Most cited articles and authors in global strategy research

Peng, Mike W.; Zhou, Jessie Qi

doi:10.1016/j.intman.2006.04.001

Cited by 59 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, not focusing on citations is a limitation. Peng and Zhou (2006) show that the list of most prolific authors does not strongly correlate with the list of most cited authors. Griffith et al (2008) and Pleggenkuhle et al (2007) have interesting discussions on citations.…”

Section: Limitations and Follow-up Studiesmentioning

confidence: 84%

Prolific authors and institutions in leading international business journals

Yalcinkaya

Seggie

2007

Asia Pacific J Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The science and practice of international business is advanced through scholarly contribution to the leading international business journals. Increased competition among academic institutions has led to increased emphasis on publication in the leading international business journals. Yet, little is known as to the answers to questions such as: (1) Who are the most prolific authors in the leading international business journals? and (2) Which educational institutions appear poised to lead international business scholarship? To examine these questions, the study examines scholarly work in international business over the past eleven years in six leading international business journals (i.e., Journal of International Business Studies, Management International Review, Journal of World Business, International Marketing Review, Journal of International Marketing, and International Business Review). Addressing these two research questions provides us with a more complete understanding of the authors and institutions most likely to influence the field of international business. © 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Follow-up Studiesmentioning

confidence: 84%

Prolific authors and institutions in leading international business journals

Yalcinkaya

Seggie

2007

Asia Pacific J Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, of the ten most cited articles in JIBS between 1996 and 2006, only two were written by IB scholars identified as most prolific by Xu et al (2008). Peng and Zhou's (2006) work on global strategy research and Harzing's (2005) research on Australian academics similarly concluded that being prolific does not necessarily equate with having an impact. Most rankings also falsely assume that having an impact is based on publications in top journals.…”

Section: Assessing Influence: Being Prolific Doesn't Guarantee Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Knowledge Wins: Transcending the Sense and Nonsense of Academic Rankings

Adler

Harzing

2009

AMLE

716

551

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."-Albert EinsteinHas university scholarship gone astray? Do our academic assessment systems reward scholarship that addresses the questions that matter most to society? Using international business as an example, we highlight the problematic nature of academic ranking systems and question if such assessments are drawing scholarship away from its fundamental purpose. We call for an immediate examination of existing ranking systems, not only as a legitimate scholarly question vis-à -vis performance-a conceptual lens with deep roots in management research-but also because the very health and vibrancy of the field are at stake. Indeed, in light of the data presented here, which suggest that current systems are dysfunctional and potentially cause more harm than good, a temporary moratorium on rankings may be appropriate until more valid and reliable ways to assess scholarly contributions can be developed. The worldwide community of scholars, along with the global network of institutions interacting with and supporting management scholarship (such as the Academy of Management, AACSB, and Thomson Reuters Scientific) are invited to innovate and design more reliable and valid ways to assess scholarly contributions that truly promote the advancement of relevant 21st century knowledge, and likewise recognize those individuals and institutions that best fulfill the university's fundamental purpose.

show abstract

“…Following the procedures adopted by Jiao et al (2014) and by prior studies on academic ranking (e.g., Lu, 2003;Peng & Zhou, 2006), we ranked strategy scholars both in terms of the quantity of their contributions (i.e., the number of their articles) and the quality of their contributions (i.e., the citation patterns of their articles). Specifically, we first ranked the overseas Chinese strategy scholars with the measures of raw and adjusted counts of their published articles.…”

Section: Ranking Rulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ranking and mapping the contributions by overseas Chinese strategy scholars: A systematic and relevant analysis

et al. 2015

Asia Pac J Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Jiao, Cui, Wang, and Xu (2014) developed a ranking of overseas Chines strategy scholars in terms of their contributions to the strategy research. Such a ranking is interesting not only because it provides a clear picture of the academic contributions of overseas Chinese scholars, but also because it can help the universities and scholars in mainland China to develop collaborative ties with overseas Chinese scholars in a more targeted manner.To complement and extend the work by Jiao et al. (2014), we have adopted a different, but more systematic approach to ranking the overseas Chinese strategy scholars. First, we have generated the list of overseas Chines strategy scholars by checking all of their publications in eight academic journals that are most relevant to the domain of strategy or strategic management. Though this approach is more timeconsuming, it will not miss any potentially important scholars in the analysis. Second, we have focused on the strategy-relevant articles published in the eight academic journals by the overseas Chinese scholars. To that end, we selected only the eight most strategy-relevant journals rather than covering all top-tier business Asia

show abstract

Most cited articles and authors in global strategy research

Cited by 59 publications

References 46 publications

Prolific authors and institutions in leading international business journals

Prolific authors and institutions in leading international business journals

When Knowledge Wins: Transcending the Sense and Nonsense of Academic Rankings

Ranking and mapping the contributions by overseas Chinese strategy scholars: A systematic and relevant analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About