JMS at 50: Trends over Time

Abstract

has been published in nal form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joms.12040. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.Additional information: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. We present an analysis of the articles published in the Journal of Management Studies (JMS) since its inception to assess to what extent JMS has: maintained its leading international ranking; maintained its founding mission as a broad based management journal; remained a broad based management journal compared to other general management journals. In terms of its impact factor and citations despite reaching a low point in 2001, we find that JMS today ranks higher than it has ever done throughout its 50-year history. From our content analysis covering the life-cycle of JMS we find four areas have been the most frequently represented, although their relative importance varies between decades: Organizational Management/Behaviour, Strategy, Human Resource Management and General Management, accounting for 67% of articles published over the period. JMS has strengthened its international author distribution through the increase in authors from the EU especially and the period 2000-2004 which saw the predominance of UK authors was an anomaly. There are marked differences between type of article and author country of origin. Our comparative analysis of the word networks between the journals JMS, AMJ, ASQ and HRM shows that over each decade the papers in the first three normally form a single cluster indicating that the words used in the papers in the different journals are similar, while papers from HRM often form an outlining group. Notably, in the early 2000s papers in JMS form a distinct cluster with papers from HRM paralleling the anomaly identified in the content analysis. Overall, JMS has regained its distinctiveness as a broad-based international management journal, not favouring any particular theoretical or empirical approach.3

Variety, Novelty, and Perceptions of Scholarship in Research on Management and Organizations: An Appeal for Ambidextrous Scholarship

“…As noted in Clark et al. (), JMS has seen the number of submissions increase from 241 in 2001 to 902 in 2011. Moreover, the country base has widened.…”

Single‐ and Multiple‐Informant Research Designs to Examine the Human Resource Management−Performance Relationship

“…A direct content analysis (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005) was conducted to classify the papers. The reliability of the allocation of articles in each category was addressed following the two-step procedure used in other content analyses such as Furrer, Thomas and Goussevskaia (2008), Jeung et al (2011) and Clark et al (2014). The reliability of the allocation of articles in each category was addressed following the two-step procedure used in other content analyses such as Furrer, Thomas and Goussevskaia (2008), Jeung et al (2011) and Clark et al (2014).…”

“…Inspired by the Weber protocol (Weber, 1990), the coding categories were defined based on Rungtusanatham et al's (2008) classification approaches, which were refined after coding a sample of the selected articles. The reliability of the allocation of articles in each category was addressed following the two-step procedure used in other content analyses such as Furrer, Thomas and Goussevskaia (2008), Jeung et al (2011) and Clark et al (2014). First, two of the authors of this paper independently reviewed all 97 selected articles and coded them in one of the four categories (based on a detailed examination of the methodology used); the two authors coded 79% of the articles in the same category.…”

Strategizing and Operating Through Our Values: JMS at 50

“…The third type involves statements on how to publish in the journal, with 'how to's' from the editors' perspectives provided for aspects of manuscript development such as theory, contribution, and data collection and analysis.In this editorial, our discussion touches on aspects of each of these three generic types of editorials, but our primary objective in this editorial is to define our value structure within the journal and connect our values to our operations and governance.We want to engage in this discussion because we believe that JMS occupies a unique space in the management journal environment. This positioning is attributable to our 50 years of organizational heritage as well as to specific steps that Mike Wright and Tim Clark took when assuming editorial leadership for the journal in the early 2000s (Clark et al, 2013).Our distinctive positioning is defined and maintained in two ways. First, our positioning is reflective of our mission for the journal.…”

“…We want to engage in this discussion because we believe that JMS occupies a unique space in the management journal environment. This positioning is attributable to our 50 years of organizational heritage as well as to specific steps that Mike Wright and Tim Clark took when assuming editorial leadership for the journal in the early 2000s (Clark et al., ).…”