IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jinter/v36y2024i1p105-121.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When an A Is NOT an A in Academic Research, or How A-Journal List Metrics Inhibit Exploratory Behaviour in Academia

Author

Listed:
  • Alejandro Agafonow
  • Marybel Perez

Abstract

On account of the leverage that the Academy of Management (AOM) has, via its positioning in the highest tiers of the A-journal lists currently used to adjudicate promotions and tenure evaluations, it is urgent to assess the premises and assumptions upon which the so-called pluralist model of scholarly impact , advocated by academics with executive responsibilities in the AOM, is built. Our findings are that the pluralist model is liable to three crucial problems: ecological bias, specific knowledge and pre-emptive costs. Consistent with extant performance evaluation scholarship, promotions and tenure evaluations must build instead on: (a) a qualitative evaluation of scholarly contributions unencumbered by ordinality assumptions; (b) the narrowing of the span of control of academics, moving supervisory authority away from the line structure and back into the hands of true peers; and (c) muting the incentives that prevent academics from focusing on riskier and long-term horizon outputs, which are pillars in agreement with known accounts of how exploratory behaviour has been successfully managed at IBM, Google, the SAS Institute and Nokia, to name but a few cases. JEL Codes: 123, O31

Suggested Citation

  • Alejandro Agafonow & Marybel Perez, 2024. "When an A Is NOT an A in Academic Research, or How A-Journal List Metrics Inhibit Exploratory Behaviour in Academia," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 36(1), pages 105-121, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jinter:v:36:y:2024:i:1:p:105-121
    DOI: 10.1177/02601079231152118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02601079231152118
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/02601079231152118?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John P. A. Ioannidis & Richard Klavans & Kevin W. Boyack, 2018. "Thousands of scientists publish a paper every five days," Nature, Nature, vol. 561(7722), pages 167-169, September.
    2. Kendall Powell, 2016. "Young, talented and fed-up: scientists tell their stories," Nature, Nature, vol. 538(7626), pages 446-449, October.
    3. Bruno S. Frey & Fabian Homberg & Margit Osterloh, 2013. "Organizational Control Systems and Pay-for-Performance in the Public Service," CREMA Working Paper Series 2013-11, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    4. Anne S. Tsui, 2013. "The Spirit of Science and Socially Responsible Scholarship," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 9(3), pages 375-394, November.
    5. Richard Van Noorden, 2013. "Brazilian citation scheme outed," Nature, Nature, vol. 500(7464), pages 510-511, August.
    6. Michael Raith, 2008. "Specific knowledge and performance measurement," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(4), pages 1059-1079, December.
    7. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    8. Vladlen Koltun & David Hafner, 2021. "The h-index is no longer an effective correlate of scientific reputation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-16, June.
    9. Tsui, Anne S., 2013. "The Spirit of Science and Socially Responsible Scholarship," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(03), pages 375-394, November.
    10. Edward P. Lazear, 2018. "Compensation and Incentives in the Workplace," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(3), pages 195-214, Summer.
    11. Alberto Baccini & Giuseppe De Nicolao & Eugenio Petrovich, 2019. "Citation gaming induced by bibliometric evaluation: A country-level comparative analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Agafonow, Alejandro & Perez, Marybel, 2024. "Overhauling multinationals for the Anthropocene: How a rogue subsidiary offers a blueprint for sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ming-Jer Chen, 2018. "Scholarship-practice “oneness” of an academic career: The entrepreneurial pursuit of an expansive view of management scholarship," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 859-886, December.
    2. Nuno Guimaraes Costa & Gerard Farias & David Wasieleski & Anthony Annett, 2021. "Seven Principles for Seven Generations: Moral Boundaries for Transformational Change," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 313-328, December.
    3. Karin Sanders & Julie A. Cogin & Cai-Hui Veronica Lin, 2017. "Methodological choices of HR research conducted in Asia," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Shandana Shoaib & Yehuda Baruch, 2019. "Deviant Behavior in a Moderated-Mediation Framework of Incentives, Organizational Justice Perception, and Reward Expectancy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 617-633, July.
    5. Wu, Jinnan & Mei, Wenjuan & Liu, Lin & Ugrin, Joseph C., 2020. "The bright and dark sides of social cyberloafing: Effects on employee mental health in China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 56-64.
    6. Ming-Jer Chen, 2018. "The research-teaching “oneness” of competitive dynamics: Toward an ambicultural integration," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 285-311, June.
    7. Tran, Chi Phuong & Pernia, Ronald A. & Nguyen-Thanh, Nhan, 2023. "Mess or match? How do academic perspectives meet the practitioner perspectives in terms of digital transformation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    8. Tae Wan Kim & Thomas Donaldson, 2018. "Rethinking Right: Moral Epistemology in Management Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 5-20, March.
    9. Brian K. Boyd, 2018. "Paradigm development in Chinese management research: The role of research methodology," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 805-827, September.
    10. Rabishankar Giri & Sabuj Kumar Chaudhuri, 2021. "Ranking journals through the lens of active visibility," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2189-2208, March.
    11. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    12. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    13. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    14. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    15. Tomasz Helbin & Amy Van Looy, 2021. "Is Business Process Management (BPM) Ready for Ambidexterity? Conceptualization, Implementation Guidelines and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    16. Son K. Lam & Thomas E. DeCarlo & Ashish Sharma, 2019. "Salesperson ambidexterity in customer engagement: do customer base characteristics matter?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 659-680, July.
    17. Jonathan H. Reed, 2022. "Operational and strategic change during temporary turbulence: evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 589-608, June.
    18. Alan Hevner & Isabelle Comyn-Wattiau & Jacky Akoka & Nicolas Prat, 2018. "A pragmatic approach for identifying and managing design science research goals and evaluation criteria," Post-Print hal-02283783, HAL.
    19. Felipe A. Csaszar & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2010. "How Much to Copy? Determinants of Effective Imitation Breadth," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 661-676, June.
    20. Bruneel, Johan & Clarysse, Bart & Bobelyn, Annelies & Wright, Mike, 2020. "Liquidity events and VC-backed academic spin-offs: The role of search alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Exploratory behaviour; journal list metrics; knowledge production; high-powered incentives; tenure evaluation; promotions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jinter:v:36:y:2024:i:1:p:105-121. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.