal and listen to the editor’s report – IF is always mentioned – not so a decade ago. We are witnessing citation cartels, coercive citations, phantom journals, and a range of behaviors unimaginable until recently. Each University makes decisions as to what criteria they have on their own, although we seem to be moving like a herd of sheep in one direction. The FT45 is popular, the 5 or 7 A+ journals are popular, and the various national rating systems get mileage. Harzing’s publish or perish might be helpful to some. If you’re able to convince your dean that journal X should ‘count’, (whatever the outcome) that’s great. If you can’t, you may just be ‘stuck’ having to publish in X without whatever expectations of institutional recognition you hope for – or else – trying with journal “Y”. Few T&P committees I am aware of actually READ material – instead they ask other specialists to read it. I’ve done some longitudinal research that shows that institutions prefer basic counting, it’s simpler. To Alex’s initial question – all new journals carry a risk of low institutional status, but AOM journals probably carry the least risk, as they get to leverage well known scholars that get cited by name alone, and we all get the journals. Steve Barley’s comments – for those of you that haven’t read it – in the 60th anniversary issue of ASQ are really on target. He says if it were like this when he started, he probably would have chosen another profession (by the way, he was a Psyc undergraduate student of Kelly’s!). He points out that if each member of AOM submitted a single A+ article each year, we would have a statistical probability of .017 in getting published. So, if someone were able to tell Alex that Univ. “A” considers discoveries an “A”, and his dean buys it, great! Colleagues – we really need to have a better sense of our intrinsic contributions as professionals, scholars, and knowledge workers. We have all created this ‘monster’, and only we can change it.
Regards
Benson
--
Benson Honig Ph.D.
Teresa Cascioli Chair in Entrepreneurial Leadership
DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University
Hamilton Ontario Canada L8S4M4
Tel: 905-525-9140 ext. 23943
Cell: 905-518-1716
Email:
Bhonig@mcmaster.ca
On 2016-05-27, 12:11 AM, "Entrepreneurship Division Listserv on behalf of Shaver, Kelly G" <
ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU on behalf of
ShaverK@COFC.EDU> wrote:
>Hello everyone,
>
>Another response from an "old guy." No, I'm not retired yet. But I do have perhaps a different perspective. Most of my career (yes, still more years than I've been in Entrepreneurship) was as a Psychology professor. In that role, among other things, I spent 10 years on the editorial board of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (an A+), not on the basis of having published frequently in JPSP. Indeed, I have only two JPSP publications. Rather, I believe I became a member of the editorial board on the basis of a book I had written. Through more department chairs and deans than I can remember, I never heard the phrase "that publication won't count" until I reached a business school. Indeed, I never heard that phrase while I was a National Science Foundation program officer (the NSF official biosketch is limited to 5 publications relevant to the proposal and another 5 that reflect a scientist's other activity). The lesson I take from this is that other disciplines (as Chuck Hofer noted) are simply more comfortable making "subjective" judgments of a person's work instead of relying on "objective" criteria like impact factors and journal ratings. Let me close with a "modest proposal": those of us who are asked to comment on the research records of candidates for tenure and promotion should walk this walk and avoid making references to the "objective" measures in our review letters (something I wish now I could say I've always done!).
>
>Best regards,
>
>Kelly
>
>Kelly G. Shaver, Ph.D.
>Professor of Entrepreneurial Studies
>School of Business
>College of Charleston
>5 Liberty Street, Charleston SC 29401
>
>________________________________________
>From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [
ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] on behalf of Charles Hofer [
chofer@KENNESAW.EDU]
>Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 3:03 PM
>To:
ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
>Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Academy of Management Discoveries
>
>All,
>
>Even though I'm now retired, I occasionally find a discussion sufficiently interesting
>to insert a dew comment of my own. I would make two observations on the last comment.
>First, I am not sure which universities now constitute the Top 25, but I got my doctorate
>from Harvard and have taught at Northwestern and Stanford. The key point here is that
>none of these universities use "citation count" as the primary criterion for promotion.
>Instead, they all look at the IMPACT of one's publications. For instance, at Stanford one
>may list only seven publications in the set of materials submitted in one's promotion
>package - no more. And both Harvard and Northwestern follow similar procedures. For
>instance, when I was at Northwestern, one individual did not quite meet that school's
>"specs" when he first came up for promotion, but he was given another year to see what
>he could do to strengthen his record. During the year, he completed one article, which
>he sent out for publication - although it had not yet been accepted. So that school sent
>it out to four external reviewers for comment. All four reviewers said it was one of
>the best that they had seen in their field over the past 25 or so years. After much
>discussion, Northwestern decided not to promote that person from Assistant Professor
>to Associate Professor. Instead, they promoted him to Full Professor Just two other
>points here. First, the field of the individual involved was economics. Second, each
>of the four external reviewers was a Nobel Prize winner in economics.
