Organizational Analysis in North America and Europe: A Comparison of Co-citation Networks

Abstract

Over the last decade, the field of organization studies has been characterized by a proliferation of divergent perspectives. Using bibliometric techniques, this paper examines the extent to which this state of differentiation may be associ ated with regional differences in scholarly orientation, specifically, between North America and Europe. The study is based on citation and co-citation analyses of articles published by North American authors in Administrative Science Quarterly and by European authors in Organization Studies in the three-year period from 1990 to 1992. Results do show that there is divergence in the perspectives that are currently dominant in Europe and North America, and, to some degree between Britain and elsewhere in Europe. The discussion section elaborates on the nature of the differences in orientation and speculates on factors that may have fostered and helped to maintain this diver gence.

Intellectual structure of human resources management research: A bibliometric analysis of the journal Human Resource Management, 1985–2005

“…However, this is a tendency that appears to be changing; judging from the most-cited work ranking by dates, the earliest dated works are articles. On the other hand, given that most of the articles that appear in the journal considered in this study are American in origin, this indicates a contrast with the findings of Üsdiken and Pasadeos (1995) regarding the tendency among U.S. authors to use articles published in journals as their source of data for research work.…”

“…Area analyzed Neeley (1981) Management and social sciences Culnan (1986Culnan ( , 1987 Information systems management Culnan, O'Reilly, & Chatman (1990) Organizational behavior Hoffman & Holbrook (1993) Consumer research Üsdiken & Pasadeos (1995) Organization studies Pasadeos, Phelps, & Kim (1998) Advertising White & McCain (1998) Information science Tahai & Meyer (1999) Management Pilkington & Liston-Heyes (1999) Production and operations management Ramos & Ruiz (2000) Strategic change Ramos & Ruiz (2001, 2004 Strategic management Ponzi (2002) Knowledge management Medina & Ramos (2004) Organizational relationships…”

Uncovering the Intellectual Structure of Research in Business Ethics: A Journey Through the History, the Classics, and the Pillars of Journal of Business Ethics

“…There are examples of bibliometric studies in information systems (Culnan 1987;White and McCain 1998), innovation (Biemans et al 2007(Biemans et al , 2010, organizational studies (Culnan The Intellectual Structure of Research in Business Ethics 501 et al 1990;Ü sdiken and Pasadeos 1995), marketing-related subjects (Hoffman and Holbrook 1993;Pasadeos et al 1998), operations management (Pilkington and ListonHeyes 1999), and strategic management (Ramos-Rodrí-guez and Ruíz-Navarro 2004;Tahai and Meyer 1999). JBE was born in the first decade after the birth of business ethics as an academic field, which business ethicist Norman Bowie places in 1974(De George 2005; the evolution of the journal is, therefore, reflective of the evolution of the most productive years of the discipline.…”

Business Ethics Research with an Accounting Focus: A Bibliometric Analysis from 1988 to 2007

“…Any discipline tends to build itself around core publications and nourishes its intellectual groundwork through the accumulation of research (Ü sdiken and Pasadeos, 1995, p. 503). In this regard, various forms of citation analysis have been used in diverse disciplines to understand how the composition of an academic research network evolves based on previous academic accumulation (Bricker, 1991;Culnan, 1986;Hoffman and Holbrook, 1993;McCain, 1991;Ü sdiken and Pasadeos, 1995). As a bibliographic analysis technique, citation analysis is based on the rationale that authors tend to cite articles they consider critical in supporting their own arguments.…”