Knowledge dissemination in operations management: Published perceptions versus academic reality

The channels for knowledge generation and dissemination in the business disciplines are many: presenting research at conferences, writing books, distributing working papers, offering insights in society newsletters, giving invited talks, publishing studies in academic journals, and many other venues...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Omega (Oxford) 2011-08, Vol.39 (4), p.435-446
Main Authors: Meredith, Jack R., Steward, Michelle D., Lewis, Bruce R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bibliometrics
Bibliometrics. Scientometrics
Bibliometrics. Scientometrics. Evaluation
Exact sciences and technology
Information and communication sciences
Information science. Documentation
Journal perception
Journal ranking
Library and information science. General aspects
OM discipline
Operations management
Operations management Journal ranking Journal perception OM discipline
Perceptions
Scholarly publishing
Sciences and techniques of general use
Studies
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The channels for knowledge generation and dissemination in the business disciplines are many: presenting research at conferences, writing books, distributing working papers, offering insights in society newsletters, giving invited talks, publishing studies in academic journals, and many other venues, including even blogs and perhaps Facebook ®. But the most important venue is probably published research in “top-level” academic journals. In the discipline of Operations Management, many studies and lists have been published that attempt to determine which of these journals are supposedly the “top” according to either citation analyses, the opinion of recognized experts, author affiliations, bibliometric studies, and other approaches. These lists may then, in turn, be used in different degrees to evaluate research. However, what really counts is what the academic institutions actually use for guidance in evaluating faculty research. Based on a new source of ranking data from AACSB-accredited schools, we compare published journal-ranking studies against that of academe to determine the degree to which the studies reflect academic “reality”. We present rankings of OM journals based on this new source of data and on an aggregate of the stream of published studies, and evaluate their consistency.
ISSN:0305-0483
1873-5274
DOI:10.1016/j.omega.2010.10.003