>
>The far more important point is that each of us must decide what it is that we want to
>do with our careers. Then we should tailor our publication efforts toward the achievement
>of these personal goals. For instance, I published articles or books only when I felt
>that I had something worthwhile to say. Also, during the last seven years of my career,
>I focused 100% of my attention on helping my MBA student teams launch new ventures in
>which they were interested. Most of these involved small and intermediate sized ventures,
>but there were several that, if as successful over the long-term as I think they will be,
>will create hundred and possibly thousands of new jobs and help save thousands of lives,
>and from my perspective both of those outcomes are far more important than building up
>a high publication count.
>
>Respectfully,
>Chuck Hofer
>770-455-4280 Cell 1
>770-757-3575 Cell 2
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Boal, Kim" <
kim.boal@TTU.EDU>
>To: "ENTREP" <
ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
>Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 1:28:20 PM
>Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Academy of Management Discoveries
>
>Dear All, having served on my P&T committee many times, here is my experience.
>First, the faculty in Management greatly out performs the other departments when it comes
>to publications, especially in A+ journals, but even in A journals.
>Second, I remember when I was a Visiting Professor at a Top 25 B-school, and one of its's
>professors came up for Full. The problem was this professor's publications, though in her
>field, we're not on the A+ list, so they didn't count. (Only 7 journals counted). However,
>the case was made that this professor was widely known in her field, and had shown that
>she was capable of publishing in A+ journals (AMJ), but typically they didn't publish in her
>field. Since, the Department wanted her to teach and publish in her field, it did not make
>sense to punish her by denying her
>Full. They promoted he, and she is well known today.
>The point of this story is that we, in Management, are probably over concerned with where
>something is published, and not whether the author has something important to say. I know
>this has lead me not to publish. Larry Cummings once told me, where I published would be
>held against me. This attitude still is wide spread as Alex's original inquiry indicates.
>Remember, Michael Porter is famous not for his A+ publications, but because of what he had
>to say.
>Kim Boal
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On May 25, 2016, at 11:04 AM, Herman Aguinis <
haguinis@EMAIL.GWU.EDU<mailto:
haguinis@email.gwu.edu>> wrote:
>
>Dear Alex, Hank, and ENTREP Colleagues,
>
>Thank you for bringing up an important issue that I think is directly related to the sustainability of our field as a scholarly discipline. The existence of journal lists served their purpose many years ago when there seemed to be clear differences between journals in terms of the quality of the research they published. Many of these differences are now less evident and also based on a unidimensional and narrow definition of “quality” such as a journal’s impact factor. So, the determination of “what counts” and what does not in terms of publications is becoming increasingly contentious and even damaging to our scholarly endeavors. These concerns prompted us to offer a modest proposal on how to define and measure scholarly impact in broader terms, and it is described in detail in the following two articles (available at
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.hermanaguinis.com_pubs.html-29-3A&d=DQIFaQ&c=7MSSWy9Bs2yocjNQzurxOQ&r=m-2FUaZN5QiFoG4utBI2pw&m=aIFP9ywaT_ndM6aPpoMh-vXz8W6rjlVerf1tqWP0wtE&s=Jyc859KuGqxDtWX9D2liP3CcUYhLy5A_GDz83YsQw3Q&e=
>
>
>· Aguinis, H., Shapiro, D. L., Antonacopoulou, E., & Cummings, T. G. 2014. Scholarly impact: A pluralist conceptualization. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 13: 623-639.
>Abstract
>We critically assess a common approach to scholarly impact that relies almost exclusively on a single stakeholder (i.e., other academics). We argue that this approach is narrow and insufficient, and thereby threatens the credibility and long-term sustainability of the management research community. We offer a solution in the form of a broader and novel conceptual and measurement framework of scholarly impact: a pluralist perspective. It proposes actions that depart from the current win–lose and zero-sum views that lead to false trade-offs such as research versus practice, rigor versus relevance, and research versus service. Our proposed pluralist conceptualization can be instrumental in enabling business schools and other academic units to clarify their strategic direction in terms of which stakeholders they are trying to affect and why, the way future scholars are trained, and the design and implementation of faculty performance management systems. We argue that the adoption of a pluralist conceptualization of scholarly impact can increase motivation for engaged scholarship and design-science research that is more conducive to actionable knowledge as opposed to exclusive career-focused advances, enhance the relevance and value of our scholarship, and thereby help to narrow the much-lamented chasm between research and practice.
>
>
>· Aguinis, H., Suarez-González, I., Lannelongue, G., & Joo, H. 2012. Scholarly impact revisited. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(2): 105-132.
>Abstract
>Scholarly impact is one of the strongest currencies in the Academy and has traditionally been equated with number of citations—be it for individuals, articles, departments, universities, journals, or entire fields. Adopting an alternative definition and measure, we use number of pages as indexed by Google to assess scholarly impact on stakeholders outside the Academy. Based on a sample including 384 of the 550 most highly cited management scholars in the past three decades, results show that scholarly impact is a multidimensional construct and that the impact of scholarly research on internal stakeholders (i.e., other members of the Academy) cannot be equated with impact on external stakeholders (i.e., those outside the Academy). We illustrate these results with tables showing important changes in the rank ordering of individuals based on whether we operationalize impact considering internal stakeholders (i.e., number of citations) or external stakeholders (i.e., number of non-.edu Web pages). Also, we provide tables listing the most influential scholars inside the Academy who also have an important impact outside the Academy. We discuss implications for empirical research, theory development, and practice regarding the meaning and measurement of scholarly impact.
