Reorienting R&amp;D for A Horizontal Future

Downey, Charles T.; Greenberg, Daniel S.; Kapur, Vivek

doi:10.1080/08956308.2003.11671584

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sample of 41 papers derived from the structured literature search and used for the main analysis are: Aarlbjorn and Halldorsson (2002), Akkermans et al (1999), Al‐Mudimigh et al (2004), Bowersox (1998), Bullington (2003), Carter and Ellram (2003), Chan et al (2003), Chan and Qi (2003), Chandra and Kumar (2000), Chen and Paulraj (2004), Chopra et al (2004), de Lurdes Veludo et al (2004), Downey et al (2003), Ellram et al (2004), Grimm (2004), Grover and Malhotra (2003), Gubi et al (2003), Håkansson and Persson (2004), Hamilton (2003), Hobbs (1996), Hoyt and Huq (2000), Humphries and Wilding (2003), Kauffman (2002), Ketchen and Giunipero (2004), Lancioni (2000), London and Kenley (2001), McDonald (1999), Möller and Halinen (1999), Mouritsen et al (2003), Otto and Kotzab (2003), Ramos (2004), Ramsey (2004), Rudberg and Olhager (2003), Schneeweiss (2003), Skjoeett‐Larsen (2000), Stadtler (2005), Stonebraker and Liao (2004), Svensson (2002a, b, 2003) and Zolkiewski and Turnbull (2002).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supply management: is it a discipline?

Harland

Lamming

Walker

et al. 2006

International Journal of Operations &Amp; Production Management

116

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo examine management literature for guidance on what constitutes a discipline. To examine supply management publications to determine whether the field constitutes a discipline or an emerging discipline. To contribute a structured evaluation to the body of supply management theory/discipline development knowledge.Design/methodology/approachLiterature review of what constitutes a discipline and an initial assessment of whether supply management is a discipline. Development of research questions used to design tests, using combinations of qualitative pattern matching, journal quality rankings, and social science citations index impact factor. Application of the tests, to evaluate field coherence, quality and the existence of a discipline‐debate, to determine whether supply management is an emerging discipline.FindingsAn initial literature review finds supply management not to be a discipline, as the field lacks quality of theoretical development and discussion, and coherence. Tests for increasing evidence of coherence, quality and impact yield positive results, indicating that supply management is progressing in its theoretical development. The test findings combined with the existence of the start of a discipline‐debate indicate that supply management should be judged to be an emerging discipline.Originality/valueDrawing from the management literature, the paper provides a unique structured evaluation of the field of supply management, finding it not to be a discipline, but showing evidence of being an emerging discipline.

show abstract