Quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies

Author:

Macdonald Stuart,Kam Jacqueline

Abstract

PurposePublication in quality journals has become a major indicator of research performance in UK universities. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the notion of “quality journal”.Design/methodology/approachThe paper examines the situation in management studies and finds dizzying circularity in the definitions of “quality journal”.FindingsThe paper finds that what a quality journal is does not really matter: agreement that there are such things matters very much indeed. As so often happens with indicators of performance, the indicator has become the target. So, the challenge is to publish in quality journals, and the challenge rewards gamesmanship. Vested interests have become particularly skilful at the game, and at exercising the winners’ prerogative of changing the rules. All but forgotten in the desperation to win the game is publication as a means of communicating research findings for the public benefit. The paper examines the situation in management studies, but the problem is much more widespread.Originality/valueThis original and topical paper concludes that laughter is both the appropriate reaction to such farce, and also, perhaps, the stimulus to reform.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference85 articles.

1. Albert, T. (1997), “Why bother with peer review?”, Lancet, Vol. 350, p. 822.

2. Ali, S., Young, H. and Ali, N. (1996), “Determining the quality of publications and research for tenure and promotion decisions”, Library Review, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 39‐53.

3. Amin, M. and Mabe, M. (2000), “Impact factors: use and abuse”, Perspectives in Publishing, Vol. 1, pp. 1‐6.

4. Armstrong, J. (1980), “Unintelligible management research and academic prestige”, Interfaces, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 80‐6.

5. Armstrong, J. (1984), “Peer review of scientific papers”, Journal of Biological Response Modifiers, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 10‐14.

Cited by 17 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3