>
>I look forward to further exchanges on this important conversation!
>
>All the best,
>
>--Herman.
>
>Herman Aguinis
>John F. Mee Chair of Management
>Kelley School of Business, Indiana University
>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__hermanaguinis.com_&d=DQIFaQ&c=7MSSWy9Bs2yocjNQzurxOQ&r=m-2FUaZN5QiFoG4utBI2pw&m=aIFP9ywaT_ndM6aPpoMh-vXz8W6rjlVerf1tqWP0wtE&s=cpgSk9Z77mq_P5gxZI8ZONoVW3bur2Mq-u169qzdUBU&e=
>
>New affiliation as of June 1, 2016:
>Avram Tucker Distinguished Scholar and Professor of Management
>George Washington University School of Business
>
>From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:
ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Stewart, Alex
>Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 10:10 PM
>To:
ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU<mailto:
ENTREP@aomlists.pace.edu>
>Subject: [ENTREP] Academy of Management Discoveries
>
>
>I am a bit embarrassed to ask this - though not too embarrassed to do it! If we submit to a journal that is not in our list we might as well submit to a black hole - it won't count. With a colleague I am readying a submission to the Academy of Management Discoveries. The only rankings I can find are an A and B. I would personally guess it should be an AB, but what do I know?
>
>Do any of you have a departmental ranking for it?
>
>Thanks much,
>
>Alex
>
>
>Alex Stewart, Ph.D.
>Professor of Management
>Coleman Foundation Chair in Entrepreneurship
>Marquette University
>Milwaukee, WI 53201-1881
>Office: 414 288-7188
>************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__aomlists.pace.edu_scripts_wa.exe-3FSUBED1-3Dentrep-26A-3D1&d=DQIFaQ&c=7MSSWy9Bs2yocjNQzurxOQ&r=m-2FUaZN5QiFoG4utBI2pw&m=aIFP9ywaT_ndM6aPpoMh-vXz8W6rjlVerf1tqWP0wtE&s=DwkvkQ4pKSaZvwsl-fTgAai9ky2_pA4NYcAi8sb2rEc&e= If you have questions or need help, please contact Jeff Pollack (
jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu<mailto:
jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu>) or Kevin Cox (
kcox24@my.fau.edu<mailto:
kcox24@my.fau.edu>). Ventures HO!
>************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__aomlists.pace.edu_scripts_wa.exe-3FSUBED1-3Dentrep-26A-3D1&d=DQIFaQ&c=7MSSWy9Bs2yocjNQzurxOQ&r=m-2FUaZN5QiFoG4utBI2pw&m=aIFP9ywaT_ndM6aPpoMh-vXz8W6rjlVerf1tqWP0wtE&s=DwkvkQ4pKSaZvwsl-fTgAai9ky2_pA4NYcAi8sb2rEc&e= If you have questions or need help, please contact Jeff Pollack (
jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu<mailto:
jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu>) or Kevin Cox (
kcox24@my.fau.edu<mailto:
kcox24@my.fau.edu>). Ventures HO!
>
>**************************************
>This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.
>
>Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.
>
>You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__aomlists.pace.edu_scripts_wa.exe-3FSUBED1-3Dentrep-26A-3D1&d=DQIFaQ&c=7MSSWy9Bs2yocjNQzurxOQ&r=m-2FUaZN5QiFoG4utBI2pw&m=aIFP9ywaT_ndM6aPpoMh-vXz8W6rjlVerf1tqWP0wtE&s=DwkvkQ4pKSaZvwsl-fTgAai9ky2_pA4NYcAi8sb2rEc&e=
>
>If you have questions or need help, please contact Jeff Pollack (
jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (
kcox24@my.fau.edu).
>
>Ventures HO!
>
>**************************************
>This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.
>
>Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.
>
>You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__aomlists.pace.edu_scripts_wa.exe-3FSUBED1-3Dentrep-26A-3D1&d=DQIFaQ&c=7MSSWy9Bs2yocjNQzurxOQ&r=m-2FUaZN5QiFoG4utBI2pw&m=aIFP9ywaT_ndM6aPpoMh-vXz8W6rjlVerf1tqWP0wtE&s=DwkvkQ4pKSaZvwsl-fTgAai9ky2_pA4NYcAi8sb2rEc&e=
>
>If you have questions or need help, please contact Jeff Pollack (
jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (
kcox24@my.fau.edu).
>
>Ventures HO!
>
>**************************************
>This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.
>
>Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.
>
>You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
>http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
>
>If you have questions or need help, please contact Jeff Pollack (
jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (
kcox24@my.fau.edu).
>
>Ventures HO!
**************************************
This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.
Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.
You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
If you have questions or need help, please contact Jeff Pollack (
jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (
kcox24@my.fau.edu).
Ventures HO!