Search results

Despite the general recommendation of using a combination of multiple criteria for research assessment and faculty promotion decisions, the raise of quantitative indicators is generating an emerging trend in Business Schools to use single journal impact factors (IFs) as key (unique) drivers for those relevant school decisions. This paper aims to investigate the effects of using single Web of Science (WoS)-based journal impact metrics when assessing research from two related disciplines: Business and Economics, and its potential impact for the strategic sustainability of a Business School.

This study collected impact indicators data for Business and Economics journals from the Clarivate Web of Science database. We concentrated on the IF indicators, the Eigenfactor and the article influence score (AIS). This study examined the correlations between these indicators and then ranked disciplines and journals using these different impact metrics.

Consistent with previous findings, this study finds positive correlations among these metrics. Then this study ranks the disciplines and journals using each impact metric, finding relevant and substantial differences, depending on the metric used. It is found that using AIS instead of the IF raises the relative ranking of Economics, while Business remains basically with the same rank.

This study contributes to the research assessment literature by adding substantial evidence that given the sensitivity of journal rankings to particular indicators, the selection of a single impact metric for assessing research and hiring/promotion and tenure decisions is risky and too simplistic. This research shows that biases may be larger when assessment involves researchers from related disciplines – like Business and Economics – but with different research foundations and traditions.

Consistent with the literature, given the sensibility of journal rankings to particular indicators, the selection of a single impact metric for assessing research, assigning research funds and hiring/promotion and tenure decisions is risky and simplistic. However, this research shows that risks and biases may be larger when assessment involves researchers from related disciplines – like Business and Economics – but with different research foundations and trajectories. The use of multiple criteria is advised for such purposes.

This is an applied work using real data from WoS that addresses a practical case of comparing the use of different journal IFs to rank-related disciplines like Business and Economics, with important implications for faculty tenure and promotion committees and for research funds granting institutions and decision-makers.

This issue includes five of the best papers, from six different countries, presented in the Cladea Assembly of 2015. This introduction summarises the papers and presents an analysis of Latin American publications on management, and of the advantages and conditions for international collaboration. The first article looks at the positive impact of the decentralization of decision-making processes and the formalisation of work in the innovation of small and medium enterprises. The second studies the fear of failure in work and its relationship to demographic variables. The third analyses the impact of the domestic violence suffered by workers on customer services in Puerto Rican companies. The fourth discusses the relationship between teleworking and the work-family conflict, and finally, the fifth is aimed at optimising the management of dependent demand inventory systems.

This issue includes five articles chosen among the best papers presented at the Cladea Assembly of 2015 organised by Universidad de Valparaíso (Chile). The articles were sent in from Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Spain, and Puerto Rico, and were the best assessed in the fields of organisational behaviour, leadership and human capital management, entrepreneurships and SMEs, technology management and innovation, and operations management and value chains.

The selection process began with the evaluation of the works sent to the conference for each topic. The author wish to thank the organisers, those in charge of each topic, and all the evaluators that helped select the best works. In particular, we thank Sergio Olavarrieta, José Ernesto Amorós, Jorge Ayala, Silvio Borrero, Daniel Cabrera, Reinaldo Calvo, Consuelo García, Valeska Geldres, Jorge Gilbert, Olga Pizarro, José Antonio Robles, and Jorge Tarzijan. Authors interested in publishing their articles were asked to send in a revised version. These new versions were then subjected to a double blind evaluation, and subsequent revisions until reaching the current publication. This has been a collective process in which dozens of academics from all the Cladea schools and countries have taken part.

Este número incluye cinco de los mejores trabajos presentados en la asamblea de Cladea 2015, provenientes de seis países. En la presente introducción se resumen y comentan los trabajos, se ofrece un análisis acerca de las publicaciones latinoamericanas sobre gerencia y de las ventajas y condiciones de la colaboración internacional. El primer artículo analiza el positivo impacto de la descentralización de las decisiones y la formalización del trabajo en la innovación de las PYMES. El segundo estudia el miedo al fracaso en el trabajo y su relación con variables demográficas. El tercero analiza el impacto en el servicio al cliente de la violencia doméstica experimentada por trabajadoras en empresas de Puerto Rico. El cuarto estudia la relación entre el trabajo a distancia en el hogar (teletrabajo) y el conflicto familia-empresa. El quinto se orienta a optimizar el manejo de inventarios en sistemas con demanda dependiente.

En este número publicamos cinco artículos escogidos entre las mejores ponencias presentados en la Asamblea de CLADEA 2015 organizada por la Universidad de Valparaíso (Chile). Los artículos provienen de Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, España y Puerto Rico, y fueron los mejor evaluados en los temas de comportamiento organizacional, liderazgo y gestión del capital humano, emprendimientos y PYMES (pequeña y mediana empresa), gestión tecnológica e innovación, y gestión de operaciones y cadena de valor.

El proceso de selección se inició por las evaluaciones que se hicieron en cada tema para aceptar los trabajos enviados a la asamblea. Debemos agradecer a los organizadores, a los encargados de cada tema y a todos los evaluadores que permitieron tener una selección de los mejores trabajos, en especial a Sergio Olavarrieta, José Ernesto Amorós, Jorge Ayala, Silvio Borrero, Daniel Cabrera, Reinaldo Calvo, Consuelo García, Valeska Geldres, Jorge Gilbert, Olga Pizarro, José Antonio Robles, y Jorge Tarzijan. Posteriormente desde esta revista procedimos a solicitar versiones revisadas a los autores que estuvieran interesados en publicarlos, versiones sometidas a evaluación doble ciego, que llevaron a posteriores revisiones hasta la publicación actual. Ha sido un proceso colectivo donde participaron docenas académicos de todas las escuelas y países de Cladea.